Fellow GOT's
Honestly, I do not intend this thread as a wind up. Rather more of a Ingerlanders view on Ingerland's national team. As I'm sure you're aware, they haven't exactly performed as well as expected in recent decades in national competitions. What I don't get is why?
I look at Spain, Germany, and Italy and see that their national team's are littered with players playing on only a couple of squads...ie Bayern Munich for Germany. Could this be part of it? Familiarity?
Uruguay is a nation of 3.3 million...and they are the tits at a national level. To put that in perspective, Greater Manchester and Merseyside combine for over 4 million folks.
I'm American, so it would be easy to take shots at the USMNTNTNT...yes we suck...but we're getting better all the time. Football (the kind with your feet) was only born in 1992 in terms of this nation looking to be a world player. Our best athletes might one day choose to kick a ball around instead of dribbling it, hitting it, or throwing/catching/running with it.
Now...with that last statement, did I assume that the best English athletes choose football? Yes I did...and please correct me if I'm wrong. Rugby is huge, I know...but attendance doesn't really support that argument.
So...back to the original question...what gives with England's underwhelming success on a national level in football?
For me, the talent is there...or should be...the youth structure seems right...I'm asking, cause I really wanna know what you folks think.
Honestly, I do not intend this thread as a wind up. Rather more of a Ingerlanders view on Ingerland's national team. As I'm sure you're aware, they haven't exactly performed as well as expected in recent decades in national competitions. What I don't get is why?
I look at Spain, Germany, and Italy and see that their national team's are littered with players playing on only a couple of squads...ie Bayern Munich for Germany. Could this be part of it? Familiarity?
Uruguay is a nation of 3.3 million...and they are the tits at a national level. To put that in perspective, Greater Manchester and Merseyside combine for over 4 million folks.
I'm American, so it would be easy to take shots at the USMNTNTNT...yes we suck...but we're getting better all the time. Football (the kind with your feet) was only born in 1992 in terms of this nation looking to be a world player. Our best athletes might one day choose to kick a ball around instead of dribbling it, hitting it, or throwing/catching/running with it.
Now...with that last statement, did I assume that the best English athletes choose football? Yes I did...and please correct me if I'm wrong. Rugby is huge, I know...but attendance doesn't really support that argument.
So...back to the original question...what gives with England's underwhelming success on a national level in football?
For me, the talent is there...or should be...the youth structure seems right...I'm asking, cause I really wanna know what you folks think.