Comments on: Michael Carrick demonstrates why he could be crucial to England’s World Cup hopes

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 06 May 2010 15:37:03 +0000

I’ve been saying for quite a while that I’d go with the lineup you suggested in the article (albeit with a slightly different formation). I’d set it up as a 4-2-3-1, Carrick and Barry holders on their respective “sides” (so as to fill the gaps when Johnson and Cole bomb on), and Rooney playing the false nine. He’s shown he can lead the line alone.

I’d play Lampard just off him so he can exploit the space when Rooney drops off and do what he does best (get into the box and score goals), Gerrard wide left, Lennon wide right. With Rooney’s natural tendency to drift left and Cole providing width on the left, Gerrard would be able to make runs into the box without the side losing its shape. He also gives England a decent ball-winner.

However I doubt we’ll see that. It’ll probably be the same system that was used in qualifying. More’s the pity.

By: Griffin

Griffin — Mon, 03 May 2010 16:40:42 +0000

Lol..I was just about to post the same thing.

Only catching this article now (Im new to the site, its brilliant by the way!) and his form since has been woeful.

Has your opinion changed?

By: Luke

Luke — Wed, 28 Apr 2010 01:30:12 +0000

I hope MC doesn’t go to the world cup. He’s had a terrible season at Man Utd; originally bought to be the successor to Scholes, the man who can make the team move with his passing from the centre circle, he seems to have completely lost confidence. Whenever he gets the ball, it goes a few yards sideways or backwards. He almost never plays an attacking pass, if he does it almost never finds its mark, and he hardly ever makes the kind of attacking runs that Scholes used to (and sometimes still does) make from midfield to get into scoring positions. If either Lampard or Gerrard aren’t fit, I’m much rather see Barry (indeed, almost anyone) else in that position.

By: ZonalMarking

ZonalMarking — Sun, 18 Apr 2010 11:36:05 +0000

The calls for Zamora are clearly growing and whilst he’s certainly the best of the three – would it not be foolish to go for someone completely untested with these players? Heskey is only in because of the very fact that he links well with his teammates and brings the best out of them, so surely it would be silly to play someone else there?

On a side note, Carrick’s form since this article was originally published has been shocking…

By: Daniel

Daniel — Sun, 18 Apr 2010 09:17:02 +0000

Could there not be a simple straight swap of Lampard for Carrick and keep the 4-2-3-1 shape from the qualifiers just with a deeper-lying player more likely to hold position forming the other man in the 2. Will also help keeping hold of possession no end to have more depth in possession and a natural passer like Carrick who is happy being a bit more patient in build up rather than Lampard who is more direct.

The trouble with the 4-3-3 you talk of I think is that England’s real threat comes from runners coming from the midfield – Gerrard and Rooney in particular – and then the quick man down the right wing just offers some variety. That system relies on the wide men to make a lot of the play and while you say there is not much difference for Gerrard, the fact that he is pushed further up the pitch into a forward line rather than a midfield line makes him a lot easier to pick up and mark I feel and possibly makes linking with Rooney harder than easier.

Finally, Zamora up front as the link man is surely better than Crouch or Heskey. A better player at using technique to bring others into play and can play killer passes around the box which neither of the other two can – they just tempt us into playing a long ball game when we actually have world class attackers who don’t need to do that.