Compare and Contrast 199That argument presupposes a whole range of things about a lot of things. First of all: Not all teams are Brazil. Or Argentina. Or even Ghana or Czechia. You have to take what you got...
The striker problem exists because with the exception of Owen & Rooney, we don't have anyone near the clbutt necessary to excel at the world cup. Therefore the inclusion of Walcott is a calculated risk. The likes of Defoe, Bent & Johnson are premiership journeymen in the same way as Bull, Fowler & Wright were in the past, never going to be good enough to bing us back the silverware.
Compare and Contrast 198But not too many friends? If I supported a national team I'd rather they were remembered for contributing something positive to a tournament, and for enhancing the reputation of football as "the beautiful...
Where do you get these citations from? Wenger hasn't used Walcott because he has 4 or 5 players of world clbutt pedigree ahead of him Eriksson, does not have that choice Why do you think that all strikers playing for Chelsea, Man Utd, Liverpool, Newcastle & Arsenal are in the starting line ups for Argentina, Ivory Coast, Holland, England, France etc... Other than Owen, Crouch & Rooney, name another world clbutt english player playing for a top premiership team. Defoe comes closest, but he has appeared on the bench mosy of the season.
We'll have to agree to disagree I'm afraid Apart from the centre of the park, ie. a holding midfielder allowing Gerrard & Lampard to get into their preferred positions, I think the England teams balance is the best its ever been Owen & Rooney are proven world clbutt strikers who are getting fitter If we can get rid of Sweden & Ecuador, we have a chance of winning the World Cup
