Jump to content

Fabio Capello: I fucked up...


Michel Kane

Recommended Posts

Very true but something we can't argue with the first tactically/technically superior team would of tooken them to the cleaners.

Last time I saw England actually look like world beaters in a major tournament was against

You need to help me out my friend I am struggling here.

Euro 96.

1 game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very true.

Besides isn't Walcott part of Capello's Plan A?

No, Capello is admitting, I didnt take Walcott because he failed to impress me enough to be part of my Plan A.

However with hindsight, he is now reflecting that taking walcott who has pace & can score a goal might have been a better plan B, than SWP & Peter Crouch. Something Messi questioned...

And TBH I dont see how ANYONE could argue that, which is why I need anelka to explain to me how he feels proved right. Cos I still see the only answer as Theo Walcott.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what TF is saying makes sense but its not true

Capello is saying he should of taken walcott instead of lennon

therefore sticking to the same plan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very true but something we can't argue with the first tactically/technically superior team would of tooken them to the cleaners.

Last time I saw England actually look like world beaters in a major tournament was against

You need to help me out my friend I am struggling here.

Euro 96.

1 game.

Lol, he asked when I gave him when.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very true.

Besides isn't Walcott part of Capello's Plan A?

Wilshere without a defensive minded(tactically aware) player alongside him is an accident waiting to happen because he will need that type og player if he is going to deploy Wilshere in the quarter back role which makes no sense when you have Tom Huddlestone(this feels like Glenn Hoddle all over again because your country is crying for this type of player)

Co Sign

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what TF is saying makes sense but its not true

Capello is saying he should of taken walcott instead of lennon

therefore sticking to the same plan

Nah he mentioned Lennon & saying Lennon got injured at the tournament and was basically playing well prior to tournamnet, suggesting he had to go, when he said

"He can play 25 minutes and be dangerous," Capello said. "I made a mistake not selecting him. He's one of the players who can make the difference. I should have taken him."

Tells me he knows SWP ahouldnt have gone, as SWP was the 25 min guy.

I'm gonna have to find the whole quotes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This aint the whole quote, as I seen one where he goes into how Lennon got injured..

'I should have taken Theo,' said Capello, having been reluctant to admit to any mistakes in the wake of the World Cup.

'This is one change I would have made for this World Cup.

'When I decided not to pick him for the squad I think he is one of the players after the World Cup I think about a lot. He can play 25 minutes and be dangerous. I made a mistake not selecting him. He is one of the players who can make the difference.

'The problem was he played only two games before the end of the season. He was not the same player. He played every time with fear, in the tackle. He was not looking to win back the ball quickly. Also when he turned, his movement was not fast like now.

'But he's one of the players who can make the difference in every moment. It was a really difficult choice. Lennon was playing very well. He was at the top at that moment. As was Wright-Phillips.

'I chose Lennon and not Theo for this reason. Lennon was perfect. I decided after Austria training and the Japan game. But Theo's a player who can play 20 minutes and I should have taken him.'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1351266/Fabio-Capello-Arsenals-Theo-Walcott-gone-World-Cup.html#ixzz1CQlNmrla

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tj has not done anything for England since the fluke in Zagreb, he did not do anything before that to suggest he should be involved, he failed to shine at the U21 tournament..

Im sorry but its a bit excited to think he cudda changed anything for England, hes not even built like that to take a game by the scruff of the neck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Klitschko

No but he is the best impact sub in the team, his pace against tired legs or a streched team = Dangerous.

Not sure how there can be any argument about that? He may not have changed things, but he would have been more of a threat than SWP.

7. Thinking SWP was a better impact sub than Walcott, WRONG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SWP did well when he came on, he also played on the left, Tj could never play on the left..

Playing for Arsenal with technical players helping you is one thing, but playing for England with Barry is another..

Tj was given multiple chances to impress, Crapello basically gave him the no.7 jersey, but then saw his shitness and told him to f*ck off

Link to comment
Share on other sites

says alot about the dire straits of that England squad that Capello thinks it was a mistake to take someone like Walcott to the World Cup

doom.

Why do people say his like he aint a few things added to his game from being a World beater.

hes not one now though is he?

wasnt one then either

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the thing, he has done nothing to suggest he wudda been a good impact sub..

This is not FM, its International football, Sven took him and saw how sh*t he was and didnt give him any minutes and Crapello told him to f*ck off

:lol:

This the same Sven who says he didnt take him cos the press attention got too much & he would have taken him again, but played him more before they left. This the same Crapello that admits he made a mistake and says he shouldnt have told him to f*ck off.

Seiously anelka you'd be better to sticking to YOUR opinion than managers on Walcott.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Portuguese

The only two players who would of made a difference were Rio Ferdinand and injury free Owen Hargreaves.

Thats dumb tbh.

An Injury-free Owen Hargreaves is an opinion based on a player 5 years ago, and if thats the case we might as will bring Michael Owen into the discussion.

I have always said Hargreaves>any english midfielder in terms of big match temperament and tactically know how.

You are seriously under estimating how good and important Hargreaves is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...