Frank Lampard: How I would have solved Gerrard partnership conundrum for England
Vložit
- čas přidán 11. 06. 2018
- Former England midfielder Frank Lampard explains how he would have solved the midfield partnership conundrum with Steven Gerrard. The new Derby boss believes he could have played alongside the Liverpool great during England's 'golden era'.
HaytersTV brings you closer to the action, with unrivalled access to the biggest names and clubs in sport.
Our extensive football coverage includes training ground footage, manager & player press conferences/interviews and live broadcasts from the biggest events.
Keep across the channel during the World Cup for an extensive array of content from the world's biggest stars, with Russia playing host to Cristiano Ronaldo, Lionel Messi and Neymar amongst others.
HaytersTV is littered with journalists who have vast knowledge in many different sports and we will bring extensive coverage from the world of boxing, tennis, rugby, cricket and much more.
Be sure to subscribe. HaytersTV - sport we've got it covered.
-------
FOLLOW 🔥HAYTERSTV🔥ON SOCIAL MEDIA 👍
FACEBOOK - bit.ly/2HKsLL8
TWITTER - bit.ly/2sZCj0j
SUBSCRIBE on CZcams - bit.ly/1T5QtVm - Sport
Does anyone else think that Frank looks like a younger version of Liam Neeson? 😃
Mike Sorinho look at him when their both 18. Look like twins
No
Looks more like Ledley king than neeson
And his voice is a bit similar to Alan Smith's
Yes
😂😂
Jose Mourinho tried to sign Gerrard. I'm pretty sure he wasn't planning to drop Lampard. The players didn't let us down, having 90s managers in the 2000s cost us
Players are partly to blame too
Clique players were too blame. Southgate would have lasted 10 minutes under that group of ego wankers.
surely not. Jose knew that both of the can destroy the games, especially when they have a good dm.
Imagine lampard gerrard and essien what a midfield that would be
@@harryrudge8529 they already have crazy midfield lampard makelele essien ballack
People in the comments seem to be forgetting that Paul Scholes retired from international football in 2004 to dedicate himself to Man Utd and his family, he also turned down offers to return to England numerous times, and as great a player as he was, he only started 60-65% of Man Utd's games past the age of 30.
A midfield three of Michael Carrick, Steven Gerrard & Frank Lampard was always the best option between 2006-2012.
yes Carrick or probably Hargreaves might have been suited even better. Though to be fair to Sven, in the 2006 knockout stages he actually played a 4-5-1. The problem there was more the fact that with Rooney being completely unfit (no surprise after breaking his foot), he couldn't play the lone striker role to his full potential
Truth to be told Scholes didn't like to be shifted as attacking wing in Euro 2004 and to be substituted every match because of St Gerrard and Lampard was playing midfield role
Think Gerard could've been played wide since he was pacier and could run at players and a midfield three of lampard, wilshere and Barry/Carrick. Oxlaide as the other wide player.
Beckham's passing, crossing ability (from open play) and set pieces meant that he had to play. This is a player who finished second in the 99 balon'dor and was England captain. So no, a midfield three was never the answer. That's without mentioning Owen Hargreaves who was a top draw player from 2001 to 2008. Or prime Joe Cole.
I still do not understand why Michael Carrick only had 34 caps. Most of those were on the bench. It was criminal that didn’t start with the England team.
A golden generation gone to waste. What a pity!
They still payed better football than the current crop.
@@The_Reality_Filter Lol 🤣👍....no...they did..nt 🤨
Could argue that they do and dont both chokers thats for.sure
The only pity was other teams had golden generations at the same time!
@JDMH Mount > Lingard
Carrick, Lampard, Gerrard would have been a monstrous midfield. One of Gerrard or Lampard could bomb forward with late runs and the other could provide cover and work together. Damn the bloody 4-4-2.
Where do you play Scholes?
We don't. Sometimes you take a bold decision and this is it. Scholes the perfect player to come on later in the second half to shore things up and slow the game down if in a winning position. But Lampard/Gerrard can not be benched by any means for their goal-scoring and attacking threat.
TheBlooRayChannel clueless, by 2006 scholes was a holding midfielder for United.
TheBlooRayChannel Scores was infinitely better than Lampard. Lampard, althougha good player for Chelsea, should've been used as back up for Gerrard.
sachin sharda Depends what you define holding midfielder. He couldn't tackle for shit. If by holding midfielder you mean like Pirlo then yes, Scholes was that player later in his career, but then you'd have to have a midfield enforcer alongside him.
I honestly can listen to Frank talk forever. He's just incredibly articulate and so insightful. He is truly one of the world greats.
I've heard he has an IQ of 150
@@eamonnobearra2111 he does and a a* in latin
@@hhb6022 that’s a joke! Can’t believe you took if serious lol 😂😂
@@dondamon4669 what?
Great interview ... England's "Golden Generation" were at their peak at a time when English football was VERY strong. You had Utd, Chelsea and Liverpool CONSTANTLY competing in the latter stages of the Champions League ... it felt like we dominated the competition for a while. Liverpool and Chelsea almost made it a yearly habit to meet in the quarter/semi finals ... while Utd and Chelsea battled for titles .... Rivalries were at their PEAK ... so to then get these players coming together to play as a unit for England, was impossible. You could almost FEEL the distance between players like Lamps and Gerrard ... It's a damn shame, but even back then I could see it.
so other teams didn't have rivalries? the germans, brazilians, italians, french, Spanish players didn't have club rivalries? what a stupid joke other team's players didn't have rivalries with each other?
Lampard was great for Chelsea because of Makelele, Gerard was great for Liverpool because of Hamann. They could've both been great for England if only someone had seen Carrick and Hargreaves' value.
RyanBennett FC stupidest comment seen in my life
Ricky McPoppins explain...
gerrard was ok because of that spanish midfield player who went to muenchen. forgot his name.
xabi alonso. got it
Vinny Mac yes because 2002-2006 was the time England were at their peak, this was when Hamann was anchoring Liverpool's midfield
Audy W actually more Hamann because Alonso played alongside Hamann and Hamann covered more of the defensive duties than Alonso who was more of a deep lying playmaker. Bare in mind England's peak was 2002-2006 when Hamann was in Liverpools midfield
I've ALWAYS felt that England's failure at international competitions was down to the management's style and inability to correctly utilize the talents of the players. This is confirmation of it.
My family live in Derby and already he's a god...could of played alongside Gerrard with Carrick sitting behind...Harry rednapp as manager . Would of won something by now. lamps, then , was the best midfielder in the premiership, he will one day be England coach.
Still true
Playing Scholes on the wing lmao
the players had so many egos they couldn't play with each other the management is not at fault the players preferred clubs over international tournaments
Also the premier league
Michael Carrick behind them. I mean, just about everyone thought so back them, except England managers.
Rio, Lamps and Gerrard did a really good interview a couple of years back on why this side failed, if you haven't seen it.
Whilst Sven made mistakes, I think what people forget is that in 2006, when Owen suffered that injury (tbf by that time leaving him out from the off would have been acceptable, unlike 2004), he actually switched to a 4-5-1 in the knockout stages. Carrick played the DM role against Ecuador (with Hargreaves inexplicably at RB), then Hargreaves against Portugal. So in 2006, the problem was more Rooney having broken his foot five weeks prior (he himself has also stated he shouldn't have gone) and thus not being able to play that role the way he could have.
Having said all that, if Gerrard had joined Chelsea (and had thrived next to Lampard), then surely not even the most ardent 4-4-2 man in the world would have been able to persist with that system...
Imagine being a manager and having Gerrard, lampard, scholes and beckham to chose from and NOT getting it right.
We had a solid defence, a lethal attack too, it was very strange watching england fail time and time again with such talent in the squad.
They needed a coach who preferred possession or attacking football.
completely agree with you but at the same time you also have to look at other terams at the time. Brazil, France, Spain etc all had fucking disgusting teams just like England.
@@d-xyz4589 very true, but even greece won trophies in that period. Clearly having a fantastic team wasn't enough in some instances
@@jamesharding9911 may be because greece played as a team but England's players lacked chemistry at that time and not utilising a player properly too was one of the main reasons for the failure of their team
@@ficroe they needed players who didn't have rivalries with each other they needed players who focused on country more than clubs
First name on the team sheet should have been Paul Scholes.
Then build your team around him.
A world-class talent under utilised by England.
Carrick... a natural very own english bred excellent tackler and "SOLID" CDM for united. Was hitting his peak at that time alongside Ronaldo + Rooney.
But England be like " 4 - 4- 2 Lets play (Scholes on the left) " SMH i cry everytime.
As a passionate England Fan what a criminal waste of talent and golden generation.
Carrick would've linked so beautifully with Rio and would've Fully free'd up Lamps and Gerrard to play forward.
Hell instead of Hesky, we could've played Lamps as a CF with Rooney as striker and had Scholes + Gerrad in the mid with CArrick as CDM
Playing lampard cf couldnt be as bad as playing scholes LM, was such a waste of talent.
Gerrard or Lampard would be better on the left tbf compared to Scholes. Both had energy and were goal threats and Cole could provide the width.
Amen!!!
We could've played a 4-3-3 system. Scholes sitting slightly deeper, Lampard and Gerrard either side. Rooney, Beckham and Owen uptop
Liverpool fan.
Always admire lampard and gerrard together.
Both great in midfield.
Top guy Frank. Gave a really good insight on the 2006/2010 WC. The players cannot be blamed for the failures. Playing Scholesy on the right!! I mean come on. Capello really created a toxic environment in the dressing room
Chirag Joshi sven played scholes on right
nope Sven played Scholes on the left. Cap played Gerrard on the left. Lamps is right.. 433 woulda been great. and best suited to the players we had available.
And selfish arsehole players, as even they themselves admit. Excuse kings, as Capello said.
Having an England manager who couldn't speak English probably wasn't the best idea either.
Capello won everything at every team he managed until he managed England. What's the common denominator ? Capello was a great coach
Although it feels like a bit of an excuse, had Lampard's goal against Germany in 2010 stood, that tournament would have had a different complexion for England. Sure, we probably would have still lost to Germany, who were a better team. But who knows how the second half would have played out? Going in 2-2 at half time, the Germans would have been shellshocked to have lost a two goal lead, and those watching the game would have found it an exciting match. By disallowing the goal, it ensured the game became a procession for Germany. England had to overstretch in the second half, and couldn't retool.
In a world with competent refs, that game probably ends 3-2 to Germany, or maybe a draw with Germany winning on penalties, and it gets remembered as a heroic and exciting loss.
KingKaitain doesn’t like an excuse that’s an excuse
@@garciapedro7554 was still a goal tho
With competent refs we may have not won the 1966 world cup. It's all swings and roundabouts.
2010 was not meant to be. Green fumbled a sure save.
excellent analysis...so well put...so self-reflective and honest...this is great stuff
Quality guy is lamps
I bet when Terry and Lampard were younger in the early days at Chelsea were really full of themselves around the England camp, bit of an inferiority complex. They seemed a bit bit*hy around that time. Get the feeling that Gerrard, Lampard probably never naturally mixed with the MU lot. The feelings between the club teams around that time was just too strong with Chelsea trying to make a name for themselves etc.
Mn B mugs who shagged everyonez birds
He answers the question Lampard/ Gerrard question at 10:18
Fin Allen as if he listed Scholes 3rd. Jesus Christ. As good as he was He couldn’t lace Scholesy’s boots!
Thank you!
@@matthewpearce25 go on the Premier league fantasy football ball app u can compare all3sholes must of went missing no goals no assist compared to the other 2 so keep dreaming just bc utd fans need to have a horse in the race about stand out cm's Scholes nowernear these 2
Thank you
klopp is a god yea, i agree that lamps was better that scholes....but fpl is not the way to judge. Look at kante’s stats compared to someone like milivojvic...they have similar points, or milivojvic has better, but everyone knows kante is better
Good Interview.
Frank Lampard the adult and manager, is someone I can get on board with.
Will never understand why carrick wasn’t used in the same role for England as he was at united!
Club rivalry was always a big factor but let's not use Spain 2008/2010 as an example... Just 3 players from Madrid (Ramos, Alonso, Casillas) the rest were Barca players and Torres from Chelsea. That's why it was easy for Spain to play the Barca way.
You forget Alvaro Arbeloa to make it 4 from Real Madrid. Juan Mata david villa and david silva from Valencia
This is why lampard will always be one of the greatest. Always speaks from the heart and the truth
For an ex-footballer, particularly of his generation, he comes across as really intelligent and well spoken
I think he has 2 or 3 degrees
He has a genius level iq apparently
His IQ is 156, he’s a genuine genius, I reckon his IQ score helped him massively get the Chelsea job cos someone who knows the club like frank with a IQ that high can’t fail really.
Intelligence is really important in football, it's no surprise to me that the best players are smart.
I really like Lampard as a Liverpool fan.
Watching Lampard and Gerrard playing for England was like watching individuals position themselves and their ego's to make sure they were starting the games. Where as I always thought Gerrard/Lampard would do anything on a Saturday to make Liverpool/Chelsea win. Thats the difference. It wasn't so much about England when they played for their country. Because really one of them needed to be left out for the good of the team.
is lampard a liverpool fan?
@@mnb9162 You don't seem to have listened to too much of this video.
@@mnb9162 They couldnt work together because they're both attack minded and were forced to always be careful at defence which limited what they naturally do at their clubs so well. all they needed is a holding midfielder behind them like carrick, instead of playing heskey at striker next to rooney/owen, spain overloaded them with 5 great midfielders vs 2. Don't blame the players, blame the shitty coach who couldn't use his players right.
@@flame6579 You could play a sitting midfield player and then play both but I still think one needed to be left out. They both occupied that space (pretty much as number 10s) for Chelsea and Liverpool. The balance would have been miles better leaving one out. Lampard would have been a good impact sub option due to his ability to nick a goal. Would have taken a very brave manager though.
He's grown up a lot from being his day as a gobshite teenager. I have a huge respect for him as a footballer and a person. Loved how he called out that radio presenter live on air. I always like how he carried himself when his mum died especially in the 2008 CL final whereas Terry was blubbering for himself not his team. Terry shouldn't of dreamed of lifting that CL trophy in 12.
Playing a 442 with 2 midfielders who play the same way both like to get in the box and score goals. Joe Cole your most creative player on the wing and Scholes the only guy who can actually control a game not playing.
I've never understood managers who don't play strong individuals in their preferred roles. Like sticking Rooney on the wing, Lamps as a defensive mid, or asking Crouchy to get back and defend. Highly frustrating to witness as a fan
WELL JOHN BONES IF YOU GOT 11 STRONG INDIVIDUALS THAT DOESN'T MAKE A GREAT TEAM THAT JUST GIVES YOU 11 STRONG INDIVIDUALS, LOOK AT GERMANY 2002 THEIR TEAM WAS NO WHERE NEAR AS TALENTED BUT THEY HAD 11 AVERAGE PLAYERS WHO PLAYED AS A TEAM ENGLAND HAD 11 GREAT INDIVIDUALS THAT COULDN'T, FACT IS LAMPARD CANT DO THE STUFF IN DEFENCE THAT AN AVERAGE PLAYER WHO PLAYS IN THAT POSITION CAN DO COZ LAMPARD WASN'T WELL ROUNDED HE WAS AN ATTACKING MIDFIELD I MEAN WITH YOUR IDEARS WE SHOULD PUT ROONEY IN GOAL JUST TO GET HIM IN THE TEAM !!!! IN 1966 ALF RAMSEY DIDN'T PICK JIMMY GREAVES THE BEST PLAYER HE PICKED HURST INSTEAD COZ HE KNEW HURST WAS BETTER IN THAT TEAM EVEN THOUGH HE WASN'T AS GOOD AS GREAVES, ITS BEST TO HAVE A GREAT TEAM THAN GREAT INDIVIDUALS
@@gamestation9437 Relax, pal. Lampard was more than capable of defending, he sat on the left of a 3 for Chelsea for years.
Great insight. Always thought england should have gone with a 3 and strange they never tried it. Also interesting that the players wanted to play that way but were never allowed to. How can you be right mentally going out on to a field thinking i don’t think this is going to work, we’re out numbered. A good manager would ask the players what do you need in place to give you a solid base to play as a team.
This man is so knowledgeable about the game. He will make an outstanding manager and a manager that every player would respect and take advice from
You were right. He's taken over Chelsea. :)
Frankie boy was my favourite player!! smashing them in from outside the box!!!
When Carrick played for Tottenham he actually earned more caps for England which is just ridiculous. In 2008 when Man Utd WON the Champions League MU had a totally English Midfield of Carrick, Scholes and Hargreaves. None were picked to play for England who didn't even qualify for the Euros that year. We over value scoring goals from Midfield and Undervalue possession and control of the game.
Can someone make this guy coach of the three lions and pay him whatever he wants until he's 85 ? Lampard has been the second best player in the world and he's a genius. Combined with the fact that he comes across as likeable and having authority... I mean that would be a dream !
Yes, he'll be manager after Southgate. Derby is just a warm-up.
He probably will be that. Smart guy, seems nice too
@ Kili : Smart midfielders tend to become the best coaches. He has great potential as a coach.
lex t he had a LOT of natural ability. Strikers would kill to have his technique. He scored so many goals that people tend to overlook his creativity, 2nd all time in premier league for assists. Best club career of any midfielder in football history, by some distance.
Him and Carrick are two midfield geniuses, love em,
Carrick, Lampard and Scholes should have been our world cup winning midfield
Said this myself during Euro 2004 and World Cup 06, and I think it would have made a big difference back then.
However, Capello did later introduce a holding mid, Barry, between 08-10, and it didn't do us much good against Germany (though Barry wasn't fully fit for that tournament).
gareth Jones that's because he selected the donkey human hybrid that was Heskey!
The useless FA picked that fraud Sven, who some people still think did a good job.
well spoken person and a genuinely humble guy. This is why derby is my second team atm. #ktbffh
Love this guy, ive Met him and he's a really cool guy.
I'm a Liveroool fan and hated Lampard as a player, I now have a lot of respect for the guy and can appreciate what a great player he was.
Here’s one thought from a german: When we won the World Cup in 2014, Löw took the best players and created a system with those players. Höwedes, normally a cb played as a leftback, Özil and Müller played on the wings eventhough they both were CAMs. But it still worked brilliantly, good possession, brilliant defending. Right now after watching the European Cup, I think that England plays under its own possibilities. Yes the defense worked extremely good, but with Sancho, Sterling, Kane, Rashford you can actually play better than ANY team in this tournament. This squad is a hidden gem. Just like the golden Generation and they just had a system for certain players but not the best. Imagine Scholes, Gerrard and Lampard behind Rooney…
Lampard and Gerrard were both players that loved to lead the charge, inspire and push the team into goal scoring opportunities, he has hit the nail on the head in saying that they were both scared of going forward playing for England because they never wanted to leave a big gap behind them and they were thinking about too much all at once. I do actually remember once (about 2008 after wolly with a brolly got sacked?) Carrick playing behind the two of them and it worked very well and should've been a more permanent strategy to get Gerrard and Lampard used to it, can't remember why that stopped, Carrick injury? Long time ago now.
Sven was a starfucker who was scared to drop Beckham, and the rest of the team were divas who didn't want to do the dirty work. Toxic mix.
It has always been the same with England since Alf Ramsey's time. Successive managers have failed to pick a team and have tried "shoehorning" the perceived star names into a lineup. This meant that Scholes was continuously pushed wide left to accommodate Lampard and Gerrard in the centre. Personally I would have sacrificed Lampard and had Gerrard to the right of Scholes and A another to the left in front of two holding midfield players.
Our midfield has always been poorly structured. Our obsession with a "box to box" midfielder has been crippling as the midfield needs to be layered into 1.holding midfield players screening the centre backs and 2. more attacking midfield players. I recall Didi Hamann bemoaning this English obsession in a radio interview a year or two back. Every team needs a Deschamps type "water carrier" to allow more talented players to do their thing. If only every midfielder was a Bryan Robson.
Alf Ramsey said "It's not my job to pick the best players, it's my job to pick the best team".
Frankie ageing into a Liam Neeson 😂
Much love mate.
I don't get it, do you mean Frank looks like Liam Neeson?
@@donnchagilley6861 From certain angles, they do look similiar.
@@jesthomas2199 having looked at a few Google images, yeah I suppose they do! Side note, waiting for the lampard announcement is bloody killing me😂
@@donnchagilley6861 it's taking ages, hope he gets a proper pre-season in. I want to see how we line up and play, can't wait for the new season.
Frank did go looking to beat up the first black guy he saw.
Unfortunately it was Drogba.
I always hated the reception Frank was given at West Ham, it wasn't his fault that his Dad was sacked, it left his position untenable. I met him when as a 16 year old academy player he gave the medals and trophies out at my son's football team's end of season awards and party. He was a very charming young man and we spoke about a cracking goal he had just scored against Liverpool in the FA youth cup final. Good kid, now a great man.
Micheal Carrick, criminally underrated and under capped! No top team has played 4-4-2 for 20 years! We’re finally catching up tactically but unfortunately we no longer have the same quality of players
When he played for Tottenham he actually earned more caps for England which is just ridiculous. In 2008 when Man Utd WON the Champions League MU had a totally English Midfield of Carrick, Scholes and Hargreaves. None were picked to play for England who didn't even qualify for the Euros that year. We over value scoring goals from Midfield and Undervalue possession and control of the game.
MrKeefelm Bayern won the treble with essentially 442, Barca last year playing 442, France have a form.of 442
MrGt I agree formations can change during a game depending on how each player likes to play their position. With a back 5 if you have one wing back who pretty much is attacking the whole game the team is essentially playing a back 4. You can only really tell the formation of a team when you see in the game the spaces each player is occupying through the whole game. For instance Lampards position was nearly a number 10 a lot for Chelsea. Rarely did he not get near Drogba for most attacks when playing in his prime for Chelsea. Sometimes in a 442 the second striker sometimes loves tracking back and defending/linking with the midfield essentially making it a 433. It really depends on the players you play in each position which determines what the formation will be during the game.
MrGts92 the 4-4-2 that Eriksens England played was straight lines, ridged and couldn’t accommodate two attacking midfield players. It was floored from the start, every fan and pundit knew it but he didn’t change it! Barca spent most of the last 4 years with a front 3, so that can’t be a 4-4-2. Chelsea in lamps era played a 4-2-3-1 and although they looked quite defensive at times Lampard benefitted massively from having holding players like Essien around. I not saying 4-4-2 can’t work, but requires the right kinds of player!
Why didnt any England manager just slot Carrick behind them, I mean Sir Alex can't have been wrong to have had Carrick in the core of his teams for so long.
lol....i used to say carrick to was # 2..2 when i was younger but as i grew older i began to see the value in his gameplay and the quality of the player. I wouldnt blame any one for not playing carrick but i believe his best years were in his later years
If Scholes Gerrard and Lampard could play that would be amazing
Super Frank, such a role model and legend, no gimmicks like what you see these players doing nowadays
A 4-3-3 with Scholes / Carrick behind Gerrard and Lamps would have been very good. But we had managers who stuck by 4-4-2. Despite us not having a good LM
Eriksson and Capello were very 4-4-2 and wouldn't play any other system. Frank has a good point. Will Frank deploy other tactics and system for Derby in Championship. The Championship is a very hard and unforgiving league. Lots of quality teams in the championship like my team Sheffield Wednesday. Lets see how frank does in the championship. Be interesting to see.
Sheffield Wednesday are not quality.
Watching Derby just to see how Frank and also watching Rangers for Steve G, both will do better than Neville did at Valencia.
That's was the very problem.
Wednesday r shit
could be worse i could support a load of sheep shaggers
Sad to hear Frank Lampard saying he didn't enjoy international football. Seems like there was no sprit in the English camp..
Isn't that a consequence of the intense regionalism found in English culture? That would make the teams disharmony actually a perfect reflection of the nation they represented.
@@edgaravila2776 don't forget about real Madrid vs Barcelona rivalry it is as big as this english rivalry if not bigger than this but they came together and won 3 cups for their country
If he didn't like it he should of volunteered for the bench so a player who was up for it played instead.
It was incredibly disappointing all those years of such a talented group not being able to perform. Interesting to see the player's perspective of it.
Great interview
Fa’s fault for paying Erickson what he wanted then capello who were 442 managers after we’d finally started to play with something more under el tel and then hoddle
Of all people Kieron Dyer got it right, they should've played 3-5-2 around 2004 onwards with 2 wing backs, being roughly:
James
Campbell, Ferdinand, Terry
Beckham, Lampard, Scholes, Gerrard, Cole
Rooney, Owen
Nice to see some real honesty from Frank, the whole Lampard - Gerrard never worked as neither was defensive minded and Barry probably was the only one who would be willing to sit deep and allow them to push forward
3 5 2 forever, wing backs who can both defend and play forward. Central midfielder who holds, with the other two in free roles. Two centre forwards, one of whom drops to midfield when pressing or defending. Works perfect t against any other formation and easy to adapt slightly providing players are intelligent enough to sense how the game is going and how space is opening up.
Am still laughing the management they stuck Paul Scholes in left midfield. The player as gifted as Scholes wasted in LM, what an utter shame.
Also I find it funny, that a bunch of grown -ass men can't put their differences over a game of football, I mean you guys are representing the country, love for your country should trump over anything. Thats why England always plays disjointed, there was no link between midfield and defense.
Its ok Frank..we know Emile Heskey was shit too.
BlueMonk25 hahahaha
yak yak.
Why Fabio Capello chose Heskey for 1st line up over Crouch is a complete baffling mystery to me.
WTF does Heskey have to do with this? Rooey was utter shite too. Rooney got 1 world cup goal in games
It turned out Rooney didn't live up to potential, but look at his output in his early career. He was one of the top strikers in the world at 20 and the decline was slow, there's no way he wasn't getting in that team
Good interview always liked Lampard...🤓
Carrick was one of the most underrated English players just because he didnt go around shouting at people and putting crunching tackles in. But great decision making and clean tackler and great in possession, people like Guardiola praised this., and the way Man Utd form nose dived a few times the instant he got injured and missed some games an example of his influence. He should have been the England holding mid for years.
Lampard is not a great centre mid he is clearly at his best behind the strikers so should have been put there, Gerrard with Scholes or Beckham in centre of a narrow diamond. Wing backs backs and forwards drifting wide would be required to give the team more width and creativity. Not sure if we had any strikers capable of doing that the way the likes of Sala, Mane, Sterling, Rashford, Bale etc. etc. do in the modern game, that was part of the problem making it harder for England to play the diamond that would have suited that talented midfield.
Gerrard Carrick Lampard
Beckham Rooney J.Cole
Imagine the power of that midfield and attack.
Top man frank ❤️
A whole nation including apparent 'experts' could never understand why Lamps and Gerrard couldn't perform as a pair. Well it was always pretty obvious, which Lampard says here. Outnumbered and needed extra bodies in there.
A one legged man not necessarily
"Playing in the Champions League final couldn't of been surpassed by playing in the world cup final for England"
And there you have it.
Doesn't mean enough to these guys.
You can play several champions League finals in a career.
Chances are you'd only get 1 world cup final if you're lucky.
The WORLD would remember a world cup winner but only Chelsea fans will remember a Champions League winner.
A refreshingly honest reason for the way England did not play well together. I often wonder that it must be hard to play your club season as bitter rivals and then all play together as an international team, good on you Frank for telling us how it was.
Just place Gerard and lampard with
A holding midfielder like Carrick or Barry.
They kept playing Gerard on the left or up front and I think if they had a 4-3-3 with Michael carrick or Gareth Barry in a holding role. Preferably Barry and I think that would have worked much better
That England team was stuck inbetween a formation transition... 442 was a norm throughout the 90s and 00s but teams started to change the shape to more now... 433, 451, 532... utilising more of the wingbacks and packing the midfield, it was unconventional back then to play with 1 striker... but mid 2000s spain changed hence their dominance.
For England back in the mid 2000s... i would've played 532 or 433... England had so many good CBs cole can play wingback, so can beckham, they could've used scholes, lampard and gerrard as 3 CMS with Carrick and Hargreaves as backup... rooney up top on his own... or Owen up top on his own and rooney play on the left like he did at United.
Alot of what ifs. But that England team had alot of potential... you don't dominate european club football but fail on the international stage like they did.
After Erickson's departure. I wanted Gus Huddink to come in, he was a top level coach at that time, and had just got south korea to the quarter final, but we got Maclaren, thanks to Brian Barwick who was chief of the FA, we wasted a group of highly talented players, thankfully we seem to have got it right with southgate and the current crop of players, who now play with no fear.
Lampard is an ok bloke , with England he was just weighed down by it all, poor tactics and division.
10:00 for gerrard Lampard question
Good man
Here is a proposition... Beckham at the base of the diamond, Frank and Gerrard on the left and right of the diamond and the preeminent Paul Scholes at the top of the diamond...rotate Beckham for Gerrard...rotate Scholes for Gerrard... People talk about a lack of width with the diamond in midfield but we were not naturally blessed with a naturally left sided player that was of International class. Additionally, if we needed width, one of the two forwards could work the widths (Heskey was a class act in his first few seasons at Leicester doing exactly that). Who knew full backs could work the whole wing? Ashley Cole would have been ideal for that system. British football was about motivation in those days. The Europeans had tacticians as managers. Unfortunately, we appointed the one Italian who needed Maldini, Baresi, Nesta, Cannavaro or Costacurta (I know my Italian is not all that good) in order to defend. Capello was a disciplinarian not a tactical mastermind. Sven was a one trick pony (trust me, I am a Leicester fan) and McClaren was an excellent number 2 at Old Trafford with Sir Alex next to him. England did what they always did - push square pegs into round holes. That generation never realised their potential.
I liked what Frank said about Crespo about going to meet up with the Argentinian team. I hope the future of English players feel the same.
Manager should've varied sccording to oppo. Midfield couldve been a diamond with Hargreaves/carrick in front of defense, with Lamps and Stevie and Scholesy behind the strikers.
4:13 - She definitely wants him. Because this is the internet.
Rapist.
England were never eliminated by Spain during that period though. They were eliminated by Brazil, Portugal twice, Germany and Italy. In 3 of those occasions it was after PKs. So Frank can't really use the excuse that they were overwhelmed and outnumbered by the skillful Spanish midfield geniuses.
The problem was that England never managed to make their talented players work together. Which is another proof that it takes more than just talented players. They lacked holding midfielder and quality attacking players. Even if they managed to get Scholes, Lampard and Gerrard (as holding midfielder) to work together, what do they do with Beckham? Who plays in attack?
Btw, Fabio Campelo also played 3-5-2/5-3-2 at Roma so he's not strictly 4-4-2 man.
If only there was VAR in 2010 WC when Lampard scored and the goal was dis-allowed. That happened in my own city was so devasted.
This guy is really smart he can analyse the game.
England could have used a 4:3:1:2 Gerrad , Paul scoals , and Micheal Carrick as the 3 , lampard as the 10, problem solved , coaches make it look so hard sometimes, smh😏😏😏
zero pace in that side
And where does Beckham(Englands captain and arguably best player at that time) fit in?
Dan Corcoran Michael Owen
yeah but thats just one player. If you're playing without wingers in a 4312, then you need at least some pace in the midfield so they can go in wider areas and cover for where the wingers would be
i would've just gone 4231, Carrick as a holding mid, instructed Gerrard to lie deeper as more of a playmaker, Lampard in a more advance role behind the striker. This would miss out a bit on Gerrard's ability to link up with the striker like we saw with him and Torres etc, but Lampard is more than good enough to do that and we know that Gerrard can play well as a deeper playmaker. This would have been a good compromise imo.
If we had Scholes though, I would play him as the deep playmaker, and *either* Lampard or Gerrard in the advanced role, making that decision based off form.
My favorite player of all time: SUPER FRANK
It's simple, neither of them liked to stay back as both loved to either assist the forwards or score themselves. They will never agree but one should have been the sub for the other with another in their place who stayed back.
Should have played
James
Neville Ferdinand Terry Cole
Scholes Carrick
Beckham Lampard Gerrard
Rooney
Sure there’s no pace in there but with Rooney up there and five of the best midfielders of their generation behind him there was surely enough quality to get the ball into positions for him to score. Compare it to the 2010 Spain team where it was Xavi, Alonso, Busquets, Iniesta, Silva or Pedro all behind Villa. This would have hopefully worked in a similar way. It really is a shame we were so tactically rigid and stuck to the constant regressive 442 which limited pretty much everyone in that team
James
Neville Ferdinand Terry Cole
Gerrard Carrick/Scholes Lampard
Beckham Rooney J Cole
With Hargreaves & Owen on the bench and a few of the younger fast players, that would've been a solid team.
False 9 would have worked wonders for england with scholes as the deeper of the 3 midfielders allowing all 3 gerrard lampard and scholes to work their magic.. 3 magicians gone to waste. Rooney as a false 9 probably would have been his best position due to his "I'll stop when I die" workrate. Micheal owen as a false left winger (really a higher laying striker). Ashley Young on the right for the workrate aswell...
The defence speaks for itself.
With that you've almost got at all times 4 midfielders who can play a deadly long ball onto 2 out of 3 pacey forwards. The long ball being called deadly still feels like its an understatement. Any of those 3 would have spoonfed that ball to the striker, or had a challenging pop themselves alongside rooney
If only I was manager 😔 I'm still too young though, SOME DAY 👊
Mickey Joyce you need to stop playing football manager
I would of played a diamond on Carrick, Gerrard, Lampard and Scholes
I'm Scottish, so obviously not a big England football fan, but me and the rest of the world appeared to know, when the English didn't, they should have built their entire team around Paul Scholes.
Frank Lampard the introspective footballer. One in a million
Remember the golden generation in England existed at a time when many national teams were also brilliant
Can listen to Frank all day. Top bloke.
COME ON ENGLAND!!!!!!!
You build a midfield around Scholes.
He was retired from 04. Carrick, Lampard and Gerrard would of been our best midfield.
Absolute top bloke, on the money with every point he made. Oh to go back in time and find a manager who would work that system... The FA are the biggest culprets. They had those players at their disposal for over 10 years. Why didn't someone sit down with them all and work things out? A crying shame...
that first 20 seconds question would apply to players for every single major western Europe national team ever though, you play for rival clubs, what's so different? The problem was twofold: It was just before top coaches really learned how to utilize a 4-3-3 like Guardiola and Klopp do today - any two of Gerrard, Lampard and Scholes would have worked great attacking together with a Barry or similar behind them. The other problem was that we never had a consistently top striker at the level of the players in all other positions on the pitch. Had we had a Shearer or Kane completing that formation - even an early career Sturridge - instead of an inconsistent Rooney and permainjured Owen things would have been very different
Lampard behind the striker and Scholes and Gerrard in midfield.
Thats how chelsea used him with makele and ballack
Eriksson suggested a diamond formation...according to lampards book he opted for a 4 4 2
Truth be told, England would have been more successful if Scholes was in the middle and everything was around him. One of the greatest central midfielders of all time, to the point that Barca's Iniesta, xavi and messi was made to watch videos of him when they were in their academy, and what do we do? we play scholes on the wing LMAO..
Absolutely, couldn't have said it better!
Haha I loved that ending
Capello the savage 😁
1st thing Walter smith done when he took Scotland job was tell them to have a few nights out together. And they had a great wee run under him. Team that drinks together wins together
Is this 1974?
GK
Neville Rio Terry Cole
Becks Lamps Scholesy Gerrard Cole
Rooney
Quality.
scholes cant tackle
But he can do everything else...
GK
Neville Ferdinand Terry
Carrick
Beckham Gerrard Scholes A.Cole
Lampard
Rooney
Becks wasnt going to track back. But I really think Carrick should have played more games for england
Of course he would have tracked back. Beckham played wingback under Hoddle.
Stop using rivalry as an excuse for the England failure. Spain in their prime had a bunch of Real Madrid and Barcelona players. How could Spain do it so well?
Sean Robinson JR well the reality was that Spain struggled with that issue for many years. Then they faced into it and won the World Cup.
Sean Robinson JR their team prior to winning the WC could've been winners but it was hindered by Barca and Real rivalry. So great knowledge you got there.
Coz they had Puyol !!!!!!
Why did he mention Spain ? England never really did face them in his time in a tournament. lol
Because the Madrid players knew to let the barca boys take the lead
One of the English players, a leader, should have stepped forward and insisted that the team play 3 in midfield. All the players say they were thinking about it at the time, if they had banded together and made a stand then it could have happened. A united front against the management could have worked.
As you can see I'm a Scot, who lives in England, and I find it totally bewildering that the national team managers couldn't or didn't play Gerrard and Lampard with a holding midfield payer like Paul Scoles, and why not be able to play Owen and Rooney up front, instead you had that big old carthorse Emile Heskey, doesn't make any sense to me.
Imagine the diamond below ScholesGerrard LampardCarrick
@Peter Stewart on the bench
Glad hes managing the Rams. Future England manager watch this space.
Towards the end comments about Capello 4-2-4. This is a fair point, Capello was fairly consistent with his 4-2-4 formations in his career. His great AC Milan side of 90s had Albertini and Rijkaard in midfield, both were quite defence minded but then behind them both Baresi and Maldini as CBs were excellent at bringing the ball forward to start attacks and supporting in midfield. In Donnadoni and Van Bastern they had better attacking outlets running wide. 4-2-4 was definitely not right for England when their real assets were attacking from the middle with freeing up Gerrard, Lampard and Rooney
Can't wait for next season. Think he will do well in management. Come on u rams
He's in Chelsea now. Lol