Quote:
|
Originally Posted by nffc
Well would you take a striker to play against the world's finest defences (OK, Sweden, Paraguay and T+T) whose only experience is 21 games in the second tier?
It's not just about ability it's about the experience and having proved yourself at the highest level before being selected.
Selecting Walcott is no more than selecting a lower division player for England. You wouldn't take Richard Cresswell would you? At least if Andy Johnson was going to be picked, he's played in the Premiership. Pearce and Merson were also picked for internationals when in the lower division but at least they had played in the side (and in Pearce's case, in a semi final of a world cup) and in the top flight beforehand.
If you honestly think picking a player with practically no experience, or actually none in the top flight or international level, as potentially the second striker in the side is a good idea then I dunno.
In fact, I'd rather take someone like Harewood, Beattie or even Defoe or Vassell because all of them have top flight or England experience. Walcott does not - yet - but does look an exciting prospect. He's 17. Maybe in 2 years time he'll be international quality. What about if he's the next Danny Cadamarteri?
If you honestly think this is all a good idea then really I think you should get one of these.
 |
Do you live in a cave and catch and kill all your own food too?
Engalnd have the best record in recent years with SGE managing them. I don't think he's the best manager ever, and he's made some questionable decisions in the past, but I think he's onto something with Walcott. How is Walcott going to get experience, unless he plays? If you're super talented, then experience won't really affect your playing. I really think he's going to be great.
