Sven-Göran Eriksson explains why he played Paul Scholes out wide for England
Вставка
- Опубліковано 22 тра 2024
- SUBSCRIBE ► bit.ly/SSFootballSub
PREMIER LEAGUE HIGHLIGHTS ► bit.ly/SkySportsPLHighlights
Former England manager Sven-Göran Eriksson explains why he played Paul Scholes out wide for England during his reign as manager.
Watch Premier League LIVE on Sky Sports here ► bit.ly/WatchSkyPL
►TWITTER: / skysportsfootball
►FACEBOOK: / skysports
►WEBSITE: www.skysports.com/football
MORE FROM SKY SPORTS ON UA-cam:
►SKY SPORTS FOOTBALL: bit.ly/SSFootballSub
►SKY SPORTS BOXING: bit.ly/SSBoxingSub
►SOCCER AM: bit.ly/SoccerAMSub
►SKY SPORTS F1: bit.ly/SubscribeSkyF1 - Спорт
Asking him about why he played scholes out wide, is like asking a person who failed the exam how he failed
As a Portuguese I got to say this, English people always talk about their golden generation. This was also Portugal Golden Generation with The likes of Figo, Deco, Carvalho, Pauleta, Ronaldo and many more from Porto CL winning side, besides that in Euro2004 we played in our Home, and in 2006 England was down to 10 man at the 60th minute. Sometimes your best is still not enough
NUNO NEVES I agree. England faced all the tough teams in tournaments like Figo’s Portugal twice and Ronaldinho’s Brazil side in 2002. Quite a few nations had peak teams between 2000 and 2006 like France for example with Zidane, Henry, Ribery or Italy’s winning World cup team with Totti, Buffon, Cannavaro and so on. Germany we’re even great as well during this period.
You’re right. Sometimes you’re best is not enough.
@@nunoneves3930 you're correct...but let's be honest here. Ronaldo didn't even hit his peak in the 2004 Euros or the 2006 World Cup. He only started showing his greatness after the 2006 World Cup during the 06/07 season and his form just kept going up and up.
@@skrrrr2211 He was still a lot to handle at his young age though.
Also mental strength. The England team lacked it. They showed this in penalties and in their inability to hold a lead. They were boring and they were just a bunch of players assembled together cos they were great for their clubs. But no chemistry. I hated watching this generation of players.
no matter what he said, he made a huge mistake, scholsy should be the one dictating in the middle...period
Gerrard and lamps in the middle of the park better players those two with goals and assists
@BNO97 ! thanks for the laught
BNO97 ! Stay off the crack.
Scholes was better than Lampard
The problem with Gerrard and Lampard was that they were too similar back then. Scholes should have been the one controlling and setting up the tempo from deep with the other two playing infront of him as they were more b2b type of midfielders (especially Lampard). They could have worked in a 3 man midfield but then again England didn't have great wingers at that time so that wouldn't have been the perfect solution neither..
"What would the press have said?"
There you go; The man's a typical Managerial Manager.
Yeah, I noticed that. Not exactly "total football" is it ....
So he has 3 world class midfielders and then puts the one with asthma on the wing? What sort of logic is that
awsomef2004 😂😂😂😂
Michael Gibson Scholes had asthma?
@@alessiodelcastillo1613 yeah sadly he did
Yeis dayum
LOL
Sven “ we never saw paul scholes best at a big tournament “
You played him as a left winger ya knobhead 😂😂😂
LMAO
He doesnt even know a mistake he made LOL
😂😂
Left midfielder* he should’ve played 4-3-3 the idiot
@@SheffKhalid if he should've play 4-3-3 at that time england did not have any great wingers. get your facts right idiot
If there was 10 great midfielders at the time would he have just played them all? 😂 "Scholsey you go in goal I can't leave you out"
Scholes was the English Xavi, to play him on the left wing was criminal. This guy had the best English squad and he made them look ordinary
Nope. He was always more of a Iniesta than a Xavi. Play him as a deep-lying playmaker and he will be criminally exposed lol. His strength was always in dribbling, short pass n go style of football.
@@de4dman wrong, scholes is more like xavi.
@@Alzenryo wrong. Come back when u have something intelligent to back up your claim ok, kid? Utd goons thinking he is in the same mould as a Xavi or Pirlo is just hilarious.
@@de4dman Saying "kid" to make yourself feel superior doesnt work on me especially on youtube. That only shows your imaturity.
@@de4dman "scholes strength was always dribbling" is even more hillarious.
Scholes should of gone in the middle Lamps to no10 and allow Ashley Cole to go forward more on the left with Gerrard moving slightly left to cover you really don’t need a left winger when you have Ashley Cole imo
@WVY KING strangely liverpools full backs do exactly that and don't concede that much huh?
Liam Edwards yeah that all sounds great,but who’s the defensive midfielder???,scholes gerrard lampard certainly ain’t none them could defend,and talking about the days when rivaldo Ronaldinho messi Ronaldo totti Del piero tevez bergkamp lot of world class creative attacking midfielders was about,simple fact was makele was at Chelsea hamann wasn’t at Liverpool roy Keane was at Utd viera Arsenal all these guy done the defending tackling nasty part the game for scholes gerrard and lampard to make them shine
Van dijk plays in the left side of cb, taa's cover is matip/gomez/lovren.
But also hendo/Milner whoever's on the right side of midfield help out too.
Liam Edwards Joe Cole would be a better choice on the left
Gerrard should've been dropped to his best position on the bench..........
Sven: Knows Scholes can't last 90 minutes due to "asthma" in the heat,.. plays him as a wide man.
@@apo5510 Scholes was the best of the 3.
@@viborgguys1Lampard was
"he was a great player but maybe we didn't see his best in a tournament" yes because you played the greatest English midfielder player on the left wing!
Scholes was worse than Lampard, Gerrard and Beckham. Worst English midifelder on the pitch
@@shruk4 STFU Noobb !
@@shruk4 lol
Eriksson couldn't come up with one logical reason for why he played Scholes on the left. Any good manager (Pep, Mourinho, Klopp) would have got the best out of that squad and won them a tournament atleast.
It will be a long time before England can have a generation as talented as this one, they let a good chance go by and there are very few people to blame for it.
Might not be that long if the current group keeps its momentum up. Plus the PL is regaining its place amongst Europe's elite which will help.
england has a great generation NOW.
Only world class players England had, were Manchester United players. The rest were overrated, Ashley Cole, Gerrard, Terry........
@@JohnAbraham-ft5go Ashley Cole and Gerrard overated? 🤣🤣🤦♂️
@@JohnAbraham-ft5go I am a Man U fan and to be fair, Ashley Cole was probably one of the best left backs in the world during his prime and John Terry scored a lot of vital goals for Chelsea as a defender during their title winning runs. Gerrard is World Class at slipping.
To be fair Fergie played Scholes to the left at times to accommodate Veron and Keane in the centre. I don't think it's a major deal. Like Sven alludes to, players find their position anyways. If you put Scholes LM or LCM or even RCM, you will see Scholes occupy positions just to the left because that's where he liked to dictate the game from. Similarly you could play Rooney as a #9 and you will find him dropping deep and to the left because that's where he liked to pick up the ball.
Although Scholes was clearly a superior playmaker to Gerrard or Lampard, I think you lost less from his game by playing him to the left than you would with the others. Lampard was a central player, full stop. Gerrard was a central player who could also function well on the right side (but Beckham is there).
To be honest if I was playing a 4-4-2 with those players I'd do the same thing, and probably look to create a situation where Gerrard and Lampard were afforded opportunities to get forward and Scholes and Beckham could tuck in and cover them. Maybe Beckham and Gerrard could interchange in a natural sense... Beckham always liked to play deep and pass/cross from deep anyways and Gerrard was a more powerful runner. The connection on the left is less balanced though because it's just a case of Scholes filling in for an advancing Lampard. The biggest problem for England was the balance on the left flank.
You can understand his predicament though. How can you drop either of those players?! Scholes the best playmaker. Lampard had taken over his role as the best advanced, goal-scoring midfielder. Gerrard by far the steeliest, most physical player in the midfield and a decent all-rounder. And Beckham a real team player with the best passing of the lot and super tactical intelligence.
And to be fair, Scholes, when he retired for England, was in the middle of his worst period as a player. He's my favourite Utd player ever to be honest, but you can't deny that at this period Lampard was a better advanced, goal-scoring midfielder. You just can't. Scholes was truly reborn in 2006 as more of a Pirlo type of player, and maybe he could've played at the base of a diamond (Lampard at the tip) at this stage, but during 2004 or so.. I can't really blame Sven for playing it as he did.
Best comment up here.
If you become the coach and do the same like sven, so same thing happened wasted the golden generation lol
"To be honest if I was playing 4-4-2" that was the mistake. That set of players were not made for a 4-4-2. It is a 4-3-3 team. Beckham and Rooney can clearly play the wings in a front 3
@wharsmetoothpicson Goal scoring runs, sure. His season in 2002/03 was immense (that and 2006/07 are his best seasons for me) and he carried on scoring goals, but I remember his form in general was starting to decline despite the goals. He took a year out to recover from some sort of eye injury... blurred vision or something... but I thought it was clear that something wasn't right even before he made that decision to take time out. He definitely had some games on the left when Veron arrived, although yeah, he played some as a sort of second striker as well. His understanding with Ruud was immense.
@@smoothcheeky8910 Maybe not a standard 4-4-2... but who knows. Sometimes you probably just need the right combination of players around you for it to work. If the Scholes Sven had was Mk II Scholes of 2006/07, they could easily have got away with playing a 4-4-2 diamond... and even when Scholes was gone, they should've been doing that with Carrick in the team. The flat 4-4-2 was probably doomed with the selection of midfielders they had.
That team in a 433 would have been immense.
@iDontDoXboxLive that sounds questionable
Depends on which players you play in that formation. Cole, Terry, Gerrard and Lampard on the bench, then yeah it would've been immense.....
Not 4-3-3 but an attacking 4-2-3-1 with Scholes and Gerrard as the double pivot and Lampard as the no.10 with Beckham and Rooney on either flank. Owen on top alone. England had a fabulous defence so that midfield setup would have been fantastic.
Unfortunately this man only knows about 4-4-2. Its the truth, typical old generation manager
@Karan Bhardwaj you speak the truth. england had great players but there arent a system that can play all these great players at one time. and IF a manager drop one or two of these players and they lost, the press and fans will be all over the manager. tough time.
Listening to coaches these days and listening to this bloke. Football has come a long way. He's absolutely clueless
At least he's better manager than Lampard and Jose........
@@JohnAbraham-ft5go in what world is he better than Jose?
Jack Richardson ignore the troll.
@X X No he shouldn't.
Yep he’s a blagger
Imagine being a Manager and not being able to accomodate Paul Scholes!? Clueless.
Andrew Marshall ... or Jamie Vardy😉
@@ozohirogi2577 😴
At that time in England the formation that was most used was 442, so he went with that. Gerrard and Lampard together in mid in 442 is perfect cause Gerrard is good at defending and Lampard at scoring. Playing them in Mid was right.
The only mistake he made was 442. 3142 with scholes as DM as Ashley cole as LM would have been perfect.
he did at LM lol
neither Gerrard or Lampard were used vs the best teams like Arsenal in the league at LM in prior seasonS leading up the way Scholes was by Ferguson and going into Euro 2004 both Lampard and Gerrard were better and more efficient at centre midfield roles so
He played Scholes out of position because he is a bang average coach.
sven goran Eriksson is a great coach he was one of the best in his generation he won trophies with big clubs such as lazio and benfica
@?? Beckham's one of England's greatest ever players, hardly a weird obsession. Getting the best out of one of the world's best set piece takers was obviously important.
@?? Don't forget Nancy.He was a busy boy.
@@oscarsilva2548 Paul Scholes is now regarded as one of the best central midfield players of the past 40 years.Sven played him on the left wing!
Paul Carney we had 3 world class centre midfielders and bang average left sided midfielders, what do you think he should’ve done? You either have a stronger team or a stronger individual.
Absolutely amazing that he couldnt work out that a 3 man midfield would be far superior to a common 442.
Rooney and Beckham could of easily played in a forward 3, both had more than enough workrate to get up and down and make the midfield a midfield 5 when defending.
Unbelievablely tactically inept.
Not to mention Gary Neville and Ashley Cole would definitely have the defensive discipline of making it work. He just didn't want to deviate from 4-4-2
Played a rigid 4-4-2 & puts best playmaker ever on the bench. Scholes could've played a deep role like Xavi with Lampard & Gerrard ahead. Overrated manager.
Lampard has often said in recent years how him and Gerrard used to get run ragged in midfield so often in tournaments simply because they were usually vastly outnumbered in that area of the pitch.
@@THOMASCOLTON1 yeah put scholes who can't tackle as holding midfield great idea
@@indivindu5048 Pirlo & Xavi? Put the best passer at pivot of midfield like a quarter back.
The problem is Scholes is way better on the ball than those guys..... Playing him to the left was a big mistake...
lampard>scholes
@@oscarsilva2548 Lampard and Scholes were played out of position. Lampard would have been better right behind the striker(s) and let Gerrard and Scholes in the middle of the park.
@@oscarsilva2548
Lampard was the one of the best CMs ever when it came to attacking and scoring goals. Scholes was the better ball distributer though.
I'd have had Scholes sitting as a deep lying playmaker with Gerrard box to box and Lampard as an AM. Up front have Rooney from the left, Owen centrally and Beckham playing wide right, coming in more centrally when attacking with G Nev overlapping. 4-3-3.
Liverpool supporter here and I would have to agree that Scholes was a better player on the ball, however, Stephen was the better all around player with more attacking threat and as a result I would have him just behind the striker (like he was played by Rafa in 08/09 season behind Torres). Scholes should have been deployed centrally.
Scholes was twice the a player Gerrard was. Also Lampard was average as well, he stat padded scoring goals from penalties........
"Scholes wanted to come off after an hour" So why did you play one of England's best centre mids on the left wing without any reason whatsoever? Eriksson is such a fraud. Any England fan looks at that team and still wonders how they won absolutely nothing.
Brazil squad at that time had Ronaldo, Rivaldo, Roberto Carlos, Cafu, etc. No right for England to win over that team
We won nothing because Rooney got injured that was not the fault of the manager that was just terrible luck.
@@misang3 Exactly. Plus people overlook we had an excellent 3-0 win over Denmark under him. Brazil went onto win the cup I think keeping England in the game the whole game with how good Brazil were should be treated as a success.
Yeah, blame Sven. Not the pros on the pitch.
@eoe123321 Scholes was useless as a playmaker. Go watch QF vs Brazil 2002, he done nothing.
This guy literally has no idea what he’s talking about. Obviously we needed a left winger to play on the left wing ahaha
Lol. Doesn't know anything
He was afraid to drop Scholes for Joe Cole because SAF would not have his best midfielder on the bench while he was a starter at United
@@alom1807
Out of all the comments I've seen on this video, yours makes the least sense.
Absolute chancer..how could you not be successful with that team? only thing missing was a keeper which I supposed cost him..Seaman was a bag of shite
@@stonecold6521 Congratulations to you then
michael carrick was one of the best midfielders, he was underrated...
Scholes didn't want to stay away from his family knowing Wales don't go for tournaments. Giggidy
Ali Omar I see what you did there
If I was a United player with Giggs as a teammate, I would never leave my wife alone lmao
Giggidy hahahaha
Ooooh nooo🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Lol :)
It's crazy that Man Utd chose this man to take over from Fergie when he was thinking of retiring in the early 00's
David Maurice why is it Crazy?
Humble Smith cause fergie won with regular player
No?.....
He had been doing well in italy winning the league with lazio
Well, didn’t he do a good job with Manchester City before Pep came in?
The guy won 11 PL titles and 2 UCLs and United haven’t come close to any of those since, he really was one of the all time greats
The fact he gave the players the option on whether to practice penalties is beyond believe to me. No wonder they kept losing shoot outs ! Make them all practice again and again !
England has a choking mentality with penalties
@@shruk4 exactly. Maybe they’d have a better chance if they practiced
4-5-1
... With Beckham and Rooney at the wings.
... Now we got Lampard, Scholes and Gerard at the centre.
Joe Cole and beckham on the wings and rooney through the middle it should have been
@@MegaTimtheman agree with this. Could have had Joe Cole on the left, cutting inside to allow Ashley to bomb down the left, while on the other side Neville would be more conservative behind traditional wide man Beckham. Simply having five across the midfield in defensive phases would help make up for the fact that none of Gerrard, Lampard or Scholes were out and out defenders, and then you'd use Rooney up top if you need him to drop deep or use Owen as the typical poacher.
I don't see how it gets much better than that, unless Rooney could be successfully utilised as an inside forward on the left. A kind of asymmetrical 433 with Beckham and Neville deeper while more of the attacking play went through the left? Failing that I guess they could have tried the diamond that was so deadly at Chelsea in 09/10 for example 🤔
5 3 2
4-3-1-2 Scholes behind Owen and Rooney
@@RL- the diamond is on paper the formation that would've brought the best out of those players (though it would have left out Beckham). Scholes was best as a deep lying playmaker imo, but still needed defensive cover next to him, which Hargreaves would provide at the base. Lampard was best as a third CM with license to break forward. More difficult to categorise where Gerrard was 'best' at, he could dominate playing deep but was also very threatening as an AM/advanced playmaker, and with the players they had was best to play him as a no.10 behind the strikers. Only problem with the diamond is lack of width but tbh, if any team had qualities through the centre that justified using that formation, it was England in 2006.
4-3-3/4-5-1 would also have been a compromise (albeit still obviously better than flat 4-4-2) with Gerrard and Lampard having to take turns going forward and Scholes playing as a sole holding midfielder, i.e. a liability; 4-2-3-1 would give license to Gerrard but have Lampard playing deep which wasn't his best role, and of course flat 4-4-2 didn't solve anyone's problems.
Could have played any of the following formations:
1. 442 - diamond with Scholes sitting, Gerrard and Becks at the sides, Lampard at the tip.
2. 352 - Cole and Becks as wing backs, Scholes CDM, Gerrard and Lampard ahead.
3. 433 - Scholes sitting, Lampard and Gerrard in the middle, Rooney off the left, Becks off the right, Owen CF.
4. 4231 - Scholes 6, Gerrard 8, Lamps 10, Rooney off the left, Becks off the right.
And this is only when all three HAVE to be in. More options with Carrick at CDM and one of Gerrard/Lampard on the bench or as Shadow striker benching Owen.
There's only one man responsible for the golden generation's failure and that's the manager.
Or Hargreaves at CDM the guy was player of the year at Bayern ahead of Ballack!
Great comment!
Scholes(pirlo),lampard(kaka),gerrard(seedorf)..sven just need to learn from ancelotti
@@user-ec2iu5pv1d you need a player like gattuso
Sven was actually clueless, I can't believe he had the keys to the Golden Generation and actually fumbled the bag!
Well, I guess you should have kept Keegan or Hoddle then. It seems like many are complaining about Sven's faults compared to Pep or Fergie or Klopp. How about questioning FA? They are the ones responsible for hiring him. What other choice of an available manager at the time would you have made them do? The problem with English international football is that everybody is overly critical of every potential mistake that was made. In other words, everybody is throwing dirt at each other instead of trying to work on the building team spirit and enjoying the game. I can't believe how easily, and seemingly without hesitation, you are throwing dirt on a great manager. If we (Sweden) had had him (Sven) during this time, we would have been over the moon.
Sven blew it. Bigtime
One of England's problems around that time I remember was retaining possession of the ball. So what did we do with one of the world's best central midfielders at the time...? we played him out wide on the left.
I've always agreed that it would have been crazy to leave any of them out, but how in the hell was it Scholes of all people that got stuck out on the left? Arguably the most metronomic and naturally talented passer we've ever had, and he's not allowed to run things from the middle? How do you look at Stevie and Scholes and not think Gerrard would be better out wide? Also frees up Lampard to allow him to get shots off with less responsibility in transitioning the ball from deep.
Even now Sven doesn't really have an answer, think ultimately he just didn't have the tactical nouse to make it work.
Playing Scholes on the left was one of the worst decisions ever made. The guy hardly ever lost the ball. Unlike the other two.
Eriksson was the only reason Scholes retired from international football; continually playing him out of position because he was scared of dropping Gerrard or Lampard.
I juste watch the 2002 tournament with Sven ,he is a central midfielder
Had the same feeling then to date
So why didn't Scholes come out of retirement again when Sven left?
@@r4h4al He did say he will come out if the manager ask him, but unfortunately no manager ask him back.
@@culunchannel1978 They did. Scholes admitted so but refused when McClaren and Capello asked.
Such a great coach. So underrated. Has had such a great career.
True!!
That was England's best chance of winning a tournament with the senior players
Until this year. I think having home advantage plus the quality of team and manager Southgate gives us more of a chance than we had under Sven.
Michael Brock not with rashford and kane injured.
The fact that he sat on his backside after he was sacked and collected his wages and then did nothing managerially since says it all!
I thought he was successful at Man City but the owner was a foreign bell-end and sacked him.
Depressing to listen to this . When he says Scholes would come off the wing and help ?! Who then covers that space ?! Hopeless
yep, 100% agree.
Ashley Cole should have like what Trent doing now
Ashley Cole, but the point is that Scholes shouldn’t have been having to go out of his way to find the match. A player like that should have had the team built around him.
Ashley Cole to answer the question.
yep, zero tactical acumen. Its not just this video but others that show his lack of tactical nous. theres limited thought process to how scholes naturally tucking in would effect the funvtioning of the team
Honestly never understood why he just ignores the existence of 4-3-3. Scholes at the base with Lamps and Gerrard as 8s. Rooney already shown he's world class across the front line so LW would not be difficult to play, Owen too. It might look simple in hindsight seeing how well 4-3-3 works today but it just make too much sense for it to be so easily overlooked
This team always lacked Ryan giggs, a left sided player who would terrorise defenders/teams
True.
He had Le Saux though, a better option than anyone else available, yet he refused to play him.
Le Saux 😳 nowhere near good enough
@@Noddy87 He would have been for '02 and possibly '04. He was a Premier League footballer until he retired and a versatile, experienced, natural left-sided player. The same wasn't true for Hargreaves, Scholes, Phil Neville, etc, or whoever Eriksson decided to shoehorn into the team at the time.
@@guillezorro le Saux was a left back and England already had the best in the world in that position.
Never before have so many been so disappointed my so few - Sven after 2006 defeat
What a plumhead
Tried fitting Square Pegs In Round Holes, never worked, Scholes was and should have been first on team sheet, stuck with 442 crap so we could not adapt the team to fit lamps and gerrard in
And people have the audacity to Call Solskjaer clueless ..Sven-Göran Eriksson is somethin else
Hoddle had the right idea with 3-5-2 . I think that would of made a huge difference with this generation of players
Active Arron absolutely right
Where would Beckham have played in a 352? He was our best player.
@@BT-kc3ee I think he had the energy and work rate to play wing back
Here is the meeting of the football minds of the last century. They could do stuff and things like that. This communication is about the clearest thing ever I have heard.
When Rooney went of injured against Portugal in Lisbon he should have moved scholes further forward and brought on a holding midfielder or a winger instead of vassell
But Owen up top on his own? For me I would have gone with a target man on his own. Crouch or Heskey and had 5 midfielders, once Rooney went off of course
Scholes was a crap no 10. Any Utd fan will tell you that. He played there for Utd when they bought veron and played so badly he got dropped to the league cup team. And then refused to play cos he didn’t like his treatment by fergie
@@MrJondinham crouch was not in the squad at Euro 2004
@@rmanS2C did you what not watch the 6 - 2 win at Newcastle when Scholes got an hatrick
He seems tactically limited, can't do anything outside 442 or change a formation during a game. As carragher said, a 433 would have been the best formation.
I think that the comment about dropping one of the midfield, "At the time, I couldn't put none of these 4 on the bench" is completely the wrong thing to say. You make a team of great players yeah but if they can't play together something needs to change or you tweak the line up or formation.
Imagine Vicente del Bosque playing Xavi on the flanks in a 4-4-2 formation ;-)
One fact That often gets overlooked with Sven. We know he selected on reputation but He also picked players on their levels of fame. I clearly remember just before WC 2002. With Beckham being injured he selected Michael Owen as his team captain. When Sven was asked why he choose Owen his reply was because he is “famous”
Captaincy is down to leadership qualities not fame. Sven had such a talented squad. Quarter finals is no achievement and he underachieved.
Will never understand why the best midfielder of our generation was on the left.
None of this makes much sense: the away from his family stuff, the stuff about not being able to hack 90 minutes (he played in the Permier League for another NINE YEARS). I think Scholes just couldn't be fucked with Eriksson.
But if that was true then when Eriksen left Scholes would have gone back to play for England, so I think was genuine about the wanting to be with his family.
TBF, that Portuguese team was pretty brutal. 2002 they lost to a Brazil side with Ronaldo, Rivaldo, and Ronaldinho upfront. They should've arguably won both games too.
The reason is because everyone played 442 and he was stuck in his ways, simple as
Scholes
Gerrard-Lampard
Beckham-Rooney
Owen(In the Jamie Vardy/Inzaghi role)
What you needed Sven was a top goalkeeper but more importantly a left winger!
Scholes in the middle is what England needed
even tho sven is a legend playing that formation with our golden generation midfielders is the biggest crime in English football
People are being too hard on Sven-Goran. He was the wrong man for the job and he had lost his touch but he was amazing during the 80s and 90s. He won the league and UEFA Cup with tiny IFK Gothenburg, 3 league titles, UEFA Cup final, European Cup final with Benfica, won Coppa Italia with Roma, won Coppa Italia with Sampdoria, then he won Coppa Italia, European Cup Winners Cup and Serie A with Lazio. Not the best manager, but he was great.
Show some respect.
Scholes retired from international duty at 26, i'll never forgive him for that
Well most of them put club before country... that’s what big wages do. I’m not saying thats why Scholes did it but ...
@@ozohirogi2577 scholes never cared about wages. He was famous for walking in and signing the contract without reading it and told them he didn't care about money. He probably cared about club more than country at that point because fergie managed him properly. He probably felt like the manager did not respect his abilities in England
He was 30, not 26.
Because he was an awful manager 😂
He had success everywhere else and then didn't do anything for England... Just like most managers.
James
Neville Terry Campbell Cole
Scholes Butt
Gerrard
Beckham Owen Rooney
Our big issue was not having a left midfielder. Should have played narrow, butt shielding, Scholes collecting the ball, Gerrard box to box. Lampard to be used as option off the bench.
14 years later. He is still convinced he didn't make a mistake putting Manchester United's most influential tactically midfielder on the left side.
Gerrard on the left Lampard Under Rooney with Scholes & Carrick as midfielders.
Putting Scholes on the left is an outrage, everyone knows it. Don’t give this joker any air time
As if one player not in his preferred position cost you a World Cup HAHAHAHA
"Imagine what the press would have said if I put one of them on the bench"... what?!? That reeks of weak management. It should have been scholes + gerrard or lampard in the middle, and a natural winger on the left. Even put two of them on the bench if it meant getting the balance right with a defensive midfielder on the pitch.
He was smart enough to keep his job. Looking after number 1.
Listen man the manager puts the team out and deploys his tactics but at the end of the day the players should have spoken up and said who they feel is suited for certain positions on the pitch.
The things Sven-Göran Eriksson says really hurt everything in my body. And i'm not even english nor an england fan.
Scholes on the left, rooney could play wide, i still think this is the best 11. Djeeeeezzz
4:24
I still love you Crouch.
I’m sure sky sports got this guy on just to create a few laughs 😂
The fact the he himself just said - i cannot put 1 of these on the bench- shows he never had any authority.
The brazilian team from 2002 send some greetings for Sir Sven-Göran Eriksson. Unforgettable victory. 2-1. The English team was much better on 2006, a shame they had such a coach not at same level of the team for that year. You guys deserved that world cup, together with Brazil and France. Italy was definitely the worst champion that could be for that year.
Shur up, clown.
So Scholsey had an asthma, couldnt handle the heat, wanted sub after an hour and guy asked him to go deep inside while covering the wing. Genius
Jamie correct, formation was wrong, and maybe you had to look and dropping Scholes at his age at that time, for a DMF.
@TheMetalMouse It was his last tournament, and the only reason I say Scholes, is that if he had one weakness it was being ginger, and I don't even mean that in a sarcastic way, he found it very difficult to cope in hot weather, and I remember him huffing and puffing with asthma problems in games like that, he was the least able in a Portuguese summer climate.
I feel like that team would thrive in a modern formation ( 4-2-3-1) with either Scholes or Lampard as the CAM and a lesser known but effective wide left sided midfielder in the 3 of 4-2-3-1
his additional picks from the golden generation squads from what I remember as average players excluding the keepers - WC 2002 danny mills, keown and southgate, T sinclair, D Vassel Euro 2004 - joe cole, kieran dyer, D Vassel WC 2006 Jenas, downing, j cole, lennon, crouch, walcott
Simple:
Sven was banging the FA's Faria Alam and the FA marketing team used this little secret to force him to shoehorn in their Golden PR boys Lampard and Gerrard and Owen.
Was he banging posh too to get Becks in as captain
@@jamessullivan9125
Didn't need to; with the dirt the FA had on Sven, they could force him to ensure selection of players crucial to their marketing strategy over and above team formation and selection.
Should have played Gerrard on the left, far more versatile
and he has the pace to beat players and can cut into the centre and shoot.. Scholes would control the game
Should have played Joe Cole on left... Gerrard holding midfielder... Scholes at 8... Lampard at 10... This would have also solved Svens problem of no strikers on the bench, drop Owen to the bench... Imagine what an impact sub Owen would have been!
Capello did that and
it was also a huge mistake
@@RR-hp5po By the time Capello came, Beckham was aging, playing in MLS and Scholes had retired, it was too late
That's why people should give the likes of Lamps more respect.
I know people love Scholes for his artistry, but how many degrees lesser was Lamps? On top of that, Lamps had the engine, the tenacity, the goals, the power, the drive.
If people judged Ronaldo for his goals, then Lamps surely has to be the greatest midfielder in EPL history.
explain why he pulled in walcott?
"Maybe rooney could play wide"😂😂 dude will never get it
But he's played wide for his club. So are you saying SAF was wrong to do that?
Michael Brock he barely played wide ever for good reason, more suited at the 9 or the 10 100%
Scholes was the magician of the team nothing like gerrard or lampard
Whatever he tells you, Scholes played on the left for the same reason Matuidi does for France. At a World Cup, sometimes style of play and formation goes out the window, as you want the players who will fight, and help
the team in that regard
People blame sven but as he said if he left one of them out for a more balanced team the whole country would have killed him.
Exactly.
Love all these experts in hindsight. Literally none of you were saying this back in 2006. Everyone in the comment section couldn't manage their way out of a paper bag
Dude, EVERYONE was talking about this in 06. How old are you? I remember this clearly. It was a hotly debated topic for all of Sven's reign.
@@stonecold6521 oh yeah I'm calling bullshit. Everyone was clueless as to why gerrard and lampard couldn't play together but no one was suggesting to play scholes behind them as a cdm. Most people were just praying Rooney would be fit so he could single handedly pull us through
@@guitarreilly Scholes had retired in 2006 you genius.
@@ravecrab exactly so no one was suggesting this you genius
@@guitarreilly So why did you even mention 2006? The line-up they're discussing in the clip is from Euro 2004. And believe me, plenty of people were saying Scholes was wasted on the wing.
Poo Eriksson, he didn’t realise that playing scholes out of position would soon push him out of a position 🤭.
World class players like Zidane, Ozil Gerrard and Pires who would be no. 10 in other formations were played out wide in a 4-4-2 or in KO/big games where there needs to be defensive solidarity. They did not do too badly there. Its not like Scholes had a fix position at Man Utd, playing as a striker, second Striker, deep playmaker, box to box etc. He was capable of adapting.
Hargreaves as a DM with Scholes lampard & Beckham as a flat 3 in front, gerrard AM just behind the striker Owen/Rooney depending on opponent. Or play a 4-1-2-1-2 with Scholes, Beckham & Lampard, Gerrard, Owen & Rooney. That’s just 2 examples that would’ve worked better than a flat 4-4-2 with Scholes wasted outside on the wing
He played around with the MOST TALENTED ENGLISH PLAYER of all time PAUL SCHOLES!
Lol Hahaha haha
Choosing his team according to the press. 😂😂😂😂
1:54 he definitely wanted to say " In this formation " Ie 442. So old school manager
2002 steve mcmanaman was great in real... He should be in team as winger.
4-3-3, Becham in a front 3 with Rooney and Owen
Beckham would be a liability on the right of a front three. He was and always was a right midfield player where he had the time to carry the ball and spray passes. Rooney or Owen out wide would have been an utter waste too. Additionally, your midfield 3 would need to drop one of Scholes, Lampard or Gerrard, all of whom had their strengths and were in/approaching their primes. 4-3-3 would not have worked.
@@PK-ts8iz Rooney played LW for United in 2007-2008 in Man United's front 3 of Rooney-Tevez-Ronaldo. how would beckham be a liability? playing him further forward would mean less defensive responsibility.4-3-3 is much more sensible than 4-4-2 with scholes as a LM
Paul scholes was one of the best ball playing cm’s that the Prem has ever seen so why on earth would you play him on the wing
He explained all this in the video if you were paying attention.
@@r4h4al he explained badly
@@culunchannel1978 his answer: the english press!
The players apart from beckham, didn’t care for England they cared about the club careers they had
exactly one of the reasons they failed
I feel Eriksson's answers here gave us some insight into the closed-mindedness of his thinking. Around 2003/04 we had Ashley Cole steadily maturing into one of the best LB's in the world. Gary Neville was at the peak of his powers fitness wise. I feel a deeper-thinking, more adventurous coach would find a way to utilize these elite full-backs so that he could make better use of his midfield talent.
Because scholes had ronaldo's pace and dribbling. I would have done the same thing. 433 would be a dumb idea.
What 😂
"I could not at that time put one of these on the bench"
He had no backbone, shoehorning players in and not having the nerve to drop anyone.
At the time it was very difficult to tell how they should play. If we talk about 2006 WC at the time it was probably Lampard which was considered as the best of him, Gerrard and Scholes. He had been voted as second best player in the world. Gerrard had been close third but Scholes was not in conversation back then. Also prior to 2006 Chelsea and Liverpool had won major trophies but Manchester United had not. I think this affected Erikssons decisions. Compared to classic 442 narrow diamond and more modern approach with less long passing and more short passing would maybe been better but who knows. Scholes and Lampard would certainly have benefited but Gerrard maybe would have struggled to adapt having played with Liverpool team that was not possession based team. To clarify Im not trying to rank Scholes, Gerrard and Lampard just pointing out that in 2005-2006 Gerrard and Lampard were in general considered better than Scholes. In 2020 we should appreciate all three and not fight over which one is better or which has had best career.
Should have played with a 4-1-2-1-2 diamond formation and have the full backs overlapping to have attacking options at the flanks.
Even after all these years he's still as clueless as ever, wasted team under his management
Because he is an absolute Numpty! 😂
Seriously it wasn't the manager it was the system. The one manager who had a vision in shape and tactics they hung him out to dry. Glenn Hoddle.
If ever a team should have played a 5-3-2 this was it. Got the width from attacking full backs.