Being a clever good passer, doesn't not make you technically exceptional.
Rooney is that. Is he technically exceptional?

No one's doubting Carrick's ability. Good player. But no way on earth is he technically exceptional.

His touch and ability is just good/solid.

"unlike say a Theo Walcott who has the vision and execution of Stevie Wonder"

Or maybe Welbeck, eh? Or Valencia or Cleverley for example.

Again you talk about this massive pool to choose from. You do not need a massive pool to choose from. You roughly need 50 odd players to pick from.

Having a large number of mediocre players to choose from doesn't help the national team.

comment by Dubbed The New Wenger (U9163) posted 16 minutes ago
Being a clever good passer, doesn't not make you technically exceptional.

-------------
Having a good first touch, vision to see an instant pass, and the technique to hit the pass with perfection, with either foot, time and time again, is a technical gift that most English footballers do not possess

Jesus dubbed this is basic stuff dude

Macca

You would have more luck getting through to Rob.

He isn't the bright spark!

"Having a good first touch, vision to see an instant pass, and the technique to hit the pass with perfection, with either foot, time and time again, is a technical gift that most English footballers do not possess"

Sorry, it's pretty clear you're mistaking vision for technique.

Though, he's not the most creative, Gerrard can/could do that.
Lampard can too. Are they technical?
Carrick's technique is solid. Nothing exceptional.

Technical players manipulate the ball a certain way, a certain style.

And comparing Carrick to the current batch of English player's is only going to make him look good.

Because of the coaching system, simple.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Taarabt's a clown. But he's a dribbler more than anything.

Drogba's technique is good, though he relies more on strength and physicality. Suarez's technique is good. Rooney? Not so much.

Players who play in similar position as Carrick;

Xavi, Alonso, Busquets, Modric, Cesc, Schweinsteiger, & Pirlo are all good examples.

All I said was Carrick's technique is solid. Just not "exceptional", nor is he "technically gifted" as those Mancs claim.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Dubbed

Xavi no

Alsonso yes

Biscuits yes

Modric no

Cesc no

Schweinsteiger no

Pirlo yes

You seriously have no clue about carrick


VC is right, it's pointless discussing this with you. You don't have the first clue

Xavi, no? You think Carrick has superior technique over him Modric, Cesc and Schweinsteiger? Hahaha Go and watch another sport.
Absolute m'ong.

These are the very same guys who go on to label gooners "deluded" and whatnot too.

Macca every player you have listed bar none has better technique than Michael Carrick.

Delusional. Completely delusional.
He has the cheek to label others "clueless" as well.

Carrick has better technique than Xavi and Cesc. Haha

Read a few comments, most of them seem to hit home. The whole foreigner thing isn't the sole cause, but it has an effect, in my opinion.

Dubbed, Carrick is technically a far superior player to Anderson. Anderson only has better dribbling ability than him. It's the only thing in his armory his has over Carrick.

Darren
Yeah. Ok. That's fine.

But have a look at the above comment about him being technically superior to Xavi, Modric, Schweinsteiger, & Cesc. Even you must have cringed at that.
Embarrassing.

He may be disagreeing that they play in similar positions, in which case I'd agree with what he said there, but in terms of ability I cannot, if that is what he's saying.

The attitudes of club management is another influence on producing players. A good English player can be made or broken by the decisions of their manager.

Alan Smith was a good striker. I know he suffered that leg break, but prior to that Fergie made the decision to convert him to a midfielder.

Scott Parker was a good young attacking mid that actually was pretty decent technically and had a good range of passing. Mourinho wanted to make him Makelele, he then just turned into this average footballer that runs around. It's incredible how much ability he lost.

Ok, these players weren't going to be Xavi or RVP, but they were good players, and when you are dealing with a smaller pool of talent it limits is more when club managers make decisions that are detrimental to a player's development - those two are just notable examples, I'm sure there are many more.

I got to be honest I never rated Smith that much to begin with...

Remember Pardew accusing Chelsea of signing him because Charlton were one place behind Chelsea in the league... always seemed a bit of an unnecessary signing.

Agree with your overall point.

In some ways the player is as much to blame as the manager. Parker really shouldn't have went there. But I feel Mourinho ruined the potential he did have.

Another player is Joe Cole. This guy was destined to be an attacking midfielder, not a winger. This, more so than Parker, was an error on his part. He was never going to displace Lampard.

Maybe had he gone to another club he could have become a better player than he was? Who knows. Injuries didn't help.

The nature of the premier league, and the smaller pool of talented English players, means we have to get these decisions on player's careers correct more often than foreign teams do.

And that's the problem, clubs are more concerned with their own gains than what they can provide for the national team.

Gerrard could have been a far better cm than he was if he was left to develop the skills needed to be a deeplying cm. I've never been his biggest fan but when he first came on the scene he looked very good in cm or dm, and was very good and patient in possession.

For his career and Liverpool's gains they realised they'd be better off utilising his attacking instincts. Fair play, and I'm sure not one Liverpool fan would swap that, but from England's point of view it was detrimental.

The older and better he got for Liverpool the worse he got for England, in my opinion, as he couldn't reign in his attacking instincts and he no longer had the patience and discipline he had in his earlier days for England.

I remember the hype about Gerrard in his earlier days all being about what he was doing in the deeper areas, but that soon disappeared, and was England's loss, even though it was Liverpool's gain.

"He may be disagreeing that they play in similar positions, in which case I'd agree with what he said there"

That he could be doing.

Is that what you were disagreeing with UnitedRedMacca? Their positions?
One can still compare central midfielders to deep lying ones, you know?

I think the Carrick debate on here is a case of arguing different points because nobody has really defined what they mean by technique - or being a "technical" player. I think Carrick has good technique but I don't agree that it is better then the likes of Cesc. It is far better than Ando's though imo but not nearly as good as, say, Scholes or Gazza.

redmisty

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2340149/England-just-players-European-50--Wayne-Rooney-Leighton-Baines.html
__________________

Say what you will about these so-called statistics (and the Daily Mail) but I thought I'd attach this link as it is very much relevant to this thread.