Forums / The Stands: Intelligent Footy Debate
Order: Newest / Oldest
England Armband- Who Cares?
TheTorresBounce (Liverpool) 6 years ago
Obviously a lot of people do, I mean the captain of England, the main guy who leads out the team before every game with the hopes of nation on his shoulder more than anyone else... Big deal right? Well in my humble opinion, on the international scene at least, the captain has very little effect on the outcome of games. Yes in club football all the players look up to the captain as he inspires them and gets the blood-pumping with an inspirational few last words to his teammates before doing battle, I'l agree at this level a good captain makes the difference given the moment. A.K.A Steve G's inspirational performance in Istanbul inspiring us to victory... But on the international stage I feel that the skippers role is exaggerated.

You think it takes someone to pump up the players for the world cup? Trust me these guys live for the big stage, they don't need any telling how important it is! If England's going to win the world cup we'll need 11 captains on the field! This is England's first team, they didn't get there for no reason... These are 11 of the finest players in England, they don't need inspiring. To a point a captain is good for bringing a team together and giving them someone to look up to but their role has been blown out of proportion by the devilish media. As long as Terry isn't having a negative effect on the team by being captain he should keep it as it shows loyalty and helps toward a better team chemistry, why the huge ordeal?! From a moral perspective I'd say Capello was right in stripping him from his captaincy but my heart tells me he should have kept it, when you break it down however this story is over-hyped and won't have a bearing on our chances in the WC, our performance will!
Ltm017 6 years ago
No, I think the captain is just as important. It doesn't matter how big or how important and game or competition is. I think if anything its just as important to have a captain. Its the big stage! Mentality and confidence is still an issue, just because its world cup it doesn't change that. All that pressure and excitement.... This is when the craziest things happen! Lol
TheTorresBounce (Liverpool) 6 years ago
I'm saying the players are all so pumped up and all act as leaders in the international arena that the captain doesn't make a huge difference and that the ordeal with Terry is over-hyped. If Terry was captain instead of Ferdinand do you think it will make any difference in our performance in the WC or results, for that matter Joe Cole could be captain and it wouldn't make a difference.... The armband is more a symbol than anything
GeryGooner (Arsenal) 6 years ago
It's gonna' be different, of course. If you put the armband on a player who can't motivate the others in the team, it will affect the endurance and focus. A captain should be a motivator for his lads. It's not just a symbol, it has more meaning of leadership. I don't think it's gonna' be the same if you put the armband on Walcott, he's weak and has no leadership mentality. Pardon my English
Charlie (Barcelona) 6 years ago
Matt started a semi-similar thread, but I think the topic in both is different enough to justify two threads.

I think my comment would fit here as well:

Its not like JT will stop pressing his team-mates when their heads sink just because he doesn't have the captaincy; like you said, he's a natural leader. He doesn't need an armband. I mean, one could argue that it is only symbolic, anyway......

In an ideal world a players off field life would have no effect on his life on the pitch. They would not converge. Like the way a child doesn't want his peas to touch his mashed potatoes during dinner, its a silly idea.

At least now England have an excuse when they bow out in the quarter finals.

TheTorresBounce (Liverpool) 6 years ago
Totally agree, Terry's a leader with or without the armband...
Realmcoy (Arsenal) 6 years ago
That's all that counts. Rio, Gerrard, Lampard, Beckham or Rooney.... It doesn't really make a difference. In the world cup, just looking up into the stands is enough inspiration. Of course the team needs someone to stand with referees during the coin toss but that's not relevant since almost half of the team has that experience with their clubs.

This particular England squad seems to be more hardcore than the rest of squads I know since they last won the world cup so I think there doesn't need to be such a big ordeal about whether or not Terry is the captain. Capello did the politically correct thing to do but that won't interfere with the teams morale.... Even if Theo Walcott gets the captaincy, lol
GeryGooner (Arsenal) 6 years ago
But in a country like England, I think a symbol means much. That's what I learn from monarchy countries. They look on symbolic reputation and in this case, the fans or even the players will do the same
[account-removed] 6 years ago
I this agree here. Rio Ferdinand is way better and successful as a caption. And being in Manchester united is also plus point as his being caption as England's team
Tomiswedd (Manchester United) 6 years ago
Why is being in United a plus?
Agent101 (Liverpool) 6 years ago
Yeah why is it a plus?
Peanutbutter (Arsenal) 6 years ago
Whats the matter in being in united? WHY is it a plus?
GeryGooner (Arsenal) 6 years ago
I think that's because United players have strong mentality. We have to admit that Fergie has given good lesson for mentality
Blueskiesahead (Chelsea) 6 years ago
I have to say I dissagree with your last statement about having 11 captains on the field. That means 11 ego's and that means tempers will flare, thus less team chemistry. We need 11 mentally strong players on the field, but not necissarily 11 guys that everyone looks up to.... Afterall who is everyone going to be looking up to if everyone's head is just as high as everyone else's.

The thing is that a good captain has a massive effect on the team chemistry, which can of course be the deciding factor in a tournament where players may not play with one another very often thus resulting in less team play. A good captain can keep the team's heads up as well and really make the team take slightly lesser opponents just as seriously as they would with world giants throughout the game. Yes it is the managers responsibility to get them to start off playing against these teams as if they were always playing in a final, but during the game, its the captains responsibility.

Now really, its not about who wears the armband. That is merely symbolic. Its those players who stand up and say "lets get out there and play the way we all know we can play" when your two nil down and actually get the team believing they can still win. So whether john terry or steven gerrard or frank lampard or david beckham are wearing that arm band or not, we will still have those players instilling confidence in the rest of the team. So is the captain of a team really all that important? Certainly. Is the man wearing the armband all that important? Not necessarily
TheTorresBounce (Liverpool) 6 years ago
Those last statements were slightly contradictory.... But I agree to an extent. When I said 11 captains on the field I meant we need 11 pumped up, motivated players who don't need to be told what to do by a captain.... I feel that this makes for a good team mentality if everyone if viewed as being on a "level playing field". But yes, we need people who can inspire others with moments of class, players such as Rooney, Gerrard and Terry.... No-one needs to look up to anyone, notice the teams with the best chemistry sometimes have no stand-out players but are all viewed as equals, teams like Greece in Euro 2004
Blueskiesahead (Chelsea) 6 years ago
Yet greece had clear stand-out leaders such as charisteas, karagounis, basinas, nikopolidis and of course the man with the arm band, zagorakis. These players may not have been much better than any of the others in the starting lineup but they were the ones who lifted the heads of the rest of the team each time they went down a goal (which happened several times throughout that tournament).

Now anyone that has played on a team knows that a good overall team mentality is vital to success. However, to keep that team mentality going you need leaders in your team that can keep the team believing. Those players don't necessarily need the armband though to inspire the rest of the team. Some people are natural born leaders and a team with 2 or 3 or even 4 of these players is more likely to succeed so long as those players are not conflicted with one another. That's what I meant with those last statements. Its not necissarily the man with the armband that is your teams true captain. Its those guys that take on the responsibility to motivate the team and keep the team playing to the best of their ability that are the true captains. Thus the man with the armband may not be all that vital to a team but the other guys who take on that leading role certainly are
TheTorresBounce (Liverpool) 6 years ago
Leaders, yes! That's what I'm saying.... The Armband doesn't add anything though except being an honor for the receiver, the point is that we should have 11 "leaders" on our team
Blueskiesahead (Chelsea) 6 years ago
Yes. But I'm not sure 11 leaders works either. For one to be a leader he needs people to follow him. We need a good possitive attitude amongst the whole england squad, but only a few leaders. Too many and tempers flare
ManUK (Manchester United) 6 years ago
Well in my opinion 11 leaders would be great. But that's not going to happen because not all the players are leader types, or they certainly don't act like it. So We are left with a few few leaders, but they're smart enough to not let egos and tempers flare with others. Actually well John Terry and Wayne Bridge might have a trickier issue to deal with...
ScooterHayes (Chelsea) 6 years ago
I agree with the sentiment, providing there still does need to be a captain that can keep a level head and communicate with the ref and manager about what needs to be done.... 11 of those on a field would be difficult.... But I know that's not what you mean, so really you're spot on.

Almost .

I do agree that there needs to be players with the qualities of leaders on the field, but I know that everybody has a different view on leadership, and everybody leads differently the same. If you were to have 11 players that were all capable of captaining, and that was encouraged, I think there would be mis-communication and frustration. A captain has to talk with the ref, talk with the coach, enforce the game plan, be wary of the opposing game plan, keep his teams egos in check, etc. There has to be one established leader to do all that, no more. Because it would undermine and hurt the team to believe anybody had that responsibility. You would have to have an entire team of humble, submissive cry-babies to make the shared-power idea work. That ain't England that I've seen.

Hang on- I'm not shooting your point down. But follow me....

Among equals you have a democracy. But there still has to be somebody to make decisions and head it up. You can treat everybody as equals, act like everybody is an equal, etc, but somebody has to buck up and set the wall up and communicate with the keeper on an opposing set piece. Having a set leader like Terry was a major plus. He's the ultimate defender, arguably (yet he has a game in the footytube arcade by the same name.... ), and one of the most solid overall players in England. Would he be considered an equal that the rest of the team would be confident in now? Not 100% if there's anybody in Wayne Bridge's camp. And I think the arguments over the last weeks have pointed to that. Ultimately, you also have the trust of your coach, and Fabs ain't happy. So to keep everything in order, which is always top priority, the switch was made.

There will always need to be somebody to tell the rest what to do, but not in an authoritative way, but a servant-minded "for-your-own-good-move-the-f-over-or-the-ball-will-go-right-by-you-on-this-set-piece" kind of leader.

Great topic, besides all that.... Mess up there I wrote. I agree that you present the ideal situation, but I don't believe that you have that to the point with the English national team. Good man.
TheTorresBounce (Liverpool) 6 years ago
Totally, but even with shared responsibility there's still going to be different personalities hence bigger egos on the side so some will tend to lead more than others. I'm not saying get rid of the captaincy obviously (I'm not even sure what the rules are on that) but maybe assigning mini captains like one for defence, midfield and attack since captains would need huge lungs to shout the whole field! This is already the case pretty much for most teams just because of differing personalities and people stepping forward.... I just feel with the England captaincy the weight is placed on one player to lead the team and this pressure could lead for his performances to suffer (then again some players thrive in this situation)!
ManUK (Manchester United) 6 years ago
" I just feel with the England captaincy the weight is placed on one player to lead the team and this pressure could lead for his performances to suffer (then again some players thrive in this situation)! I agree with this 100%. There needs to be some pressure on everyone not just the Capitan, We need everyone to preform.

I'm not sure about Egos as I haven't seen a whole lot of big heads on the National squad. Maybe It's mostly an English thing.
ManUK (Manchester United) 6 years ago
I agree. Every person can be a leader on the team. Not that they will but there are some people that aren't captain that lead anyways, and people look up to them. Like Jamie Carrahger on Liverpool or Giggs on United. And on England we have so many of those players that's there's lots of almost mini captains inside the squad. I Like it that way. Just to Name a few: Terry, Beckham, Gerrard, Lampard, and Maybe Wayne Rooney now. Yes They care about captains but they care more about being a leader in the team, than just being captain
Blueskiesahead (Chelsea) 6 years ago
Exactly. Every team needs good leaders. And we have an abundance of those who aren't wearing the armband
ManUK (Manchester United) 6 years ago
Yes, England is more that way than any other country I've ever seen. Lots of decent hard working leader types. That's the type of players we raise here
Yogan (Chelsea) 6 years ago
Good idea, in what you've said. I don't think the captain has that much influence on the team/ Of course, they are the ones who are allowed to speak to the referee (in the Premier League obviously), they "boss" their team around, tell them what they are doing wrong, be their critic. But they have to be a player who plays well every game, is consistent, and the manager knows they are reliable and plays in their position well. Ferdinand isn't like this, so Terry can be annoyed. But like you said, really, who cares? Its like a tournament - you lose in the final and don't get the trophy, but it isn't going to change anyones life so go home, sit down, have a cuppa, give it a think and then forget it. I think this is a good thread
TheTorresBounce (Liverpool) 6 years ago
I think if we lose in the final of the WC the players aren't going be able to go home, have a cuppa and forget about it though, it'l probably haunt them for years to come...
Ltm017 6 years ago
Now that I think about it.... It matters completely. I would not want the person who might betray you. No matter what thins you do outside affect team dynamic. People have it in their minds eye of what he did.... He was just ridiculous. Why not someone that is NOT also in the public eye? Why another footballer? And it doesn't even matter who is the best player! People rely on mentality.... Everything you do in life deals with mentality.... In fact he should have stepped down. Just for respect. You all can sit and say he is the best Captain and it doesn't matter but it does matter.... Think about it. Some might look at him and wonder.... Who is he going to betray next? Would he do that to me?

Best player does NOT equal Captain
Bluezombi (Barcelona) 6 years ago
I'm sorry but I don't see much of a betrayal in JT's story. As I understand that was Bridges's ex girlfriend, which in turn means they were broken up and done with it except for the child which is another story. Now, I do understand that one is not supposed to go after his friends ex's or something like that but you know things happen and (she is hot) well JT got some, in the process of doing so he has hurt his wife and kids, which is not the right thing to do, but that is also another story which has nothing to do with football. To sum this up, in my opinion I don't see this as a betrayal and even though he is a role model he should have not lost his armband because IT IS rightfully HIS, he deserves it. I'm not a chelsea fan but whats right is right and Terry certainly deserves to be the captain
TheTorresBounce (Liverpool) 6 years ago
BlueZombie.... Looks like you've misread the situation haha She is NOW Bridge's ex but Terry cheated with her whilst Bridge was with her, they were best friends at the time, needless to say he deserves everything he's getting.... !
Bluezombi (Barcelona) 6 years ago
That kind of changes things between them two don it haha. I still don't believe that his personal life should impact his great abilities as a footballer and a leader. I'm not England supporter, I just like some players that's all. That aside, I think there is something weird going on, when everything was starting to click and england started to look very serious contender for the title this started happening. I mean first JT, now Cole, I think by the time WC comes along every England player will have a tabloid story attached to them. I am seriously thinking that English Tabloids are trying to ruin their own national team, I'm not conspiring or anything but it just seems like that to me
Matt (Footytube Staff) 6 years ago
I think a consideration has to be made here to a couple of factors. From some of the replies I have read there seems to be a blurring of the lines between a captains role and that of a good goalkeeper/defender/midfielder/attacker.

What I mean by this is certain roles require you not only to do your job but to organise certain situations. For example a goalie facing a free kick has to place the wall and make sure people are paying attention to runners. Defenders have to be vocal about holding a line to ensure offside pushes don't fail.

Great players in their positions improve those around them. Does this mean they do not a captain or that they are the best captain? I don't think so.

A captain in the modern game needs to command the instant respect of the players. In the modern game players can be sent off so very easy for dissent or for a couple of rash challenges. The captain must be able to talk to the players and more importantly be listened to.

Also the argument that players do not need inspiring for world cup matches is a bit over simplified. I agree 100% that any player in these situations would be highly motivated as they sit in the dressing room before the match. A captain comes into his own when you go 1-0 down, when the ref seems not to see any fouls against you, when there is 5 minutes left and you are under intense pressure, when you have missed a sitter, when you are getting skinned over and over again.

These type of situations is when you need a captain and who that captain is really matters
Blueskiesahead (Chelsea) 6 years ago
I agree 100% with everything you just said. Spot on.

The thing is with england right now, that jt was that perfect captain. Everyone listened to him, everyone respected him, and no one ever ignored him. Will things change because he doesn't have the armband? Hardly. Thus the man with the armband may not be so important, but the players who take their stand to keep the team playing to the best of their ability and keep their heads up are the true captains of the squad. And honestly, I don't think rio is one of those men
Perrygarl (FC Seoul) 6 years ago
I partially agree with your point, and partially disagree.

I agree that the Captain is not the only leader on the pitch. There are a number of key players who will be leading in some way, the goalie controlling the defence in set-pieces for example. I will be looking at players like James, Terry, Ferdinand, Gerrard, Lampard, Beckham, Rooney and Owen to be leading from the front, with the younger, or less experienced players looking to them.

But at the same time, I feel a captain is needed. Players look up to this one player, he is the man with the most respect from the players. When you are losing this man needs to rally up the other leaders to rally the rest. Look at Gerrard in Istanbul, some of your players in that Liverpool were world-class, but Gerrard took that game by the scruff of the neck and pushed the team on.

As for Terry losing respect, it's probable in this case some will, so I guess the captains armband had to go. Ferdinand has it, but I think Gerrard can take the pressure, we seen what he can do when his team goes behind, he'll thrive in my view.

TheTorresBounce (Liverpool) 6 years ago
I was more pointing out that the captains role is in no way as influential or central to a teams success and is usually minimal in International football, therefore the fuss being made about who should get the armband is unfounded and persistently annoying. As long as the players respect the captain.... Who cares? And why take the risk with Terry?
Tottibaggio10 (AS Roma) 6 years ago
Who cares who is wearing the English captains armband.... Little prediction England meets team with a bit of talent (Portugal, Italy, Germany, Brazil, Spain) and the will be punished for being the ordinary team they are. This will happen in ordinary time or it will go to penalties in which case we all know they will bottle it under pressure.
England will only win the world cup if they do what the South African rugby union organised in 1995 poison all the opposition that is better than them. The only reason the premier league is strong is because of all the foreign players! En.... Ger.... Land are rubbish
Charlie (Barcelona) 6 years ago
Like a bucket of cold water on the fire that is England winning the WC
Borg (Manchester United) 6 years ago
@ totti, I can't say I agree with you. Be wary England IS a strong team. The fact that FIFA has Italy and Portugal and germany ranked about England is somewhat disturbing. Italy are not even close to the strength they once were, if you want to see ordinary teams look at germany and italy, both seem to grind-out 0-0 and 1-0 matches and play ultra-conservative. And Portugal, they barely qualified.... I'll give it to you that Spain and Brazil are stronger but come on.... Italy has won world cups in a very questionable manner
Tottibaggio10 (AS Roma) 6 years ago
Borge 130 Italy will make the semis at the very least just on their defence alone, England will sniff the quarter finals and go out again.

Really Italy has won world cups in a questionable manner? Is the fact that they have won four troubling you. The one time England won it, the goal that changed the course of the game was not even a goal. We played with the French last time out and delivered the killer blow with five penalties. The semi was one of the best world cup games ever played and we slaughtered the Germans in the last two minutes.

We cleaned up Brazil and Germany the previous time we won, 2 of the best teams in the world. I think that you need to get yourself some optrex to clean your eyes so you can see 20/20 again mate. To even compare England in the same breath as Italy is laughable, I can't think of one English player I would put in the Italian team ahead of their Italian Counterpart
Silvestre (Manchester United) 6 years ago
I can't seem to bring myself to care who's the captain. All that I can think about, is whether England will give their all or not at the 2010 World Cups. As an England fan, I'm sick of watching them playing like second-class players every time they go to international stages. I can't see why they haven't been able to play as a team and even though they do look good so far, we'll see what's gonna' happen at the WC 2010. Clearly, the problem I just mentioned isn't caused by the lack of captaincy, so basically the only problem which may appear is perhaps if Lennon or Walcott picked as a captain, cause the more senior players would maybe revolt haha. Basically, with all the senior players available, lack of other captain candidates than Terry isn't the issue. If it were me, I'd simply pick Ferdinand because he's the oldest of all the candidates available
Soccafan187 (Chelsea) 6 years ago
I think personally that he should still be captain even after all this mainly because he's the rock in the back, two all great athletes should be able to make a mistake and not have their athletic career judged, and three rio ferdinand isn't captain material because he's to inconsistant. Also, Steven Gerard as third choice of captain is a joke.... He shouldn't even be the captain of liverpool.... Obviously, Glen Johnson or Carragher are better choices because Gerrard can't get a championship in anything in a long long lonnng time. Wayne Bridge was quoted saying he wouldn't even fly on the same plane rather than play on the same field with John Terry. First off the FA shouldn't get involved in deciding if John Terry can go to the WC or not, this is personal stuff between John Terry, Wayne Bridge, and Wayne Bridge's ex-girlfriend. If you're looking at performance wise than John Terry is the best pick obviously and England needs to be focused on performance because they haven't won a world cup in nearly 40 years! Fabio Capello don't be stupid and not take your best defender because your job counts on your performance at South Africa

Kick4Life - changing lives through football