Congratulations Wayne Rooney

[Dig Dig]

He scores 1 in 2 for his country. That is a pretty good record to be fair.

 

It is but a lot of his goals have been scored against dire European opposition and part time plumbers. An extreme version is having Rooney play for your 5 a side team over 10 years and then lauding him up because he smashed the teams all time goal scoring record.

 

I addition, it's true that he's never really had a any true competition for his place.

 

When I think back on all the good memories I have of England, not one involves Rooney.

Edited 9 September, 2015 by Dig Dig

[sambosa75]

He scores 1 in 2 for his country. That is a pretty good record to be fair.

 

Yep, it is good. I said I think Rooney is a decent player. Just not a great one. He burst on to the scene, full of promise but that promise was never materialised to its full extent. Had Rooney played in an era where we had viable alternatives available (such as the mid-90s), he wouldn't have got anywhere near the record.

[hutch]

He scores 1 in 2 for his country. That is a pretty good record to be fair.

Not a patch on Lineker though

[tommi]

Compare his record to that of Peter Crouch for England... not quite so impressive then! Based on his goals per game, Crouchie would be on 40 or so goals now, if he had played the last 5 years.... makes Rooney's achievement a little less 'special' in my eyes.

 

Worth taking into account Robbie Keanes record for ROI, scoring more for a lesser team. Could Rooney have done that?

 

Not bitter, 50 goals is still an achievement - but it doesn't deserve the unbalanced media reaction it has received.

[The9]

Absolutely. People seem to be using their dislike of him to try and find a way to belittle his achievement which is pathetic. The bottom line is that no-one in history has scored more goals for England than he has.

 

I dislike the fact that Rooney is England's all-time scorer far more than I disliked Klose beating Ronaldo's World Cup scoring record. Think about THAT for a moment.

 

Anyway, OGs will beat all of them in the end.

[ART]

Definitely not Saints related. more Saints hated

 

All but 5 against minnow countries. Equivalent of Le Tiss scoring against the likes of Eastleigh instead of the best sides in the land.

 

[The9]

Compare his record to that of Peter Crouch for England... not quite so impressive then! Based on his goals per game, Crouchie would be on 40 or so goals now, if he had played the last 5 years.... makes Rooney's achievement a little less 'special' in my eyes.

 

Worth taking into account Robbie Keanes record for ROI, scoring more for a lesser team. Could Rooney have done that?

 

Not bitter, 50 goals is still an achievement - but it doesn't deserve the unbalanced media reaction it has received.

 

To be fair, saying "if Crouch had played lots more matches he'd have scored more goals" is kind of the point. He hasn't, because he hasn't been selected for enough matches to do so - part of being able to score 50 goals for England is playing in enough matches for England to be able to do that.

 

Rooney started young, has been consistent enough not to get dropped, and scored often enough to reach the target. He's probably going to get another 10-15 more as well, unless someone superb comes along he's going to be in with a decent shout of starting for England in matches for maybe 2-3 more years, he's not 30 until next month.

 

If Sturridge remains as injury-prone as he has been, Kane disappears into nothingness as he seems to have started to do, and the manager goes for the same sort of extended run Beckham, Gerrard and Lampard all got and maybe drops him a little deeper (but still on penalties), with England guaranteed to play a couple of lightweights in every qualification campaign he could get to 60, if not more.

 

I'm not sure I can see him retiring from International football after the 2018 World Cup in Russia, when he'd be 32, but it may depend on what happens at club level. Man U don't have the stability they used to so it's not like you can say "Van Gaal will still be picking him no matter what" and it's a results business after all. He's almost certainly going to do a few years in MLS in his mid-30s too, he's just the type, that's probably going to rule him out for England by the Euros in 2020 anyway.

[The9]

Definitely not Saints related. more Saints hated

 

All but 5 against minnow countries. Equivalent of Le Tiss scoring against the likes of Eastleigh instead of the best sides in the land.

 

 

And yet (ignoring your hatstand definition of "minnow teams") no-one else has managed this supposedly easy feat.

Edited 9 September, 2015 by The9

[The9]

It is but a lot of his goals have been scored against dire European opposition and part time plumbers. An extreme version is having Rooney play for your 5 a side team over 10 years and then lauding him up because he smashed the teams all time goal scoring record.

 

I addition, it's true that he's never really had a any true competition for his place.

 

When I think back on all the good memories I have of England, not one involves Rooney.

 

I'd like to hear this list of "good England memories". Obviously 5-1 v Germany, then what?

[Diabolus Ex Machina]

It's a great achievement for him and he's a very good player but greatest? Not for me, hasn't done it at tournaments where the pressure is on and the competition fiercer and has never shown that ability to grab a game by the scruff of the neck or raise the level of his teammates.

 

Again deserves the recognition for the goals scored and I imagine his record will last for a long time by the time he's finished but we've had better overall players.

 

I'll put it another way, Lionel Messi has scored 49 goals for the Argentine national team and is widely recognised as the best player of his generation (possibly ever) but in terms of greatest Argentine players ever would you put him above Maradona (34 international goals) considering their international achievements?

[The9]

Exactly, nothing memorable from Rooney at all. Maybe that goal in Russia a few years ago in qualification but that's about all I can think of. In fairness to him, he's been playing in one of the most drab decades for England in a long long time.

 

There is a reason for this:

 

Rooney's greatest impact on tournament football to date came as a teenager at Euro 2004, when he scored twice against both Switzerland and Croatia before breaking a bone in his foot during the quarter-final defeat by hosts Portugal.

Since then, however, he has scored just two more goals at major tournaments, with a winner against Ukraine at Euro 2012 followed by his goal in the defeat by Uruguay at the 2014 World Cup - his only World Cup finals goal.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/32053848

 

He has failed to make an impact on the biggest stage - but at least part of that is due to the failings of the players around him - England could easily have won the World Cup in 2002 and Euros in 2004 with a bit more luck and not much else but since then, they've been also-rans, and lack of goals, which in itself isn't just down to him, is only part of that.

[The9]

It's a great achievement for him and he's a very good player but greatest? Not for me, hasn't done it at tournaments where the pressure is on and the competition fiercer and has never shown that ability to grab a game by the scruff of the neck or raise the level of his teammates.

 

Again deserves the recognition for the goals scored and I imagine his record will last for a long time by the time he's finished but we've had better overall players.

 

I'll put it another way, Lionel Messi has scored 49 goals for the Argentine national team and is widely recognised as the best player of his generation (possibly ever) but in terms of greatest Argentine players ever would you put him above Maradona (34 international goals) considering their international achievements?

 

I think that's fair, because Rooney's the top goalscorer but longevity is part of the most goals and longevity has nothing much to do with any measures of footballing greatness, which is usually measured from the highs of peak performances.

 

The Messi analogy is a little off though, as if Messi had won the World Cup last year he'd have a case for being Argentina's best ever, and as he played in the Final, that's literally one match making the difference.

 

Messi's greatness in club football comfortably outstrips Maradona winning one Argentinian title at Boca, no league titles at Barcelona, dragging Napoli to Serie A twice and a UEFA Cup. Plus as yet he hasn't had any drugs bans or started a 60 man brawl in front of the King of Spain...

 

So basically what we're saying is that if Rooney can lead England to Euro 2016, people might accept he's the best goalscorer in English history.

[shurlock]

There is a reason for this:

 

Rooney's greatest impact on tournament football to date came as a teenager at Euro 2004, when he scored twice against both Switzerland and Croatia before breaking a bone in his foot during the quarter-final defeat by hosts Portugal.

Since then, however, he has scored just two more goals at major tournaments, with a winner against Ukraine at Euro 2012 followed by his goal in the defeat by Uruguay at the 2014 World Cup - his only World Cup finals goal.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/32053848

 

He has failed to make an impact on the biggest stage - but at least part of that is due to the failings of the players around him - England could easily have won the World Cup in 2002 and Euros in 2004 with a bit more luck and not much else but since then, they've been also-rans, and lack of goals, which in itself isn't just down to him, is only part of that.

 

His greatest impact was getting sent off for stamping on Carvalro at the quarters of the 2006 WC.

[Diabolus Ex Machina]

I think that's fair, because Rooney's the top goalscorer but longevity is part of the most goals and longevity has nothing much to do with any measures of footballing greatness, which is usually measured from the highs of peak performances.

 

The Messi analogy is a little off though, as if Messi had won the World Cup last year he'd have a case for being Argentina's best ever, and as he played in the Final, that's literally one match making the difference.

 

Messi's greatness in club football comfortably outstrips Maradona winning one Argentinian title at Boca, no league titles at Barcelona, dragging Napoli to Serie A twice and a UEFA Cup. Plus as yet he hasn't had any drugs bans or started a 60 man brawl in front of the King of Spain...

 

So basically what we're saying is that if Rooney can lead England to Euro 2016, people might accept he's the best goalscorer in English history.

 

Yeah the Messi comparison isn't perfect but his record for Argentina has (had?) been held against him for a while and Maradona is an icon for them so if we're basing this entirely on what is done for the national team I think it works.

 

Your last sentence is probably spot on though. If we were to win the Euro's (possibly even just make the final) and Rooney played a big part in that I think a lot of people would change their tune or at least give him greater consideration, mainly because all those goals would have actually led to something above the norm for an England team.

[sadoldgit]

Anyone who saw Jimmy Greaves play will know that he was a far better finisher - but at the end of the day Wayne Rooney is now England's leading goalscorer and wouldn't it be kind of odd if the media ignored it? As for Crouch, he has played for how many teams? No one seems to keep him for long and his England career didn't last that long because he is not as good as Rooney.

[Dig Dig]

I'd like to hear this list of "good England memories". Obviously 5-1 v Germany, then what?

 

Just memories of actual decent and exciting games regardless of the result. Obviously 5-1 against Germany, the buzz around Euro 96 and even the Argentina game in WC 98 where you remember the impact of certain players.

 

Obviously I have to qualify this with being a kid where I would get excited at even the sight of a football on TV.

[Wade Garrett]

Lets put another slant on it, it is an achievement but not as great as Bobby Charltons. When Charlton was playing he had number of players that could have challenged him for his position in the side with the likes of Greaves ect, because of the influx of players from overseas there has been a lack of English players to challange Rooney for his place in the side. But I have got to give to the lad he has done it but part of me wanted him to miss that pen last night and not break the record, because IMO Rooney will never be the player Charlton was in his day.

 

Greaves was a centre-forward. Charlton was a midfielder, Lineker scored 10 World Cup goals in 12 appearances. Rooney's 50 goals are a great achievement, but he is still behind the other 2 in my book.

[Mr Biscuits]

T

bit harsh. bottom line is people are p*ssed that rooney isn't as good as charlton, and that he doesn't 'deserve' the tally because very few have been decisive goals.

 

but it's not a problem with rooney - its a problem with england. his form just reflects england's over last few years. Playing dirt poor opposition, getting kicked out of tournaments, being 'good' or 'solid' but never actually 'world class'. Give him a break.

 

He's achieved something, and relatively consistently (cept for a coupl' years) produced alright performances. Not glowing praise, but sadly that's better than quite a few of the england squad.

 

Ashley Cole, JT on his day, Gerrard, Scholes. Are there many more in last decade worthy of really challenging at int'l level?

 

That's like saying he gets a medal for turning up.

The only reason Rooney has been in the side for so long is because we haven't had an England manager with the balls to pick players outside the top 6. A manager with the balls to stand up to the press who f*cking love Rooney for whatever reason (probably because he plays for Utd).

 

Rooney,factually, has the record through a combination of circumstances and not because of any particular flair or skill he has shown on the pitch. In fact I think it is safe to say that the flair and talent he has shown for Utd has been distinctly lacking when it comes to playing for England. It was inevitable he would get the record since he kept on getting selected regardless of how well he is playing at club level. It reminds me of the Royal Navy from the Napoleonic Era - once you were promoted to Captain all you had to do was, essentially, not die and one day you would be handed a promotion to Admiral.

 

In fact the set up, selection policy and attitude of the FA stinks to high heaven and Rooney is the perfect example of this.

[hasper57saint]

Wayne Rooney is a Stan Collymore in a world without Sheringhams, Fowlers, Wrights, Coles, Ferdinands and Shearers.

 

Decent player, good enough to play international football but the fact he has played for England enough times to become all time scorer is testament to the fact there has been a massive lack of serious, long-term rivals for his place in the team. He is not an England great.

 

This. The availability of quality English front men is the reason he has played so many games.I actually saw some of Charltons goals live.What a striker!

[The9]

Yeah the Messi comparison isn't perfect but his record for Argentina has (had?) been held against him for a while and Maradona is an icon for them so if we're basing this entirely on what is done for the national team I think it works.

 

Your last sentence is probably spot on though. If we were to win the Euro's (possibly even just make the final) and Rooney played a big part in that I think a lot of people would change their tune or at least give him greater consideration, mainly because all those goals would have actually led to something above the norm for an England team.

 

I think part of the Maradona/Messi thing is Messi starting his club career in Spain too, there's no-one with that "we saw him as a kid at Argentinos and Boca" thing like there is with Maradona, he's sort of the overseas bloke - and yeah, Argentina aren't as good as Barcelona when he plays for them.

 

Well, there are a lot of rubbish teams going to be in this Euros finals, so as their thing at the moment is being mediocre teams, maybe England will have the chance to lose in the QFs again. Based on FIFA rankings, Wales are in line to be seeded, lolz.

[The9]

Just memories of actual decent and exciting games regardless of the result. Obviously 5-1 against Germany, the buzz around Euro 96 and even the Argentina game in WC 98 where you remember the impact of certain players.

 

Obviously I have to qualify this with being a kid where I would get excited at even the sight of a football on TV.

 

As an older person (42 ) I can comfortably say England were boring for all but their last 2 knockout matches of 1990's World Cup but beating Netherlands 4-1 at Euro 96 was pretty decent, though I happened to be at Scotland v Switzerland at the time. Saw the England v Scotland and semi-final matches though. I also sold my ticket to England v Argentina in 1998 for FF3000, I have an interesting history of with avoiding England matches at major tournaments outside the UK.

[The9]

Owen would have smashed the record if he'd stayed vaguely fit. But these records seem to have become something we want people to beat. Look at Beckham, great player that he was, by the end it seemed to just be handing him caps for the sake of it. Same with this one, everyone seems far more concerned with him banging in goals against rubbish teams and breaking a record than England actually building a good team.

 

These qualifiers have been a joke. Yes other nations have been poor and England have won, but should that be an excuse? Fact is, we were likely to qualify regardless and we've used a lot of players and tactics, AGAIN. All I wanted to see from Hodgson was a coherent team he could stick with and gel together. Yet it's the same as always and that's why no one should get excited about the qualification record.

 

Will we be playing 1 up front or two? Will Rooney be up front alone, behind a striker, left wing? Where will Sterling player? Why is Walcott always left out? Who will be flavour of the month next May? Lallana, Barkley, Townsend, Chamberlain? Someone completely new? Who will be preferred at CM? Delph, Shelvey, Wilshere, Carrick, Milner? And will they have played together? Will they know who is sitting deep and who goes forward?

 

Yet when they fail in the tournament again no one will mention the fact the team hasn't played together again, it'll just be 'not good enough, all players rubbish', despite the fact they can all do it in qualifying and in the premier league or europe, which is a higher standard.

 

The best international teams at tournaments aren't necessarily the ones with all the talent, it's the ones that are actually teams, that are vaguely settled and know how to play together. We see it every tournament, England fail to beat a team like that every tournament, and we never learn.

 

I'd want the team to be tactically flexible rather than rigid and predictable, but you're right that you'd at least have to go through that process of rigidity, their "system", to build a foundation for those changes without people losing their understanding altogether. Part of the problem is the short-term nature of international get-togethers, there's rarely time to build anything other than simple relationships (especially if you're changing the team or squad all the time, and that's inevitable from the timescale of qualifying and tournaments anyway).

 

That's one of the reasons why managers like to pick blocks of players from the top 6 as well, of course...

[shurlock]

In the mboard's words, Rooney's the ultimate flat-track bully.

[sadoldgit]

Owen would have smashed the record if he'd stayed vaguely fit. But these records seem to have become something we want people to beat. Look at Beckham, great player that he was, by the end it seemed to just be handing him caps for the sake of it. Same with this one, everyone seems far more concerned with him banging in goals against rubbish teams and breaking a record than England actually building a good team.

 

These qualifiers have been a joke. Yes other nations have been poor and England have won, but should that be an excuse? Fact is, we were likely to qualify regardless and we've used a lot of players and tactics, AGAIN. All I wanted to see from Hodgson was a coherent team he could stick with and gel together. Yet it's the same as always and that's why no one should get excited about the qualification record.

 

Will we be playing 1 up front or two? Will Rooney be up front alone, behind a striker, left wing? Where will Sterling player? Why is Walcott always left out? Who will be flavour of the month next May? Lallana, Barkley, Townsend, Chamberlain? Someone completely new? Who will be preferred at CM? Delph, Shelvey, Wilshere, Carrick, Milner? And will they have played together? Will they know who is sitting deep and who goes forward?

 

Yet when they fail in the tournament again no one will mention the fact the team hasn't played together again, it'll just be 'not good enough, all players rubbish', despite the fact they can all do it in qualifying and in the premier league or europe, which is a higher standard.

 

The best international teams at tournaments aren't necessarily the ones with all the talent, it's the ones that are actually teams, that are vaguely settled and know how to play together. We see it every tournament, England fail to beat a team like that every tournament, and we never learn.

 

I think a part of the problem right now is that we don't have too many players who are streets ahead of the competition and pick themselves. A lot of the players you mention are very similar in ability. Rooney clearly gets the nod every time but as much as he is disliked here, the England set up and the pundits rate him. I agree with finding a team. Ramsey had the balls to leave out the likes of Greaves and Paine and played a side that worked together as a unit in a system that they understood. He didn't have the best players but he had a strong spine to the team and they were a team and all did their job.

[ALWAYS_SFC]

Cannot stand the bloke, been overrated for a while now and all the media gushing is nauseating..

[Batman]

Cannot stand the bloke, been overrated for a while now and all the media gushing is nauseating..

 

We rarely, if ever agree

But I do this time completely

[Brave Sir Robin]

Imagine how many goals Charlton or Lineker would've scored if they'd played for England for as many years! Rooney's record is less than 1 goal every 2 games. Really not that impressive.

[sadoldgit]

Cannot stand the bloke, been overrated for a while now and all the media gushing is nauseating..

 

We aren't going to win any trophies any time soon so you cant blame the media for finding something to crow about. If it was David Beckham everybody would be wetting their pants with joy.

[Based on what?]

It's like acknowledging Bananarama are more successful than the Supremes

[Dig Dig]

It's like acknowledging Bananarama are more successful than the Supremes

 

Based on what?

[Shance]

Imagine how many goals Charlton or Lineker would've scored if they'd played for England for as many years! Rooney's record is less than 1 goal every 2 games. Really not that impressive.

 

Charlton - 106 appearances 49 goals

 

Rooney - 106 appearances 49 goals

 

 

Lineker though was the best of the lot and a proper tournament player.

[Based on what?]

Based on what?

 

Sales

[Based on what?]

Sales

 

Not goals scored

[Shandy_Top_89]

Rooney is a very good striker, and this record is an achievement. However, a lot of the media seem to be pushing his case for being known as England's greatest ever striker, which he is far from. As others have pointed out Charlton (as a midfielder), Lineker and Greaves were more prolific. Until he proves himself at a major tournament, most of us wont consider him to be at that level.

 

For what its worth, I think that Rooney is a much better player in a Manchester United shirt and that probably speaks volumes about the national teams collective ability to form a cohesive team over the last 2 decades. I remember him coming on in that FA cup game during Poortvliet's reign and completely changing the game single handedly (although we were a poor outfit at the time, prior to that we were arguably the better side). Id still say Rooney's best season was sat behind Van Persie as a No.10, even if Rooney himself doesn't want to play behind the striker and I would rather see Kane leading the line with Rooney sat behind. Of course this will never happen as the NT appears to cave constantly to club and player pressure.

[Chocolate Box]

Wayne Rooney is a Stan Collymore in a world without Sheringhams, Fowlers, Wrights, Coles, Ferdinands and Shearers.

 

Decent player, good enough to play international football but the fact he has played for England enough times to become all time scorer is testament to the fact there has been a massive lack of serious, long-term rivals for his place in the team. He is not an England great.

 

Spot on

[Toadhall Saint]

Cannot stand the bloke, been overrated for a while now and all the media gushing is nauseating..

 

Ditto

[saint si]

Charlton - 106 appearances 49 goals

 

Rooney - 106 appearances 49 goals

 

 

Lineker though was the best of the lot and a proper tournament player.

 

A quick glance at Wikipedia ... Lineker's 48 goals scored in a 7 year period (and a month)... wow. And just look at the general quality of the opposition compared to the teams Rooney has scored against.

 

In Rooney's defence, I think he is a more complete all-round player and capable of contributing more. Perhaps in another era, he'd have played in a deeper role much more regularly.

[Saint IQ]

My feelings are that it is a great achievement but he's never been great for England since 2004. Shearer was a better player for England but just didn't play as many games or didn't play as many easy opponents same with Lineker

[The9]

Imagine how many goals Charlton or Lineker would've scored if they'd played for England for as many years! Rooney's record is less than 1 goal every 2 games. Really not that impressive.

 

Mmmm, Charlton played exactly the same number of games as Rooney to get to 49 goals - and Charlton would have been substituted far fewer times, seeing as they weren't widely allowed in international competitions for most of his career and even at his his retirement only one sub was allowed.

[The9]

A quick glance at Wikipedia ... Lineker's 48 goals scored in a 7 year period (and a month)... wow. And just look at the general quality of the opposition compared to the teams Rooney has scored against.

 

In Rooney's defence, I think he is a more complete all-round player and capable of contributing more. Perhaps in another era, he'd have played in a deeper role much more regularly.

 

Lineker scored 10 goals in 12 World Cup Finals matches, his tournament goal percentage is much higher than the others and he played more matches against top teams because of that. Though some of the second tier of "top teams" have changed a bit since then.

 

I think in a 4-4-2 era he'd have just continued as a support striker for longer.

[scotty]

His greatest impact was getting sent off for stamping on Carvalro at the quarters of the 2006 WC.

 

This.

 

But whatever we say about the sides England have played while he's been a permanent fixture in the team, the bottom line is that becoming the top scorer for your national side is a huge achievement.

[Shance]

This. The availability of quality English front men is the reason he has played so many games.I actually saw some of Charltons goals live.What a striker!

 

Hate to go all MLG on you but Charlton was a midfielder. That's what puts his achievement on a higher level to Rooneys.

[sadoldgit]

Hate to go all MLG on you but Charlton was a midfielder. That's what puts his achievement on a higher level to Rooneys.

 

Before Ramsey did away with wingers Charlton was an "inside forward." We used to line up with 5 up front 3 in the middle and two at the back (full backs) and the forward line would have to make a W formations with the inside forwards slightly behind the Centre Forward and the two Wingers. Our PE teacher used to stop the game every few minutes to make sure we were all where we were supposed to be. The Centre Half was in the middle of the middle three. Oh how things have changed!

[alpine_saint]

It's no more impressive than scoring 50 goals in the Championship to be honest. There's a complete list of them here

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_international_goals_scored_by_Wayne_Rooney

 

Never scored in a knockout game of a major tournament. 2 goals in any major tournament since 2004, despite being almost ever present.

A tap in against Uruguay last summer in a tournament in which he was dreadful and a free header from all of 6 inches out against Ukraine at Euro 2012.

 

He has been consistently mediocre for England. A half century against teams like Andorra, San Marino, Estonia, Montenegro, Slovenia and Belarus really isn't anything great.

 

This.

 

Lineacre and Charlton p*ss all over his acheivements.

 

EDIT : That list is even worse than I thought. Not a single goal against a "world footballing power" in a game that counted for anything.

Edited 10 September, 2015 by alpine_saint

[sadoldgit]

Jimmy Greaves and Gary Lineker both scored their fair share of tap ins and we used to employ a certain Ted MacDougall who scored more than his fare share from a yard out. A goal is a goal. Rooney has also scored more than his fair share of spectacular goals. I cant believe some of the comments on here. He may not be a likeable character but it is some achievement to score 50 goals for your country. Only in this country do we knock success so much. As I said before, if he played for us would the thread be so churlish? Would you not want Wayne Rooney in your team?

[hughieslastminutegoal]

Absolutely. People seem to be using their dislike of him to try and find a way to belittle his achievement which is pathetic. The bottom line is that no-one in history has scored more goals for England than he has.

 

No England team in history has played so many minnows in qualifying competitions and friendlies.

[sadoldgit]

I guess we can look forward to Harry Kane breaking the record in no time then.

[The9]

No England team in history has played so many minnows in qualifying competitions and friendlies.

 

I'd like to see a statistical breakdown of this - I'm fairly sure there are now retrospective world rankings going back to the pre-War era and England matches are so well documented they're actually numbered nowadays, so knock yourself out.

[Wilf]

Now because of the internet and we find out within 30 minutes whenever he farts,

 

He's just let one go apparently.

[Miltonaggro]

His greatest impact was getting sent off for stamping on Carvalro at the quarters of the 2006 WC.

 

Indeed it was. His international career has been downhill ever since. Pie faced turd!