You aren't getting this are you? Did I say put him in in place of Gerrard or Lampard etc? Read what I've put.....a number of managers who know a damn sight more than us have picked him regularly, and when you are selecting a small squad such as for a national team then it's useful to have a utility player that you know can play in a number of positions. Picking the England team isn't about putting the best 11 players in the country on the field, look at the debate on strikers....there wouldn't be much argument that the best 2 strikers we have are Owen and Rooney, but because they are similar types of players you don't get the best results by playing them both together, same with Gerrard and Lampard.
Is this a wind-up? No-one can seriously suggest that Phil Neville's a better central midfielder than Michael Carrick...? I don't have a problem with him being in the squad, but I don't see him as a patch on Carrick. The fact that Alex Ferguson got rid of Neville and spent £18m on Carrick says it all.
I'll suggest it, Phil Neville is more worthy of a squad place than Carrick.</p> In fact with the "lazerus" of Barry , Carrick should struggle to get in future England squads as he can only play 1 position averagly</p>
Both Nevilles Average players in a very good Man Utd team. I wonder if they would have been capped if playing for a lower Prem tea. Even I'd look half decent playing with Beckham, Keane et al.
now i can see the reasoning behind the flak aimed at Phil Neville... ... as he is a utility player and doesn't particularly shine in any position and that's why the average football fan (IQ of...???) doesn't like him. Phil Neville is a more than useful player to have in the England squad because of his ability to play anywhere in defence and midfield. Gary Neville has been a major contributor to Utd's success and has been without doubt the best English right back over the past 8 years or so. People dislike him because he is so pro-Utd and not afraid to show it. As they are the most hated team in the land he gets the stick also. I have to admit that if I played for Barnsley i'd be exactly the same - they are my team and to play for them would be an honour that most players today can't even comprehend. At the end of the day the many honours they have both won outstrips most players in the modern game and they have a right to be respected for that. (respect)
Load of Ballax !!!!!! They're both over rated and have been for many years.... Just been lucky enough to have played in a very good team all their carrers... Pinched a living... the both of em
I beginning to think this is the new BBC initiative to 'Test the Nation'. I'm going to stick my neck out and say Phil Neville is clearly a good squad member fro England because he's versatile and quite well regarded as a first teamer at Everton as well, club captain I believe. Should I use plastic scissors or real ones?
Exactly, he is an ideal squad man in that he is more than competent to play in a variety of positions.</p> </p>
RE: Load of Ballax !!!!!! Gary Neville, one of the best right backs this country have had. Excellent defender, good at putting a ball in going forward. Name better.
RE: Give us some players who have been hard done by through the Nevilles inclusion. Lee Dixon and Danny Mills.... Dixon was a far better defender IMHO and Danny Mills was excellent when he played in the World Cup in Japan... If he'd had played for one of the top 4 he would have been a regular...
RE: Give us some players who have been hard done by through the Nevilles inclusion. Mills was **** after the World Cup,</p> If he was that good he would have been at a "Top Club"</p> Lee Dixon had his chance and didnt peform.</p> Neville has always been solid at right back.</p>