He's been an accident waiting to happen in the last year or so, and surely we don't want him in the team to do 'absolutely fine apart from the goal he cost us' in the Euros next year?
He also did very poorly for the Ukraine goal on Saturday, essentially running away from the decent position in the middle of the box to allow them more space.
Yes he's done well in the past for England, but he's woefully out of form now.
With a few people saying this is the best team in years etc, interested in what combined sides people would put out between the early 2000s side and the current one?
With a few people saying this is the best team in years etc, interested in what combined sides people would put out between the early 2000s side and the current one?
Seaman Walker - Terry - Ferdinand - Cole Scholes - Gerrard Bellingham Saka - Kane - Rooney
Realised I forgot someone when putting together the same formation we have now, but cant see Rooney out wide - There arent many from the current crop that I'd pick over the 2000s... Maybe even:
Seaman Walker - Terry - Ferdinand - Cole Beckham - Gerrard - Bellingham - Saka Shearer - Kane
With a few people saying this is the best team in years etc, interested in what combined sides people would put out between the early 2000s side and the current one?
Considering the amount of individual talent there, that team were massive underachievers.
With a few people saying this is the best team in years etc, interested in what combined sides people would put out between the early 2000s side and the current one?
You'd overrun that midfield with Rice and Philips sitting in, and Foden and Bellingham forcing Gerrard and Lampard to have to drop to protect Terry and Ferdinand
With a few people saying this is the best team in years etc, interested in what combined sides people would put out between the early 2000s side and the current one?
Considering the amount of individual talent there, that team were massive underachievers.
Great talent. Average team.
Just too many of the same players stacked into a starting 11.
With a few people saying this is the best team in years etc, interested in what combined sides people would put out between the early 2000s side and the current one?
Seaman Walker - Terry - Ferdinand - Cole Scholes - Gerrard Bellingham Saka - Kane - Rooney
Realised I forgot someone when putting together the same formation we have now, but cant see Rooney out wide - There arent many from the current crop that I'd pick over the 2000s... Maybe even:
Seaman Walker - Terry - Ferdinand - Cole Beckham - Gerrard - Bellingham - Saka Shearer - Kane
Rooney was decent on the left of three.
Think I'd have to have Rice as the one decent defensive midfielder.
I'd say:
Pickford Walker, Ferdinand, Terry, Cole Gerrard (Bellingham soon though I suspect!), Rice, Scholes Saka, Kane, Rooney
Feels weird leaving Beckham out.
So 5 current, 6 from back then.
If we had the defence from back then with the current front 6 we'd be the best team in the world I think.
With a few people saying this is the best team in years etc, interested in what combined sides people would put out between the early 2000s side and the current one?
Seaman Walker - Terry - Ferdinand - Cole Scholes - Gerrard Bellingham Saka - Kane - Rooney
Realised I forgot someone when putting together the same formation we have now, but cant see Rooney out wide - There arent many from the current crop that I'd pick over the 2000s... Maybe even:
Seaman Walker - Terry - Ferdinand - Cole Beckham - Gerrard - Bellingham - Saka Shearer - Kane
Rooney was decent on the left of three.
Think I'd have to have Rice as the one decent defensive midfielder.
I'd say:
Pickford Walker, Ferdinand, Terry, Cole Gerrard (Bellingham soon though I suspect!), Rice, Scholes Saka, Kane, Rooney
Feels weird leaving Beckham out.
So 5 current, 6 from back then.
If we had the defence from back then with the current front 6 we'd be the best team in the world I think.
Stones over Terry, Bellingham over Gerrard would be my only changes to that.
I think it's also worth pointing out a big difference between now and the "golden generation" is the squad depth - yes we had a good 11 at that time but I'd argue the squad depth is far superior now, you only have to look at the players left out or not there last night - the likes of TAA, Grealish, Stones, Stirling, Shaw etc etc etc
With a few people saying this is the best team in years etc, interested in what combined sides people would put out between the early 2000s side and the current one?
If that side had the team spirit and togetherness that the squad of the past couple of years have had then they'd have gone pretty close to winning something. It's common knowledge that a lot of players back then didn't like each other and only really mixed in their own club cliques.
What the squad have today is definitely something that goes under the radar but is a big thing that Southgate should be applauded for.
I think it's also worth pointing out a big difference between now and the "golden generation" is the squad depth - yes we had a good 11 at that time but I'd argue the squad depth is far superior now, you only have to look at the players left out or not there last night - the likes of TAA, Grealish, Stones, Stirling, Shaw etc etc etc
It's only at CB, our traditional strength, where we lack depth compared to back then. At Euro 2004 we had Terry, Campbell, Carragher and Ledley King, with Rio banned.
I think it's also worth pointing out a big difference between now and the "golden generation" is the squad depth - yes we had a good 11 at that time but I'd argue the squad depth is far superior now, you only have to look at the players left out or not there last night - the likes of TAA, Grealish, Stones, Stirling, Shaw etc etc etc
It's only at CB, our traditional strength, where we lack depth compared to back then. At Euro 2004 we had Terry, Campbell, Carragher and Ledley King, with Rio banned.
And at the 2002 world cup Trevor Sinclair and Danny Mills were playing.
The best team England never had was:
Seaman Nevile Campbell Rio Cole Beckham Gerrard Scholes Giggs Shearer Owen
The one thing that does sit at the back of my mind is how many of England's better players have had the best days by the time they are about 28. Germany, France and Italy always seem to have players go on into either mid 30s and still be good.
I said a few years ago that 2024 & 2026 were the two tournaments we had to win one of. The last Euros was a little bit early amd Qatar was always a bit of a wild card.
I think it's also worth pointing out a big difference between now and the "golden generation" is the squad depth - yes we had a good 11 at that time but I'd argue the squad depth is far superior now, you only have to look at the players left out or not there last night - the likes of TAA, Grealish, Stones, Stirling, Shaw etc etc etc
It's only at CB, our traditional strength, where we lack depth compared to back then. At Euro 2004 we had Terry, Campbell, Carragher and Ledley King, with Rio banned.
And at the 2002 world cup Trevor Sinclair and Danny Mills were playing.
The best team England never had was:
Seaman Nevile Campbell Rio Cole Beckham Gerrard Scholes Giggs Shearer Owen
The one thing that does sit at the back of my mind is how many of England's better players have had the best days by the time they are about 28. Germany, France and Italy always seem to have players go on into either mid 30s and still be good.
I said a few years ago that 2024 & 2026 were the two tournaments we had to win one of. The last Euros was a little bit early amd Qatar was always a bit of a wild card.
Giggs was never eligible for England, it's a myth.
He played for England schoolboys as he went to school in England, but hasn't got an English Nan or anything.
I think it's also worth pointing out a big difference between now and the "golden generation" is the squad depth - yes we had a good 11 at that time but I'd argue the squad depth is far superior now, you only have to look at the players left out or not there last night - the likes of TAA, Grealish, Stones, Stirling, Shaw etc etc etc
It's only at CB, our traditional strength, where we lack depth compared to back then. At Euro 2004 we had Terry, Campbell, Carragher and Ledley King, with Rio banned.
I really thought and hoped Gomez was going to be that next big player in that position for the next 10 years- his England career started off so strongly as well.
I think it's also worth pointing out a big difference between now and the "golden generation" is the squad depth - yes we had a good 11 at that time but I'd argue the squad depth is far superior now, you only have to look at the players left out or not there last night - the likes of TAA, Grealish, Stones, Stirling, Shaw etc etc etc
It's only at CB, our traditional strength, where we lack depth compared to back then. At Euro 2004 we had Terry, Campbell, Carragher and Ledley King, with Rio banned.
And at the 2002 world cup Trevor Sinclair and Danny Mills were playing.
The best team England never had was:
Seaman Nevile Campbell Rio Cole Beckham Gerrard Scholes Giggs Shearer Owen
The one thing that does sit at the back of my mind is how many of England's better players have had the best days by the time they are about 28. Germany, France and Italy always seem to have players go on into either mid 30s and still be good.
I said a few years ago that 2024 & 2026 were the two tournaments we had to win one of. The last Euros was a little bit early amd Qatar was always a bit of a wild card.
Giggs was never eligible for England, it's a myth.
He played for England schoolboys as he went to school in England, but hasn't got an English Nan or anything.
He was however eligible to play for Sierra Leone through his grandfather.
I think it's also worth pointing out a big difference between now and the "golden generation" is the squad depth - yes we had a good 11 at that time but I'd argue the squad depth is far superior now, you only have to look at the players left out or not there last night - the likes of TAA, Grealish, Stones, Stirling, Shaw etc etc etc
It's only at CB, our traditional strength, where we lack depth compared to back then. At Euro 2004 we had Terry, Campbell, Carragher and Ledley King, with Rio banned.
And at the 2002 world cup Trevor Sinclair and Danny Mills were playing.
The best team England never had was:
Seaman Nevile Campbell Rio Cole Beckham Gerrard Scholes Giggs Shearer Owen
The one thing that does sit at the back of my mind is how many of England's better players have had the best days by the time they are about 28. Germany, France and Italy always seem to have players go on into either mid 30s and still be good.
I said a few years ago that 2024 & 2026 were the two tournaments we had to win one of. The last Euros was a little bit early amd Qatar was always a bit of a wild card.
Giggs was never eligible for England, it's a myth.
He played for England schoolboys as he went to school in England, but hasn't got an English Nan or anything.
Of course he was eligible to play for England, he moved to Manchester when he was six.
I think it's also worth pointing out a big difference between now and the "golden generation" is the squad depth - yes we had a good 11 at that time but I'd argue the squad depth is far superior now, you only have to look at the players left out or not there last night - the likes of TAA, Grealish, Stones, Stirling, Shaw etc etc etc
It's only at CB, our traditional strength, where we lack depth compared to back then. At Euro 2004 we had Terry, Campbell, Carragher and Ledley King, with Rio banned.
And at the 2002 world cup Trevor Sinclair and Danny Mills were playing.
The best team England never had was:
Seaman Nevile Campbell Rio Cole Beckham Gerrard Scholes Giggs Shearer Owen
The one thing that does sit at the back of my mind is how many of England's better players have had the best days by the time they are about 28. Germany, France and Italy always seem to have players go on into either mid 30s and still be good.
I said a few years ago that 2024 & 2026 were the two tournaments we had to win one of. The last Euros was a little bit early amd Qatar was always a bit of a wild card.
Giggs was never eligible for England, it's a myth.
He played for England schoolboys as he went to school in England, but hasn't got an English Nan or anything.
Of course he was eligible to play for England, he moved to Manchester when he was six.
I think I read somewhere that the rules of residency/education qualification have changed since Giggs was a child, and that he could now have played for England.
I think it's also worth pointing out a big difference between now and the "golden generation" is the squad depth - yes we had a good 11 at that time but I'd argue the squad depth is far superior now, you only have to look at the players left out or not there last night - the likes of TAA, Grealish, Stones, Stirling, Shaw etc etc etc
It's only at CB, our traditional strength, where we lack depth compared to back then. At Euro 2004 we had Terry, Campbell, Carragher and Ledley King, with Rio banned.
And at the 2002 world cup Trevor Sinclair and Danny Mills were playing.
The best team England never had was:
Seaman Nevile Campbell Rio Cole Beckham Gerrard Scholes Giggs Shearer Owen
The one thing that does sit at the back of my mind is how many of England's better players have had the best days by the time they are about 28. Germany, France and Italy always seem to have players go on into either mid 30s and still be good.
I said a few years ago that 2024 & 2026 were the two tournaments we had to win one of. The last Euros was a little bit early amd Qatar was always a bit of a wild card.
Giggs was never eligible for England, it's a myth.
He played for England schoolboys as he went to school in England, but hasn't got an English Nan or anything.
Of course he was eligible to play for England, he moved to Manchester when he was six.
I thought you needed more than citizenship?
There is no difference between English and Welsh citizenship is there?
I think I read somewhere that the rules of residency/education qualification have changed since Giggs was a child, and that he could now have played for England.
Correct.
As a youngster, Giggs captained England schoolboys but contrary to popular belief, he was never eligible for the senior England team (eligibility at the schoolboy level depends solely upon the location of the school, in Giggs' case Moorside High School in Salford). In October 2009, new rules were introduced for the Home Nations' associations that would have enabled Giggs to represent England had he not already represented Wales in an official competition, but Giggs has always maintained that he would have chosen to play for Wales anyway; he stated in 2002, "I'd rather go through my career without qualifying for a major championship than play for a country where I wasn't born or which my parents didn't have anything to do with".
I think I read somewhere that the rules of residency/education qualification have changed since Giggs was a child, and that he could now have played for England.
Correct.
As a youngster, Giggs captained England schoolboys but contrary to popular belief, he was never eligible for the senior England team (eligibility at the schoolboy level depends solely upon the location of the school, in Giggs' case Moorside High School in Salford). In October 2009, new rules were introduced for the Home Nations' associations that would have enabled Giggs to represent England had he not already represented Wales in an official competition, but Giggs has always maintained that he would have chosen to play for Wales anyway; he stated in 2002, "I'd rather go through my career without qualifying for a major championship than play for a country where I wasn't born or which my parents didn't have anything to do with".
Having spent far more time looking it up than is healthy.
He could have played for England under FIFA's rules at the time. It was the "Gentleman's agreement" between the 4 home nations that prevented (if he ever actually wanted to).
It's the same reason that the NI team wasn't full of players with Irish Grannies when the Eire team was. Despite almost all of them technically being able to play for both.
Let's be honest Giggs is/was more English than John Robinson was Welsh.
The flip side being that while he he played for the "correct" country, he was hardly an enthusiastic Welshman for the national team. He's very much a club legend, rather than an international legend, unlike say Bale.
I think it's also worth pointing out a big difference between now and the "golden generation" is the squad depth - yes we had a good 11 at that time but I'd argue the squad depth is far superior now, you only have to look at the players left out or not there last night - the likes of TAA, Grealish, Stones, Stirling, Shaw etc etc etc
It's only at CB, our traditional strength, where we lack depth compared to back then. At Euro 2004 we had Terry, Campbell, Carragher and Ledley King, with Rio banned.
And at the 2002 world cup Trevor Sinclair and Danny Mills were playing.
The best team England never had was:
Seaman Nevile Campbell Rio Cole Beckham Gerrard Scholes Giggs Shearer Owen
The one thing that does sit at the back of my mind is how many of England's better players have had the best days by the time they are about 28. Germany, France and Italy always seem to have players go on into either mid 30s and still be good.
I said a few years ago that 2024 & 2026 were the two tournaments we had to win one of. The last Euros was a little bit early amd Qatar was always a bit of a wild card.
Giggs was never eligible for England, it's a myth.
He played for England schoolboys as he went to school in England, but hasn't got an English Nan or anything.
Of course he was eligible to play for England, he moved to Manchester when he was six.
I thought you needed more than citizenship?
There is no difference between English and Welsh citizenship is there?
I meant that in FIFA's eyes, I didn't think living in a country was enough
I think it's also worth pointing out a big difference between now and the "golden generation" is the squad depth - yes we had a good 11 at that time but I'd argue the squad depth is far superior now, you only have to look at the players left out or not there last night - the likes of TAA, Grealish, Stones, Stirling, Shaw etc etc etc
It's only at CB, our traditional strength, where we lack depth compared to back then. At Euro 2004 we had Terry, Campbell, Carragher and Ledley King, with Rio banned.
And at the 2002 world cup Trevor Sinclair and Danny Mills were playing.
The best team England never had was:
Seaman Nevile Campbell Rio Cole Beckham Gerrard Scholes Giggs Shearer Owen
The one thing that does sit at the back of my mind is how many of England's better players have had the best days by the time they are about 28. Germany, France and Italy always seem to have players go on into either mid 30s and still be good.
I said a few years ago that 2024 & 2026 were the two tournaments we had to win one of. The last Euros was a little bit early amd Qatar was always a bit of a wild card.
Giggs was never eligible for England, it's a myth.
He played for England schoolboys as he went to school in England, but hasn't got an English Nan or anything.
Of course he was eligible to play for England, he moved to Manchester when he was six.
I thought you needed more than citizenship?
There is no difference between English and Welsh citizenship is there?
I meant that in FIFA's eyes, I didn't think living in a country was enough
It was 2 years and then increased to 5, that's with zero ancestor connection. It was increased because Togo and Qatar were nationalising radomers at a rate of knots.
Like I said I have spent far to much time looking into this.
The massive outlier is British nationals born outside the UK. Who can play for any of the 4 countries despite having no connection with the country at all. Dele Adebola nearly played for Northern Ireland, if he had done he would have been the first member of his family to set foot in the country.
With a few people saying this is the best team in years etc, interested in what combined sides people would put out between the early 2000s side and the current one?
If that side had the team spirit and togetherness that the squad of the past couple of years have had then they'd have gone pretty close to winning something. It's common knowledge that a lot of players back then didn't like each other and only really mixed in their own club cliques.
What the squad have today is definitely something that goes under the radar but is a big thing that Southgate should be applauded for.
It's one of the excellent things he's done, but I sometimes think that he's been reduced to this vibes man who doesn't know anything about tactics. Like he's Eileen Drewery with England caps. He's not though, he's actually pretty smart with his tactics, it's just that often gets drowned out by the Twitter crowd screeching about how Southgate picks too many defensive players or needs to 'take the handbrake off' or something else equally inane. That lineup above is full of good players but it's a rubbish team.
You've got a right midfielder who plays narrow and withdrawn using his overlapping fullback to create space for him to put crosses in from deeper and a narrow midfielder on the other side in Scholes doing a fairly similar thing but inverted and in more of a playmaking role. Inbetween them you've got a goalscoring midfielder who wants to ghost around the pitch arriving late into the box to finish chances and an all action midfielder next to him who isn't a box to box, isn't a holder and isn't an attacking midfielder. Both these players had brilliant careers being the spare man in a midfield where they could play in a fairly unique way because the players around them were more rigid in their roles. In front of that you've got a pacy finisher looking to run off the shoulder and a maverick attacker who can do anything but was instead asked to do everything. That is a team constructed entirely on Match of the Day conversations and newspaper columns. It's awful, I hate looking at it.
Southgate doesn't do that. He knows that the teams who get to finals are the ones who don't get beaten, not the ones with the best players and he sticks to making sure that the style is as consistent as possible so players who are getting increasingly complex instructions every day at club level aren't also reinventing themselves every time they turn up for international duty. They know their team mates, they know how they're going to play, they're hard to beat as a result. That 2004 team was essentially picked by committee, newspapers wondering how you play Lampard and Gerrard together when the answer is you don't. Pick one and shut up. If you're going to play Scholes on the left and Beckham on the right as Ferguson often did at Utd then make sure your middle is hardworking, defensively minded and stable (Ferguson would go with Keane and Butt or Neville) not insane and individualistic. Or don't play both Scholes and Beckham there, sacrifice one for a bit of pace on the other wing and a middle that can shuffle across in transition. If you're going to let Rooney be his free self before Ferguson has tacticted him into a 30 goal striker then put some structure in behind him. Southgate could cuddle that 2004 team into an Avengers-style best friends club and they'd still be picked apart by decent teams.
As with most things - some of the criticism he receives is OTT - from fans at the game - when he always tries his best, but if ex pros and journalists say he's clearly struggling, isn't playing first team football and as such, shouldn't really be first choice for his Country, it's hardly a crime.
With a few people saying this is the best team in years etc, interested in what combined sides people would put out between the early 2000s side and the current one?
If that side had the team spirit and togetherness that the squad of the past couple of years have had then they'd have gone pretty close to winning something. It's common knowledge that a lot of players back then didn't like each other and only really mixed in their own club cliques.
What the squad have today is definitely something that goes under the radar but is a big thing that Southgate should be applauded for.
It's one of the excellent things he's done, but I sometimes think that he's been reduced to this vibes man who doesn't know anything about tactics. Like he's Eileen Drewery with England caps. He's not though, he's actually pretty smart with his tactics, it's just that often gets drowned out by the Twitter crowd screeching about how Southgate picks too many defensive players or needs to 'take the handbrake off' or something else equally inane. That lineup above is full of good players but it's a rubbish team.
You've got a right midfielder who plays narrow and withdrawn using his overlapping fullback to create space for him to put crosses in from deeper and a narrow midfielder on the other side in Scholes doing a fairly similar thing but inverted and in more of a playmaking role. Inbetween them you've got a goalscoring midfielder who wants to ghost around the pitch arriving late into the box to finish chances and an all action midfielder next to him who isn't a box to box, isn't a holder and isn't an attacking midfielder. Both these players had brilliant careers being the spare man in a midfield where they could play in a fairly unique way because the players around them were more rigid in their roles. In front of that you've got a pacy finisher looking to run off the shoulder and a maverick attacker who can do anything but was instead asked to do everything. That is a team constructed entirely on Match of the Day conversations and newspaper columns. It's awful, I hate looking at it.
Southgate doesn't do that. He knows that the teams who get to finals are the ones who don't get beaten, not the ones with the best players and he sticks to making sure that the style is as consistent as possible so players who are getting increasingly complex instructions every day at club level aren't also reinventing themselves every time they turn up for international duty. They know their team mates, they know how they're going to play, they're hard to beat as a result. That 2004 team was essentially picked by committee, newspapers wondering how you play Lampard and Gerrard together when the answer is you don't. Pick one and shut up. If you're going to play Scholes on the left and Beckham on the right as Ferguson often did at Utd then make sure your middle is hardworking, defensively minded and stable (Ferguson would go with Keane and Butt or Neville) not insane and individualistic. Or don't play both Scholes and Beckham there, sacrifice one for a bit of pace on the other wing and a middle that can shuffle across in transition. If you're going to let Rooney be his free self before Ferguson has tacticted him into a 30 goal striker then put some structure in behind him. Southgate could cuddle that 2004 team into an Avengers-style best friends club and they'd still be picked apart by decent teams.
I kind of agree but also I’m in the negative club towards Southgate. Yes his record at major tournaments is good but I personally think that has been despite him. I don’t feel England will ever win anything with him as manager. When we have had opportunities to put teams to bed in crucial games the bloke bottles it a top manager would actually have won those tournaments rather than being plucky losers
I think I read somewhere that the rules of residency/education qualification have changed since Giggs was a child, and that he could now have played for England.
Correct.
As a youngster, Giggs captained England schoolboys but contrary to popular belief, he was never eligible for the senior England team (eligibility at the schoolboy level depends solely upon the location of the school, in Giggs' case Moorside High School in Salford). In October 2009, new rules were introduced for the Home Nations' associations that would have enabled Giggs to represent England had he not already represented Wales in an official competition, but Giggs has always maintained that he would have chosen to play for Wales anyway; he stated in 2002, "I'd rather go through my career without qualifying for a major championship than play for a country where I wasn't born or which my parents didn't have anything to do with".
That was my understanding. I didn't know the exact rules (or that there had been a rule change since then) but my impression was that Giggs played for Wales because that was what he wanted to do, and if playig for England had been possible, he'd have still wanted to represent Wales.
Comments
He's been an accident waiting to happen in the last year or so, and surely we don't want him in the team to do 'absolutely fine apart from the goal he cost us' in the Euros next year?
He also did very poorly for the Ukraine goal on Saturday, essentially running away from the decent position in the middle of the box to allow them more space.
Yes he's done well in the past for England, but he's woefully out of form now.
Hope we play Foden more regularly, makes things happen, and having Foden and Bellingham both attacking with skill and pace is good.
Walker - Terry - Ferdinand - Cole
Scholes - Gerrard
Bellingham
Saka - Kane - Rooney
Realised I forgot someone when putting together the same formation we have now, but cant see Rooney out wide - There arent many from the current crop that I'd pick over the 2000s... Maybe even:
Seaman
Walker - Terry - Ferdinand - Cole
Beckham - Gerrard - Bellingham - Saka
Shearer - Kane
Rooney was decent on the left of three.
Think I'd have to have Rice as the one decent defensive midfielder.
I'd say:
Pickford
Walker, Ferdinand, Terry, Cole
Gerrard (Bellingham soon though I suspect!), Rice, Scholes
Saka, Kane, Rooney
Feels weird leaving Beckham out.
So 5 current, 6 from back then.
If we had the defence from back then with the current front 6 we'd be the best team in the world I think.
Stones over Terry, Bellingham over Gerrard would be my only changes to that.
What the squad have today is definitely something that goes under the radar but is a big thing that Southgate should be applauded for.
The best team England never had was:
Seaman
Nevile Campbell Rio Cole
Beckham Gerrard Scholes Giggs
Shearer Owen
The one thing that does sit at the back of my mind is how many of England's better players have had the best days by the time they are about 28. Germany, France and Italy always seem to have players go on into either mid 30s and still be good.
I said a few years ago that 2024 & 2026 were the two tournaments we had to win one of. The last Euros was a little bit early amd Qatar was always a bit of a wild card.
He played for England schoolboys as he went to school in England, but hasn't got an English Nan or anything.
As a youngster, Giggs captained England schoolboys but contrary to popular belief, he was never eligible for the senior England team (eligibility at the schoolboy level depends solely upon the location of the school, in Giggs' case Moorside High School in Salford).
In October 2009, new rules were introduced for the Home Nations' associations that would have enabled Giggs to represent England had he not already represented Wales in an official competition, but Giggs has always maintained that he would have chosen to play for Wales anyway; he stated in 2002, "I'd rather go through my career without qualifying for a major championship than play for a country where I wasn't born or which my parents didn't have anything to do with".
He could have played for England under FIFA's rules at the time. It was the "Gentleman's agreement" between the 4 home nations that prevented (if he ever actually wanted to).
It's the same reason that the NI team wasn't full of players with Irish Grannies when the Eire team was. Despite almost all of them technically being able to play for both.
Let's be honest Giggs is/was more English than John Robinson was Welsh.
Like I said I have spent far to much time looking into this.
The massive outlier is British nationals born outside the UK. Who can play for any of the 4 countries despite having no connection with the country at all. Dele Adebola nearly played for Northern Ireland, if he had done he would have been the first member of his family to set foot in the country.
'You're disgraceful!': Harry Maguire's mum hits out at 'fans, football pundits and media' for abuse of her £80m Man United star son after he was jeered by fans when playing for England | Daily Mail Online
As with most things - some of the criticism he receives is OTT - from fans at the game - when he always tries his best, but if ex pros and journalists say he's clearly struggling, isn't playing first team football and as such, shouldn't really be first choice for his Country, it's hardly a crime.