Cardiff City Forum



A forum for all things Cardiff City

Should Caulker of gone instead of Jagielka?

Fri Jun 20, 2014 8:45 pm

Jagielka Shocking for England in my opinion, he's not terrible he just doesn't have anything close to world class about him.
Caulker has played every single game his fit enough and fresh enough to last 90 minutes comfortably.

Can score goals, he's strong on the ball I feel he would excel in a team of talented players where all eyes aren't on him

Re: Should Caulker of gone instead of Jagielka?

Fri Jun 20, 2014 8:49 pm

No.

Re: Should Caulker of gone instead of Jagielka?

Fri Jun 20, 2014 8:54 pm

Principal Prickly wrote:No.


England can't of done any worse :lol:
They need players like caulker he has heart, something very hard to come by in that team of bottlers

Re: Should Caulker of gone instead of Jagielka?

Fri Jun 20, 2014 8:54 pm

Jagielka chased Suarez when he scored the winner. Caulker would have watched him.

Re: Should Caulker of gone instead of Jagielka?

Fri Jun 20, 2014 8:55 pm

So Jagielka shouldn't have gone because he isn't world class yet Caulker should have gone. Caulker who captained a side who conceded close to 80 goals and made numerous mistakes during the season. If any defender went in place of Jagielka it should have been Curtis Davies or apologise to John Terry and bring him back.

Re: Should Caulker of gone instead of Jagielka?

Fri Jun 20, 2014 9:06 pm

I can't believe anyone can think Caulker should have gone to the World Cup as I don't think at the moment, he's good enough against some of the best players in the world.If England qualify for the next World Cup,I'd think of taking him then providing he learns to close players down a bit more quickly and challenge them.

Re: Should Caulker of gone instead of Jagielka?

Fri Jun 20, 2014 9:15 pm

noisycat wrote:I can't believe anyone can think Caulker should have gone to the World Cup as I don't think at the moment, he's good enough against some of the best players in the world.If England qualify for the next World Cup,I'd think of taking him then providing he learns to close players down a bit more quickly and challenge them.


Im not saying hes fantastic, but england are so bad, it's laughable it couldnt of done them any worse.
also he has heart

Re: Should Caulker of gone instead of Jagielka?

Fri Jun 20, 2014 9:49 pm

Should have taken Stones

Re: Should Caulker of gone instead of Jagielka?

Fri Jun 20, 2014 10:35 pm

Had same debate in work today. Caulker should av gone in replace of Smalling. Very, very average player. Recognised as too weak for Utd CB. Therefore, tried to utilise him as a versatile defender. As he plays for Utd, he finds himself at a World Cup!! Politics of football!!! :laughing5:

Re: Should Caulker of gone instead of Jagielka?

Fri Jun 20, 2014 11:21 pm

Caulker made a shed loads of errors last season. Would you take Caulker over Jagielka down the City?

How did we go down with all these brilliant players I don't know.

Re: Should Caulker of gone instead of Jagielka?

Fri Jun 20, 2014 11:32 pm

No, Curtis Davies from Hull should have gone instead of Jagielka and Ashley Cole should have gone too, as they missed him badly, is experience really could have helped the English. I just cannot see the reason why Hodgson took Luke Shaw if he was not going to play him, i think Shaw should have started for England in both games. Anyway back to Curtis Davies, he was magnificent for Hull last season and they paid the paltry sum of £1.5m, to sign him from Birmingham. I was desperate for Malky to sign him because he has lots of Premiership experience from his times at West Brom, Birmingham and Aston Villa, where at every club he was brilliant. He was pure class when he was at Villa and he was partnered with Martin Laursen in central defence. At the time their partnership was that good that they were not too far off from being the best central defensive partnerships in the Prem. There was only one better central defensive partnerships in the division and that was, Ferdinand and Vidic. I truly do believe that if we had of signed Davies and partnered him with Caulker, then we would not have conceded so many goals as we did and i do believe that we would have stayed up. Even with our poor goalscoring record. I have always rated Curtis Davies very highly and to me, i cannot believe that for the small price of £1.5m Malky Mackay never made an attempt to sign him. Davies is one of the biggest reasons why Hull stayed up, another few reasons were that they signed Tom Huddlestone, another Premiership experienced player. I really thought and hoped that we would have signed or tried to sign Davies and Huddlestone. Especially when one of the first things you make sure you do when you are a new club in the Prem, is that you sign quality and experienced Premiership players. Hull did and we did not and that is why they are where they are now and we are where we are. Sorry for kind of going off topic but I do think that Curtis Davies should have been in the England squad and personally i think he should of been starting alongside Cahill rather than Jagielka and Cahill. Especially as Jagielka missed a lot of football for Everton last season and Davies i think played every single game for Hull. If he did not play every game then he may only have missed a few games.

Re: Should Caulker of gone instead of Jagielka?

Sat Jun 21, 2014 12:16 am

geggs_ccfc wrote:No, Curtis Davies from Hull should have gone instead of Jagielka and Ashley Cole should have gone too, as they missed him badly, is experience really could have helped the English. I just cannot see the reason why Hodgson took Luke Shaw if he was not going to play him, i think Shaw should have started for England in both games. Anyway back to Curtis Davies, he was magnificent for Hull last season and they paid the paltry sum of £1.5m, to sign him from Birmingham. I was desperate for Malky to sign him because he has lots of Premiership experience from his times at West Brom, Birmingham and Aston Villa, where at every club he was brilliant. He was pure class when he was at Villa and he was partnered with Martin Laursen in central defence. At the time their partnership was that good that they were not too far off from being the best central defensive partnerships in the Prem. There was only one better central defensive partnerships in the division and that was, Ferdinand and Vidic. I truly do believe that if we had of signed Davies and partnered him with Caulker, then we would not have conceded so many goals as we did and i do believe that we would have stayed up. Even with our poor goalscoring record. I have always rated Curtis Davies very highly and to me, i cannot believe that for the small price of £1.5m Malky Mackay never made an attempt to sign him. Davies is one of the biggest reasons why Hull stayed up, another few reasons were that they signed Tom Huddlestone, another Premiership experienced player. I really thought and hoped that we would have signed or tried to sign Davies and Huddlestone. Especially when one of the first things you make sure you do when you are a new club in the Prem, is that you sign quality and experienced Premiership players. Hull did and we did not and that is why they are where they are now and we are where we are. Sorry for kind of going off topic but I do think that Curtis Davies should have been in the England squad and personally i think he should of been starting alongside Cahill rather than Jagielka and Cahill. Especially as Jagielka missed a lot of football for Everton last season and Davies i think played every single game for Hull. If he did not play every game then he may only have missed a few games.


The same Ashley Cole that got torn apart by Daehli at the end of the season. Hodgson showed that despite taking the younger players that he was still going to stick with the same old crew, how Lallana never started but Welbeck did is a travesty.