Could Man Utd's Success Be Attributable To Fewer International Commitments?

Could Manchester United’s success in the past be attributable to the fact that very few of his players, as a percentage, play international soccer? And even when his players are picked for duty, you know and I know that his footballers often pick up mystery injuries where they have to pull out at the last minute. But then are magically cured by the time Manchester United is ready to play its next game.

To demonstrate how few of his players play international soccer, let’s take a look at the team he fielded this past Saturday. Given, Wayne Rooney (England) was not chosen. But still, here’s the lineup as well as which country they play for:

  1. Edwin van der Sar (Netherlands, retired)
  2. Gary Neville (England, hasn’t played since 2007)
  3. Patrice Evra (France, suspended)
  4. Nemanja Vidic (Serbia)
  5. John O’Shea (Republic of Ireland)
  6. Jonny Evans (Northern Ireland)
  7. Ryan Giggs (Wales, retired)
  8. Nani (Portugal)
  9. Paul Scholes (England, retired)
  10. Darren Fletcher (Scotland)
  11. Dimitar Berbatov (Bulgaria, retired)

Out of the 11 starters on Saturday, only 45% play international soccer right now. In comparison, let’s take a look at Manchester United’s opponents this weekend, Liverpool, and the side that Roy Hodgson fielded against Birmingham City:

  1. Pepe Reina (Spain)
  2. Glen Johnson (England)
  3. Paul Konchesky (England, hasn’t played since 2005)
  4. Jamie Carragher (England)
  5. Martin Skrtel (Slovakia)
  6. Steven Gerrard (England, captain)
  7. Maxi Rodriguez (Argentina)
  8. Lucas Leiva (Brazil)
  9. Christian Poulsen (Denmark)
  10. Fernando Torres (Spain)
  11. Milan Jovanovic (Serbia)

Out of the 11 starters on Saturday, 90% play international soccer right now — exactly twice as many as Manchester United. And if Ashley Cole wasn’t so good as left back for England, the number could be 100%.

Depending on which side of the fence you sit on, Sir Alex Ferguson is either a genius or selfish in terms of fielding a team that isn’t affected by international duty as much as other teams. But you have to wonder how a team from Manchester, England doesn’t have one single player who turns out for England on a regular basis. Not that it’s a prerequisite for a Premier League club to field an English team, but it does make you wonder. It’s also perhaps a reflection of a transfer policy that focuses on buying the best-of-the-best rather than what nationality they are.

Even when you consider the other Manchester United players who didn’t start against Everton who are English, there aren’t many serious contenders for an England position. Hargreaves and Ferdinand are always injured. Owen is out of favor with Capello. So too are Wes Brown and Michael Carrick (also injured). And Chris Smalling is a future England prospect who currently plays for the u-21 side.

In the long run, Ferguson’s selection of teams that aren’t as impacted by international duty as others only benefits his team’s performance in the Premier League. Ferguson doesn’t have to worry as much about players being jet-lagged after returning from meaningless friendlies halfway across the world. Or players getting injured, as much as managers for other Premier League clubs have to be concerned with.

What do you think? Should Sir Alex Ferguson be applauded or criticized for having a team that is less impacted by international duty than other Premier League clubs? Share your feedback in the comments section below.


  1. premierleaguered September 13, 2010
    • Peter September 13, 2010
  2. Simon Burke September 13, 2010
  3. VillaPark September 13, 2010
  4. Juve September 13, 2010
    • UpTheBlues September 13, 2010
    • Peter September 13, 2010
      • Simon Burke September 13, 2010
  5. Go red! September 13, 2010
  6. Dave C September 13, 2010

Leave a Reply