Villa88

So the domestic season is over, the play-offs complete and all we have as fans to tide us over is the prospect of England vs Brazil, and then a more suitable opponent, Estonia.

Discussions about Beckham's inclusion to one side, and the ongoing Gerrard/Lampard debate...well...ongoing...

What about McClaren's option for skipper?

Out with the old, in with the new. That was McClaren's starting point. Beckham, who was decidedly below-par in Germany 06, was dropped from the squad after his honourable resignation as captain.

So JT's selection as captain was roundly applauded. It was a welcome change, and the results matched.

But now?

Can JT lead England?

So far, I'm not so sure. Against Israel and Andorra we were collectively appalling, but it remains crucial that the captain starts to challenge players, on the pitch where they're not up to scratch. Is it because he's afraid of speaking out? Is he in awe of the other big names? Or is he simply adjusting to his new role. A leader must lead, and sometimes that involves pointing out people's failings.

There is no questioning Terry's leadership abilities for Chelsea, he leads with passion and guts, throwing himself recklessly into challenges. We've seen none of this so far for England.

But the captain is the manager's representative on the field. Has the manager made clear his intentions? Can Terry articulate adequately the manager's plans? For Mourinho he seems more than able. So perhaps the poor captaincy is a direct link to poor planning and explanation from the manager? Is McClaren wrong through and through?

When the English cricket team so comprehensively beat the West Indies in cricket, where Vaughan once more demonstrates his captaining qualities, can Terry emulate this?

So that's the choice: Is Terry able to bring his club-captaincy to the England party, or is he doomed to glimmer rather than shine? And if he isn't the man for the job, who should be?

Rooney08

I agree, I'm not sure Terry shows the same level of commitment and passion for England. Would he have thrown himself head first into a challenge for his nation as he did in the Carling Cup final? For some reason, I think not.

For me, the captain should have been Gerrard from the start. He showed his leading quality again in the recent match with Andorra. Great captains have the ability to take a game by the scruff of the neck and turn it on it's head. Beckham did it against Greece, and Gerrard has proved he can do it for England as well. As much as I like JT, I don't quite think he's the right man to captain England.

RafaTheGaffer

So your questioning his captaincy qualities after a few matches, yet we let Beckham fail to inspire England in 3 major tournaments without any real examination. Why don't you give him a chance to actually settle into the job before slamming him eh? At least hes a genuine leader of men, something our last "captain" couldn't have been less of, you wont get self-serving tears from Terry half way through a world cup game if his team is still drawing - thats for sure! Hes a team man so give him a break and let him breathe.

Dan

The role of a captain in a football team is overrated, do you honestly think players just sit back and reqire shouting or inspiration to get them going, or that football players without a captain on the field are like Football players on Pro Evo/FIFA without the bloke pressing the buttons?

Okay, it may look like that with England some of the time, but that's down to the ineptitude of not getting the right players into the team and playing the right system.

I wouldn't read that much into Vaughan and his captaining heroics, anyone could have beaten the West Indies - they are in crisis.