Share
5th October 2017
04:34pm BST
For a start, recent history suggests no-one should get their hopes up. England haven’t won a knockout game since 2006, when they beat Ecuador at the World Cup in Germany. David Beckham scored the only goal of the game, that’s how long ago it was. Since then, England have qualified for four of five tournaments and scored just twice in the knockout stages – Matt Upson against Germany in 2010 and Wayne Rooney last summer against Iceland. The current England team has a world class striker in Harry Kane, but they had great players before and it didn’t make much difference in key games at tournaments. There’s little to suggest it will be different next summer.
England teams with more quality than the current side have consistently lost to better teams at tournaments over the last 20 years. That may seem like a contradiction, because the “better” team should, in theory, win against lesser opponents. But in international football, the most talented teams don’t always win. An international team can cover their weaknesses by developing a system of play that works in their favour – like Iceland and Portugal did at Euro 2016, and the Netherlands and Costa Rica did at the 2014 World Cup. England have never done so, and, as such, have often looked like less than the sum of their parts.
https://twitter.com/SportsJOE_UK/status/838393189140729857
At both Euro 2004 and the 2006 World Cup, they lost to Portugal on penalties in the quarter-finals. Many fans, players and elements of the media consoled themselves that the team lost on the “lottery” of penalties. But penalties aren’t a lottery, they’re a test of composure and technique under extreme pressure and England consistently fail under those circumstances.
England’s failure to qualify for Euro 2008 is the perfect example of the team’s repeated failure to beat opposition of equal or better quality. Croatia and Russia finished ahead of Steve McClaren’s team. At the finals, Croatia beat Germany before losing in the quarter-finals to Turkey on penalties, while Russia lost to eventual winners Spain in the semi-finals. If England had to regularly play teams of such quality in qualifying, they almost certainly wouldn’t be tournament regulars.
Since 2010, England have been knocked out of tournaments by Germany, Italy and Iceland. Italy and Uruguay beat them at the 2014 World Cup, and Roy Hodgson’s team didn’t make it out of the group. There’s an undoubted pattern that has repeated over and over again for England in recent years – as soon as they face a half-decent team in a tournament, they lose.
Some might claim this shortcoming is down to pressure on the players, but all international teams face pressure and it is no greater for England players than Italian, Spanish or German players. It’s more likely to do with shortcomings regarding technique and game intelligence, as well as an inability to keep the ball. In the quarter-final of Euro 2012 against Italy, the most frequent pass England made was between Joe Hart and Andy Carroll. Andrea Pirlo could’ve read a book during the game - it was that easy for him playing in midfield as Steven Gerrard and Scott Parker ran around. Hart, with 85, had more touches of the ball than any other England player that night.
There’s no-one in the current team capable of dictating play or hitting penetrative passes. If we were ranking Jordan Henderson’s attributes, he would probably score 10 out of 10 for shouting at the referee, but not quite so well for his ability on the ball. Jonjo Shelvey showed a greater range of passing in just one game against Liverpool last week.
The decision-making of English players is also questionable, as Alex-Oxlade Chamberlain displayed in the team’s last game against Slovakia in September. Kane, one of the world’s best strikers, and Dele Alli, a wonderfully talented player with a great goalscoring record, were ahead of Oxlade-Chamberlain, but the Liverpool player attempted to shoot from 25 yards, resulting in this:
https://twitter.com/RobRedmond10/status/904786683027128324
Such a poor decision is almost impressive.
However, it’s probably unfair to single out individual players for lacking game intelligence and technique, because tactical acumen and game intelligence isn’t a notable facet of English football, and it rarely has been. Back in 1992, when Bobby Robson left Dutch club PSV, Berry van Aerle, a Dutch full-back, was asked what did he learn from the former England manager. “Robson’s a nice man, really a very nice man,” he said. “But the only thing he taught me in two years was English.”
English football has been associated with effort and fighting spirit, but not a tactical framework to harness these attributes. A tactical approach is still distrusted by many within English football, and you only have to watch five minutes of some punditry to detect a strong undercurrent of anti-intellectualism.
The athletic player still seems to be picked ahead of the technical, intelligent footballer. Michael Carrick, who has been good enough to win everything for Manchester United, has less caps than Shaun Wright-Phillips and Stewart Downing. He would’ve provided balance to England’s midfield when they had the chance to be competitive at tournaments. Instead, successive managers persisted with the dysfunctional pairing of Gerrard and Frank Lampard, or lesser players such as Henderson and Parker.
The England job also appears to reduce a manger’s ability. Hodgson has been a manager for 40 years, and he didn’t achieve this by being the bumbling figure we saw last summer, standing helpless on the sidelines as England lost to the smallest country to ever qualify for a tournament. Fabio Capello was recruited because of his immense pedigree in the game. He ended-up instructing his team to lump the ball up to Emile Heskey. McClaren was once considered one of the brightest coaches in English football, but will be remembered as the “wally with the brolly.”
If the England job reduces a manager’s ability, then it really could get ugly for Gareth Southgate next summer.
Southgate seems like a thoroughly decent person, and he was an accomplished footballer, playing with distinction for several Premier League clubs and for England. However, he is not a top level manager. If there was a vacancy in the Championship tomorrow, he wouldn’t be on a shortlist of 10 managers. Southgate’s only club job was with Middlesbrough. McClaren, his predecessor, guided them to a Uefa Cup final and they were a comfortable mid-table team. They were then relegated from the Premier League under Southgate. Unlike his predecessor Sam Allardyce, there's no sense that Southgate has an idea of play, or the means the execute it.
Before England's World Cup qualifier against Scotland back in June, Southgate took his team on a two-day retreat with Royal Marines. They were put through a series of activities, and experienced what it was like to be a soldier in the field.
"“These guys represent Queen and country, and we do the same," the England manager said. "But the consequences of failure for the Royal Marines are far higher. That gives us a good context and comparison.”It is staggering to think that an international manager chose to spend his limited time with players ahead of a big qualifying game on a corporate retreat, instead working on tactics, or a plan to nullify the opposition or on developing a pattern of play. It’s even more astounding that very few questioned Southgate’s logic. It’s highly doubtful that Jogi Loew took the German team on a camping trip for two days before a key game on the way to winning the World Cup. England’s marine training won’t count for much when they’re wasting possession, making poor decisions and trying to beat a team who can keep the ball. So, it's no surprise that very few are excited by England qualifying or their chances of success at the World Cup. There's little to suggest the team are capable of competing at the tournament, and even less so to suggest Southgate can coax performances from them. English football fans have seen this movie before a few times, and know how it ends.
Explore more on these topics:
