You don't have to look in the record books to see that England have underachieved hugely on the international level. Be it the World Cup or the Euros, England always fall short, sometimes embarrassingly. But why is this?
A lot of emphasis is on the media. From previous failures, the expectation and pressure mounted on the players is excessive. But they can only slate poor performances. I'm sure if England offered something to cheer about at a major tournament and didn't underperform the editor's tunes would change. However, the most common thinking behind this is there are too many foreigners in the game, thus not giving English players a chance. Nonsense. I was once told "look at Steve Sidwell, he left Reading, playing week in week out, went to Chelsea, now he isn't playing." My immediate response was, "yes, but he's now a better player." Playing daily with English players at Reading, or playing daily with a mixed cultured squad like Chelsea; where are you going to better yourself? Clearly at Chelsea. So, game time on the weekend isn't the problem, just as the ratio of foreigners to homeland players isn't the problem. I'll not look at the stats, but granted the percentage is consistently rising.
That is down to two main reasons. One, English players are overpriced. Two, generally speaking, foreign players are better. Using foreigners as an excuse is an easy way out, without these foreigners the Premier League would not be lauded (incorrectly), as the best league in the world. Whether you’re from England, Spain, Slovakia or Belarus, if you’re good enough, you’re in. So that immediately eradicates the thought that England's downfall is down to the influx of overseas players, because it is plain to see that these players are better. But why is this? Well, here is a quote from, in my view, the best "footballer" in the world, at the best team in the world, both domestically and internationally.
This quote is from Xavi, when asked about the coaching of players:
“It’s all about rondos [piggy in the middle]. Rondo, rondo, rondo. Every. Single. Day. It’s the best exercise there is. You learn responsibility and not to lose the ball. If you lose the ball, you go in the middle. Pum-pum-pum-pum, always one touch. If you go in the middle, it’s humiliating, the rest applaud and laugh at you.”
Simple. Here we have a top level footballer, who plays with fellow top level performers, and the simplicity of this is; keep the ball. Move the ball quickly, through the one touch, but most importantly keep the ball. That is indeed, how Spain set their stall out. If we have the ball, you cannot score. That is their strategy, not only during a game, but it is how they are brought up. It's how they are coached from grass roots, through to international level. Equally with the Brazilians, they are taught to "love the ball." When you are taught this from such a young age, how to "love" the ball, how to keep the ball, you develop key skills. Keeping hold of the ball, playing at a high tempo and also having the ability and confidence, to go and create something.
That is the key component behind all of the top sides, who are a joy to watch with their creative freedom, confidence on the ball, and the simplicity of their football. Brazilians are ridiculously eccentric on the ball, not under strict orders from their boss, but how they are taught the game. Spaniards are the best at keeping the ball, which of course is encouraged by their manager. But it comes so easy to them as they are taught this way as children. Look at the top international sides, Spain, Brazil, Argentina, Holland. They’re all comfortable on the ball and have the freedom to express themselves on a football pitch.
Again, I reiterate this boils down to way they are taught from grass roots. This then has an effect on the formation the team chooses to play. Sometimes these sides don't seem to have a strict formation as they are all excellent on the ball. Even defensively, there tends to be two centre halves, with an anchorman to protect, while the full backs are effectively wingers.
Now look at England. For a long time, it has been the simple 4-4-2. This is looked upon as simple, as everyone knows their roles in the side. But I believe this is their downfall. The prime example is, if an 8 year old is quick, with a decent left foot, as an Englishman you’re going to be a left winger. At grass roots, your manager will say to you, "right son, get the ball, run at the full back and cross it in." Job done. Then before you know it, as a 16 year old, you’re doing exactly the same thing. Granted, they will develop greatly as a player and maybe make a career out of the game, but strictly as a left winger.
Similarly to all positions though, if you have attributes suited to a certain position and you fit the bill, you’re in, and that is then you for the rest of your playing days. These players, develop parts of their game suited to their position. So where is their time of learning to love the ball, rather than be given them a limited list of instructions to help the under 10s win a game on a Sunday morning. Let's coach the children to play proper football, rather than coach them how to be a full back or a winger. Because once they set on that one position, as a defensive midfielder for example, they will then learn how to win the ball and play it simple. Why not expand their education of football, rather than their education of one position.
Looking at the elite footballers, as much as they do play consistently, in a set position, they are not specifically designated to a position. They are just great players. Messi, Ronaldo, Xavi, Fabregas, Iniesta, Maradona and the list goes on, of players, yes, who played in a given position, but in a nutshell, they could play anywhere across the front six. That said, England over the years have produced exceptions, who could fit in some of the great sides, with the great players mentioned. Yes, there are arguments for the strict position allocation. I mean would we have had Alan Shearer or Michael Owen, without someone saying "you’re a forward, stick it in the net". But the forwards who naturally score goals, are born in every country. Villa, Klose, Pele, van Nistelrooy, Raul, Batistuta, all part of teams who have players within, that are said have so much flair and creative freedom.
Looking briefly at club football, it is a results business. Go out and get three points, job done. Teams set up to get a result and leave with maximum points. Not such a bad philosophy, I know, but look at Joe Cole off the back of this. He played for arguably the best manager of his time, Jose Mourinho, went to Chelsea as the next big thing, billed as the next Gazza. But under the win at all costs mentality, Joe Cole lost the eccentricity of his game, his willing to run at people, essentially all excitement he had in his locker, gone. I am not blaming Mourinho for this because that is just the way English football is. You have to cut out your fancy flicks, your dallying on the ball and the pretty turns. You have a duty on the pitch and you have to do it. But if Joe Cole had played in Brazil, I promise you he wouldn't currently be on loan at Lille.
The most frustrating thing to hear as an England fan over the years goes along the lines of "Lampard and Gerrard can't play together", "Gerrard/Lampard is rubbish." Ridiculous. I agree they are not suited to play in a midfield two, but to say they can't be in the same team completely is a joke. Equally with Paul Scholes, the greatest English centre midfielder of my time was thrust out onto the left hand side under Sven-Goran Eriksson. There aren't enough expletives to describe this action, but it is down to the strict format of the English game. We have players who are so gifted on the ball, but have such discipline instilled into them, they lose a good 25% of their game, not having the freedom they desire and crave. It is incredibly frustrating, because the players we have at our disposal, given a more fluent and expressive setup, would go far. But a team that sets up on 4-4-2, or now more so a 4-3-3/4-5-1, you’re set up purely not to get beat.
This isn't such a bad thing, and it indeed can work. Look at Greece, getting to their great heights, winning Euro 2004 based on discipline and hard work. On a greater scale, Germany and Italy, are even more so disciplined than us using a not too dissimilar system. But again, they offer a lot more offensively and have players who aren't afraid to get the game by the scruff of the neck. We have players that can do that also, but why isn't it happening?
Let's not blame the media, or the masses of overseas players who have only ever benefitted the game in England. Let’s firstly look at the grass roots of our game, not encourage one specific player to do all required things of one position. Let's teach them to keep the ball, move for the ball, want the ball, and love the ball. Once all kids are brought up this way, as they grow up, inevitably bettering themselves, they are not restricted on a football pitch. And then let's try and escape our boring and over disciplined setup, and set ourselves up to go and create something.
Let's not be embarrassingly predictable and break free from our shackles, and produce the actions on a football pitch, the current England players and hopefully future England players can. But until the grassroots coaching is improved, England is set for a long haul of media beatings.
Written by Michael Collins
Chinese
French
German
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Russian
Spanish
.jpg)
.jpg)
