Live Together, Die Alone
16 June 200658 minutes gone. England have been struggling against Trinidad & Tobago, a team who despite their organisation and hard work, were the fourth-best team in Central America; the weakest qualifier in one of the weakest footballing regions. England fans are tired, frustrated at their team, but they know that one man will save them. One man will turn it all around. We all expect his imminent arrival. His name is continually chanted. His entrance onto the pitch is greeted with a roar across the nation. The saviour is here.
As it turned out, a few good runs apart, Wayne Rooney didn’t actually do very much (it was another substitute, Aaron Lennon, who proved to be far more effective). But despite the deflation of the hype, the delusion continues (judging from the back pages of today’s papers); we still believe that in a team game, it is only one player that matters.
Many great footballing teams have often been defined as being based around one great player, usually either a talismanic creative midfielder (France with Zidane, Argentina with Maradona) or a deadly frontman (Germany with Klinsmann or Muller before him). But even so, the one great in the team was surrounded by many other players of high quality; the star player is the difference between being a good side and a great one, but he cannot do everything on his own. France would have never won the ’98 World Cup without Deschamps, Thuram or Blanc; ditto Argentina in ’86 without Valdano or Ruggeri. The classic club example of a “one man” team of late has allegedly been Arsenal, even though their recent Champions League success owes just as much to the midfield organisation of Fabregas and Gilberto, and the battling defensive performances of Touré, Senderos and Flamini, as it does to Henry’s goals.
Wayne Rooney is England’s best player and has many of the qualities that make him a great, even at his age. However, to think he alone is the solution to England’s woes is a delusion. Trouble is, I am not sure which delusion England fans are operating under. Do they think that Wayne Rooney alone, still not yet 100% match-fit, can battle through the heat and a gruelling schedule to single-handedly lead England in a Roy of the Rovers-style road to glory? Or, alternatively that England are a high-quality team just missing that little extra spark which will make them world-beaters? Both are total myths; the first should be obvious to anyone who watches football rather than reads comic books, the second to anyone who’s watched England play. England’s squad has a dearth of striking options, very little in the way of pace (the excellent Aaron Lennon apart), a glut of average workhorse midfielders (Carrick, Jenas, Hargreaves) and only one consistent defender who is fully fit (John Terry).
The only other England player whose quality and form really stands out (Gerrard) has been let down by a manager who is not sure where to play him, nor who to play him with; partnered with Lampard, he has had to cover for the Chelsea man’s marauding (and often misguided) solo charges forward. If only Eriksson had picked and groomed a player to play the same role as the superb Xabi Alonso, whose tracking back, interceptions and accurate passing complement Gerrard so well at Liverpool. Admittedly Alonso is a tough act to follow; Michael Carrick, given a bit of time and some matches could have filled the role, but by now it is too late.
Sven is accused of being out of touch with the general public but all too often he is of one mind with them, seduced by the idea of the individual star; never mind how many times Owen fails to get to a pass, or Joe Cole gives the ball away, or Lampard fails to combine with Gerrard, he doesn’t drop them. One of his few brave decisions, picking the unglamorous Peter Crouch, has been rewarded; not only has he been paid back in goals, but when the ball is played to Crouch’s feet, his play in holding the ball up and supporting team-mates is another level above Owen’s.
Crouch is fortunate; he plays for Liverpool (like Emile Heskey before him, who was dropped from the England side the moment he left for Birmingham), and so even though not a star himself, he plays for a star club. If only Eriksson had given the same consideration and time to Charlton’s Darren Bent or Bolton’s Kevin Nolan, and England might have a team that could both attack with purpose, and whose players are aware that you need to support your team-mates as well as relying on them. Instead, seduced by the idea of big club == big player (how else can you explain the selection of Theo Walcott, a highly talented player but totally unexperienced at the highest level?) he persists in picking the best players, but not the best team. This myth of the supremely talented individual being the secret to success in a team sport (which in many way parallels the rise of the personality cult around Blair) will soon be shattered by the first decent attacking team England play (currently, my money’s on Ecuador). Or rather, it should, but we seem to be so much in denial of the fact that it’s very hard to let go.
Jawbox`
The point about single talented individuals is a good one – you could make a pretty good case for Zidane having inadvertantly wrecked the French team simply by acting as the conduit through which every passing move must be conducted.
However, I don’t buy into Rooney being England’s best player – I think there’s several candidates for that place and he’s not really one of them. Crouch should not be in the team. He’s nowhere near good enough; an international-quality striker would have put away most of the chances he had yesterday rather than just one. Describing Steven Gerrard as the only other player besides Rooney who stands out in quality terms is grossly unfair to Lampard and Joe Cole, as well as Beckham (judging by his last couple of matches).
Meh. Come on Northern Ireland.
Chris
Beckham’s World Cup has been a mixed bag – he’s set up two goals; his crossing apart though, his game has been distinctly average, but he’s not been bad. As for Lampard, he was all over the place and made three misses, all just as bad as Crouch’s. He is a good player, but Gerrard is better (why do you think Mourinho tried so hard to sign him last summer?); given they can’t play together, it’s only right that you have to drop one of them.
As for Joe Cole, he is quite frankly a liability, and England’s worst attacking player by far. He continually drifts inside, trying to get onto his favoured foot, taking one too many touches and dribbling the ball into an opposition player and losing possession, rather than passing to a team-mate or trying to go round him (Tom & I have taken to calling it “doing a Joey”, as he does it so much). The introduction of Lennon showed up Cole for the lightweight he is; Lennon was willing to take the game to his opponents, get into the final third of the pitch, and he was aware of players around him, something that Cole is severely lacking in. He might play well for Chelsea but on the left for England he is useless.
Jawbox
“As for Joe Cole, he is quite frankly a liability, and England’s worst attacking player by far”
He’s the only attacking player England have who’s given the opposition any problems thus far, and was the quickest player in the starting line-up. Gerrard had an absolute stinker against Trinidad and Tobago – aside from the goal, he could have been charged admission. Lampard, for sure, didn’t have a great match, but neither did he try to hide from the match, as Gerrard did. His misses weren’t anything like as bad as Crouch’s, which radiated ineptitude.
There is an obvious problem with the two of them working together in midfield, but if one must be dropped, it should be Gerrard. Lampard isn’t a bad shot either. (The better solution, of course, would be to play Owen Hargreaves in the holding role.)
Prolix
Gerrard was only less noticeable because it was him doing all the dirty work whilst Lampard stood around the box hoofing the ball over or wide at every opportunity! The one time Gerrard did come forward and have a shot – he scored. If anyone is at fault it was Lampard, he had a stinker of a game and if he’s not scoring and threatening in that way, he offers very little else.
Tom
Gerrard didn’t “hide from the match” – Sven’s tactics demand that he sit deep. When he briefly surged forward in the first half, he caused havoc in the T&T defence: two bookings in the space of two minutes, free kicks in dangerous positions, and several good chances. He should have been allowed to play that role throughout the match.
Lampard’s misses may not have radiated ineptitude, but they certainly radiated a worrying laziness. And Joe Cole (who I think has been a vastly improved player both for club and country in the past six to nine months) had reverted to all his bad old ways; it was like he was parodying himself. Or parodying Christiano Ronaldo, come to think of it, who’s had two absolute stinkers so far for Portugal.
I agree, a genuine holding player behind the two – Carrick, or Carragher, or Hargreaves – is the solution. But Sven’s hamstrung himself by not giving Carrick the experience, and having no dedicated cover for Neville which now requires Carragher to fill in that role. You could interchangeably slot in Beckham, Lennon and Cole around them, playing either a 3-1-4-2 if you want to attack, or either 4-4-2 or 4-5-1 if you want more defence. But as that’s not currently an option, the courage has to be there to drop one or the other of them for the benefit of the shape and tactics of the team.
Jawbox
Owen Hargreaves plays the holding role for Bayern Munich every week in the Bundesliga, but presumably that’s not enough of a qualification. There is a simple solution: keep the back four as it was in the T+T match, Hargreaves behind the Beckham/Lampard/Gerrard/Cole line, and Owen up front by himself. Rooney wasn’t great when he came on, and Owen needs a goal.
I cannot believe the treatment Frank Lampard’s getting here. He’s been among the finest midfielders in Europe for years – is there anyone here who, honestly, wouldn’t buy him and have him straight into the centre-midfield of their club side if they could?
sars
*puts hand up*
I sure as hell wouldn’t. Lampard does one job, and while he does it very well, Gerrard does it 10 times better. They clearly can’t play together, and Gerrard is shackled in the position he’s being forced to play. Drop Lampard, let Gerrard do what he does best, with Carrick behind him.
Rachael
joe cole is a fabulous player! He gets the ball, he keeps the ball and he passes the ball to an england player. he rarely gives it away. He is an amazing player for the team and helps england out a lot!!