World Cup: A Difficult Journey

I want to tell you about a very long and arduous car journey I took recently.  Things started off well and I was making good time, but after I had been driving for a while, I realised that I had taken a wrong turn.

This wasn’t because I didn’t know where I was going or how to read a map or anything, I just went on auto pilot for a while and stopped focusing on the route I was supposed to be taking.  Before I knew it I didn’t recognise where I was or how to get to where I was going.

I had a number of passengers travelling with me – in fact, it was they who had asked me to drive them, and suggested that I should choose someone to help with navigating and so on, and who would take the front seat.

I had actually prepared quite well for the journey – I had checked out the route on the map, checked out the alternatives in case I had to make a detour, made sure the car was in good working order and that I had the supplies I’d need if anything did go wrong.

Still I took a wrong turning.  So what to do now?

At first I didn’t think it was that serious, and was fairly sure we would be back on track in no time.  After all, up until now the journey had been a breeze.

My back-seat passengers all had different opinions on how I had gone wrong and what I should do about it, but they couldn’t really help because they didn’t know the route properly.  We all agreed that as we had come so far it would be foolish to give up now, but they quickly became unhelpful because they wouldn’t stop arguing and shouting about who’s fault it was.

At this point I wanted to focus on how we could fix the problem of reaching our destination, and decided not to worry about who was to blame until it was time for the next journey we were making in a couple of months time.  But my companions kept trying to divert my attention back to the problem of culpability, and then tried to convince me that I should just do as they suggested.

I knew that this was a bad idea because whilst they knew roughly where we were going, they hadn’t studied the map in any great detail and as a result didn’t really know how to get there.  To make things worse, they soon started arguing amongst themselves.

I needed to figure this out fairly quickly because I wanted to get there on time and if I was late it would be a wasted journey, but the escalating arguments in the back seats meant that I couldn’t focus.  I looked to my front-seat passenger for help and support in dealing with the arguments, but he started to tell me how he could do a better job and that I should let him take over.  This was despite the fact that he had no experience at driving or even a license.

Now that I knew I would have to do this on my own I began to panic a bit.  So I forgot the map and started taking random turns – a right here, a left there – in the hope that I would stumble across the road I should have been on in the first place.

Naturally I just became all the more disoriented and by this point the map had flown out of an open window in the confusion.  Now I became angry.  I started to shout back at my companions and tell them that if they didn’t shut up I would make them walk all the way home.  This did the trick with the front-seat passenger, but the sniping continued unabated in the back.

Eventually, after many hours of aimlessly driving about, time ran out and we had to turn for home.  After it was over I was told by my so-called friends that they no longer wanted me to drive for them on our regular trips, and that they would find someone more qualified to do it.

This was particularly hurtful as I was sure that I could have got them there if they had not reacted in the way that they did.  In fact, I later found out that I was not the first to suffer this fate, as they had had many drivers in the past who had been treated in the same manner and cast aside.

This might all seem a bit irrelevant and, if you are a regular poster on BBC 606, you might want to comment below and call me names and stuff but please bear with me.

Because actually it wasn’t me and my friends making that journey, it was England’s football team, it’s fans and it’s media.  And yes, they have taken a wrong turn somewhere and are as we speak turning against each other with frightening speed.

John Terry sat in front of the media yesterday and laid bare many of the problems within the England squad. If you read between the lines of the press coverage and the information coming from within Fabio Capello’s ranks, it’s not hard to decipher what’s going on.

Since the start of this competition there has been a growing, and almost universal as far as I have seen, clamour for a switch to 4-5-1 amongst the media. We’ll call this the Gerrard/Rooney axis.

It is very rare to find such support within the press for one solution, as usually everyone has different ideas. So today it was no surprise to hear that this was the view of senior England players as well. Could it be that the press consensus had been fed to them by the players?

When John Terry then tells the world how the squad are unhappy with the strict methods of Capello and that he is planning to have it out with the coach at a crisis meeting that evening, the press, or at least most of them, and pundits like Alan Shearer scrambled to back him, praising his honesty and forthright views.

Shearer, it should be remembered, challenged the authority of Glenn Hoddle during the final months of his tenure – “have you ever considered that the problem might be you” – albeit without bleating to the press.

Imagine the response from Sir Alex if one of his players had said publicly the things that EBJT said yesterday. Actually, you don’t need to imagine because Roy Keane did something similar. His contract was terminated faster than you could say Fletcher Christian.

Airing your differences within the dressing room is all well and good, but to do so in front of slavering press hounds is an unforgivable sin.

Terry is no longer captain, which makes this quote very revealing indeed:

Since I lost the armband, nothing’s ever changed for me. Off the field, in the camp, in the dressing room, I’ll still be the same. No one will take that away from me. I was born to do stuff like that. I will continue to do that in the dressing room and on the training field

So in a single press conference Terry has managed to openly question Capello, reveal the inner-dysfunctions of the squad as well as his resentment at losing the captaincy and undermine Steven Gerrard’s captaincy.

It’s no secret how highly Terry esteems the captaincy, and also how lucrative a position it is for someone who is willing to exploit it. That quote from yesterday tells us that he has a sense of entitlement rather than just a desire. It is also clear from his actions at Chelsea in the past that he is a budding Macchiavellian.

The news that last night’s meeting was anything but a no-holds-barred slanging match, however, suggests that Terry has been put in his place.

He might be able to curry the favour of the press by passing on inside info, and whilst there is the prospect of World Cup diaries and autobiographies to be ghostwritten, but he is rapidly running out of friends inside the England setup.

The players, as reported in today’s Times, are unhappy at the leaking of information and Terry’s claims to be speaking on behalf of the whole squad yesterday, which he was not. Gerrard, as captain, has particular cause to be upset.

Capello and the coaching staff had already lost faith in Terry as a result of his various indiscretions and his general attitude.

If Terry thinks he can successfully make a grab for power, or force change behind the scenes, he has chosen the wrong adversary in Capello.

Whatever the result against Slovenia, if Capello is still the manager come September he may take the opportunity to “build for the future” by clearing out any disruptive prima donnas from the squad.

After yesterday, John Terry will be firmly on top of the list.

Why is it always such torture watching England at the World Cup?

So here we are once more. This was an England performance from the darkest days of brolly wallyness and turnip faced coaches.

England were insipid, awful, incoherent, uninspired, unenthusiastic. It was a performance to match anything that France could offer.

They now need to beat Slovenia to qualify for the last 16, unlikely on current form. They certainly don’t deserve it.

After the final whistle, England were roundly booed by their fans and the cameras picked up this comment from Wayne Rooney:

Nice to see your own fans booing you. That’s what loyal support is all about.

I’ll leave it to you to make your own judgement on that and begin the inquest.

What is going wrong?

In this tournament England resemble a mortally wounded animal. You want to put them out of their misery but can’t quite bring yourself to do the deed.

The media will be quick to criticise Fabio Capello and his choice of tactics and selection. Yet those pundits who scream for a change of formation that would see Gerrard support lone-striker Rooney are the same ones who praised England’s tactics during the qualifying campaign. Nothing much has changed tactically since then yet it is no longer working.

Gerrard played that position for Liverpool last season, and Reds fans will tell you that it was less than successful. If we also accept that Rooney is jaded and struggling then asking him to play a lone role is not a smart move.

There will be claims that the disciplinarian ways of Capello are inhibiting and dividing the squad. There could be truth in this, but it’s not as if England’s Premier League stars have never experienced this before (Sir Alex anyone?) and even if they haven’t they ought to be proffessional enough to handle it.

Has something happened to fracture the togetherness of the squad? The John Terry scandal fits the bill nicely, but surely the importance of a World Cup should overcome personal differences.

Are the players burnt out after the combined terrors of domestic and European season? Could be, but this hasn’t been a problem for other nations. Conversely, England don’t have the advantage of a winter break to refresh their bodies and souls.

Has the media criticism after the USA match affected the morale of the squad? Again it’s possible, but equally possible would be the fostering of a “we’ll show ‘em” siege mentality.

These are questions to which there can be no answers until the presses start whirring on those oh-so informative World Cup diaries.

But the problems go beyond the here and now. The performance against Algeria was so bad that the blame cannot lie entirely with Capello. Raymond Domenech should accept the blame for France’s troubles, but he has had six years to achieve that level of ineptitude. Things do not go wrong as quickly as they have for England without other underlying problems being at play.

The bigger picture

If we look back at the England team over the last two decades, there are two moments that stand out. Italia ‘90 and Euro ‘96.

In both of these tournaments the team clicked to produce a run to the semi-finals. In 1990 England were able to capitalize on media criticism by creating a siege mentality, and benefited from a change of tactics midway through. In 1996, home advantage counted for a lot and England had a settled team riding a wave of national optimism. Both times Paul Gascoigne played a major role.

Much of the rest of the time England have flattered to deceive, putting in the odd good performance amid many indifferent and a number of poor ones.

What was the difference? There is no single answer to this, rather a combination of factors and circumstances that bring a team together.

When things are going badly for England, they are very often quick to forget the basics – passing, ball control, intelligent movement. They suddenly become sloppy, and are an easy target for criticism because the problems are so easy to pinpoint. Other teams often appear at a glance to be doing the same things they normally do but just lack a certain something extra – see Spain v Switzerland for an example.

Defensively they are less affected, and very rarely get thrashed. Instead it is always going forward that causes them to struggle, as they become pedestrian and predictable. Think of the matches against Sweden in 1992, Germany in 2000 and Croatia in 2007.

This is a trend that highlights a fundamental flaw in English football. Our game has always, from the very beginning, been about hustle and bustle, the Victorian ideals of robust manliness. It imbues our players, our coaching and our fans.

This doesn’t mean that technique and intelligent movement are not important within English football, but they are not the core values that are instilled in the formative years.

The Premier League is a shining example of this. Yes there are great players from all four corners of the globe who bring great skill, but the defining attribute is tempo.

Some matches are played in such a fury of pressing and intensive chasing that certain skills become almost impossible. The media trumpet it as proof of the best league in the world and it is how the average fan prefers it.

So much so that patient buildup play is often derided. When Wayne Rooney publicly complains about booing, it is because he remembers all the occasions when England have been booed by their own brainless fans for trying to build from the back. They would prefer to see England repeatedly try and “hit Les” in a way that for years has been the preserve of small nations with limited resources.

Capello has tried to instil continental values into the team, and has been successful in many ways. But the core values do not get overwritten as easily with the result that, when things are going badly, all of the old instincts take over and the bad habits re-emerge.

Suddenly the players are charging about like headless chickens trying to change their fortunes through sheer physicality rather than relying on superior technique to carry them through.

When players are at their best they can perform almost on autopilot, as the effects of inborn ability and training combine to produce “the zone”. The same can happen when players are at their worst, except that it’s the bad habits to the fore rather than the good.

This is less obvious in the Premier League where the effect is masked by the presence of so many foreign players, but it is there nonetheless. West Ham’s 0-3 defeat against Wolves at the end of last season springs to mind.

Players from other countries can turn to the basics of technique when all else is lost because those are the core values that they have been imbued with at a young age. They still have matches where they play badly but they are not prone to the sort of disintegration that England experienced against Algeria, and they are able to recover more quickly as a result.

For this to change English football would require a root and branch reform, from the Premier League to youth coaching in schools and junior clubs. Fans and media would have to be painstakingly re-educated. Football vernacular would need to evolve. Tactical analysis would have to improve, new styles developed.

I can’t see it happening, can you? In which case we should expect plenty more nights of torture supporting England at major tournaments, and plenty more dismal performances interspersing the passable ones.

Perhaps we need the Hungarians to come and beat us 6-3 again.

So it’s proving difficult to keep up with three games a day at this World Cup. Here’s a roundup of the last two days.

Honduras 0 Chile 1

Chile play an attack minded game under Marcelo Bielsa, and managed to squeak a win through a goal from Beausejour. The game was notable for a brilliant point blank save from Honduras goalkeeper Noel Valladares.

Spain 0 Switzerland 1

We had been waiting all week for Spain to ignite the competition but instead it was Switzerland who ignited their own chances with an excellent defensive display.

However, neat though their passing was, Spain played too narrowly and allowed the Swiss to concentrate almost entirely on clogging up the middle.

When del Bosque finally sent on Navas, Spain found that their crosses were met with a blanket of white shirts. Torres also looked off the pace, and Spain now have their work cut out – no team has lost their first game and won the world cup.

South Africa 0 Uruguay 3

Fears of another dull Uruguay display proved unfounded as the exposed the host’s limitations. Forlan especially was outstanding, scoring two goals and causing all manner of other problems.

South Africa weren’t helped by the harsh sending off of goalkeeper Khune – it was a penalty, but Luis Suarez made a seven course meal out of it, and the ball was heading away from goal.

Argentina 4 South Korea 1

Argentina had too much fire power for South Korea, Gonzalo Higuain scoring a hattrick. Suddenly the world has realised that the best thing Maradona has going for him is that the players are behind him in a way that they are not for, say, Raymond Domenech.

There is a hint of frailty at the back for Argentina – Demichelis’ blunder lead to the Korean goal, and there are now question marks over the fitness of Walter Samuel. Whichever way things go, it will be exciting.

Nigeria 1 Greece 2

A moment of madness from Kaita cost Nigeria the game and possibly a place in the next round. Having taken the lead from one of those free kicks that misses everyone and goes in, Nigeria looked comfortable against an utterly insipid Greek side.

After Kaita had kicked out at Vasileios Torosidis after the ball and both players had left the field of play. It was utterly unprovoked and rightly Kaita pulled his shirt over his face in shame as he left the pitch. Torosidis would later score the winning goal after Vincent Enyeama had spilled a long range shot.

Despite that blunder, Enyeama was still the man of the match after another string of fine saves, and it could be that he has kept Nigeria in with a chance.

Should Nigeria beat South Korea and, as expected, Argentina beat Greece, the Super Eagles would still qualify on goal difference with all three teams level on three points. Group B just got fascinating.

France 0 Mexico 2

The French resisted in the manner of an intimidated hedgehog and were no match for Mexico’s stylish passing and attacking verve. As Raymond Domenech, surely Liverpool manager in waiting, stood and watched his team disintegrating before his eyes, it was not hard to see where the blame should lie. He should have been removed after Euro 2008.

But the French players looked disinterested and unfocused making it plain for all to see that the squad was fractured. Laurent Blanc will have a tough task on his hands.

Mexico meanwhile looked good, and will go head to head with Uruguay to win Group A. The losers will face Argentina in the last 16, and I hope it will be the Uruguayans – that’s a grudge match I would love to see at the World Cup.

First it was Thierry Henry, now West Ham are reportedly close to agreeing a deal to sign Juan Román Riquelme, that Argentinean playmaker extraordinaire.  The news will no doubt evoke mixed reactions in the football world.  Personally, I think it is silly season gone mad.

Photo courtesy of Wikimedia Commons

Don’t get me wrong, Riquelme is a fantastic footballer of a type that I love to watch, but in no way is he suited to the Premier League’s or West Ham’s style of play.  The Hammers may have in mind the impact he made at Villareal, a club of similar stature in La Liga, but the style of football is so different as to render the comparison irrelevant.

Riquelme is an old fashioned playmaker, the sort who dictates the play and dissects defences with slide rule passing.  Great.  But this is a free role, and defensive responsibility is not part of the package.  Riquelme is a throwback, a “glorious anachronism” as Jonathan Wilson called him in Inverting the Pyramid.

With the breakneck Premier League pace and the need for constant pressing all over the pitch, Riquelme will very quickly find himself shoe-horned into a system with which he is not familiar and asked to perform duties that he has never carried out before.

Then there is the question of system.  The traditional Argentinean system of 4-3-1-2, with it’s playmaker lying behind two strikers, was designed specifically for players like Riquelme.  Would Avram Grant play that way?  He has tended to be a 4-5-1 or 4-3-3 man, with no space for a central playmaker.

So how does Grant adjust?  Does he change the formation, or try and fit Riquelme into his existing tactics?  In his usual formation, Riquelme would either find himself supporting a lone striker or out on the wing, and in either position would be expected to track back and help out in midfield.  Whichever way you look at it, it just doesn’t fit.

The second problem is a financial one.  After taking over at Upton Park, Davids Gold and Sullivan went to great pains to tell the whole world just how close to the edge the club was, with 110m of debt and an inflated wage bill.  Reports in March revealed that Kieron Dyer and Freddie Ljungberg cost West Ham £1m for each match that they played.

Yet now we find that the club is trying to find the exact same sort of players who represent the exact same sort of risk.  Signing a player like Thomas Hitzlsperger may be less glamorous, but it makes much more sense in both footballing and financial terms.  Riquelme himself was willing to play for relatively little at Boca Juniors, his boyhood club, but that surely wouldn’t apply to West Ham.  As the players’ agent said

But it’s come to the position now where he feels he may have to look at all the other options that are being offered to him because he doesn’t feel like he’s getting value for money in terms of staying at Boca.

So it’s a big risk for West Ham whichever way you look at it.  I can’t see this ending in anything but tears.