The Wrongs of Roy’s England Squad

The Wrongs of Roy’s England Squad

Roy Hodgson was never going to please all the people with his England selection heading into this summer’s Euros. The first to be displeased would have been the omitted fringe players, followed by fans who have their own varying opinions. Before dissecting his choices, it should be noted that the England manager has an embarrassment of riches in certain areas and scant choice in others.

The area where England has plenty of choice is in attacking roles. The most notable inclusion is Marcus Rashford. After suffering injury in the FA Cup final, the debate may have been shelved, Roy’s final choice unknown forever. That aside, his selection does need examination.

There is no doubt Rashford looks like the real deal and has more to his game than just explosive pace and an eye for goal. Whether by fluke or invention, Louis Van Gaal has unearthed a gem. The question has to be if 18 appearances for United warrants a place in the final squad that heads to France.

The national team has a history of young stars bursting onto the scene at major tournaments, the best example of such an impact is perhaps Michael Owen at France ’98. Could France in 2016 be Rashford’s time. It’s this sort of thinking that has made Roy choose him over experienced poacher Jermain Defoe.

The accusation of favouring big clubs has inevitably reared its head again. Defoe bagged 15 goals feeding off scraps but his two-and-a-half-year absence from the England scene means Roy doesn’t see him as a potential shoe-in now. Andy Carroll would have been another that could have offered something different but like Defoe, was never in the running.

There has been a suggestion Rashford’s selection is about acclimatising to the England set-up but he won’t make the final cut. Managers have done this before. Bobby Robson took players in his Italia ’90 provisional squad that weren’t in the running to be selected but he wanted to help blend-in the next generation of players.

If this is Roy’s thinking, then why waste a space on a player that couldn’t even make the first friendly? He could have let Defoe prove his worth.

The midfield debate has largely centred on who missed out. Theo Walcott will spend the summer reviewing his career choices. He needed to nail down a place in this season’s Arsenal side. He didn’t. After declaring his intention at the start of the season to be a centre forward, Walcott failed to convince Arsene Wenger he could be entrusted with the role.

That failure led to him floating in and out of the side. The Gunners had a disappointing campaign overall. Finishing runners-up masks a missed opportunity to challenge and take the Premier League title. If Walcott can’t become a mainstay in an Arsenal side requiring extra spark, he can’t expect to head to France.

Some have argued Jack Wilshere shouldn’t be there based on lack of game time. Roy hasn’t helped himself with the excuses he used for dropping Walcott (a lack of starts) when Wilshere has been absent so long with injury. Hodgson is effectively allowing club managers to dictate who is a good player, rather than compare those in his squad based on his own experiences with them. But Wilshere’s lay-off could be a blessing; it’s not often a player goes into a tournament fresh.

Wilshere has been on the radar because many believe, including here at The Reflective, that Mark Noble should have been included. If Roy was worried too many new faces in midfield roles (Drinkwater, for example) would upset his squad harmony, he should have used one of the extra three places to test the theory with Noble.

Wilshere shouldn’t be the man people look to axe for Noble, the midfield is full of charlatans waiting to be found out. Picking Andros Townsend should be applauded, but by the same measure, placing him in the squad should have been the axe for Raheem Sterling.

If Walcott was dropped for lack of games, how can a player that has only started once for Manchester City in their last 11 games is baffling. During that period, if not before, his form and confidence faded. There has never been a better example of a player needing the summer off to reset their batteries.

The attention on Sterling allows Barkley to slip without inspection after indifferent form, Fabien Delph to snake in, and Jordan Henderson to take his place alongside the industrious, if not always effective, James Milner.

When you closely examine several players, Mark Noble has every right to feel annoyed he missed out.

Defence is an area where Roy did have his work cut out. But that doesn’t mean we’ll go easy on him. Only taking three centre backs is understandable considering the riches elsewhere, and if injuries or suspensions played a part, Eric Dier could slot in as a makeshift replacement. It’s his choice in the trio that should have people worried.

Question marks will hang over Smalling and Cahill’s ability at the top level, this being the case the best course of action is to include an experienced – if underwhelming – alternative. That player exists at Everton but Hodgson opted for the understudy instead.

John Stones appears to be there thanks to the early season hype, his recent performances cannot be the reason he makes the squad over Phil Jagielka.

Like all elephants in the room, he has been left until last: Wayne Rooney. For experience and influence, he has to be on the plane. That was never in doubt. The problem is, as pointed out by Alan Shearer and voiced around the country for months, he isn’t England’s first choice striker anymore. He isn’t even second or third in line. His performances in deeper roles haven’t convinced he should start there either.

So Roy is left with two awkward choices: start a player based on his assumed psychological benefit to those around him, or have a disgruntled captain taking a seat on the bench.

We all know Hodgson will go with the former and play Rooney from the start. Whether this resides England to their usual fate or if the captain has one last moment of magic he’s been saving, only time will tell.

Greatest Achievement in League Football

Greatest Achievement in League Football

Leicester City winning the English Premier League completes a dream season for a club that battled to survival only twelve months previous. This unexpected success still belies belief, for months so-called experts have struggled to give reason for their insurmountable lead. A common denominator is that other teams have failed. This denies The Foxes the full credit they deserve.

The obvious comparison people have gone for is between the current Leicester side and Brian Clough’s Nottingham Forest. Clough’s side gained promotion from the old First Division and went on to win the title as the new boys. Throughout that season they had many doubters. It was deemed unlikely they could maintain the pace and stay at the top.

Sound familiar?

Of course, Forest went onto greater success but this initial title win has been the watermark for all underdogs in English football. Until now. Football was a different game back then. The gap between the haves and the have nots has never been greater than it currently stands. Massive clubs like Liverpool – who are the third highest spenders in Premier League history – have still yet to win their first Premier League title.

Clubs of Leicester’s stature are supposed to be happy with Premier League survival – nothing more. But they haven’t read the script this season, even after a bad start at Arsenal. It’s imperfect beginnings that laid the way for this journey.

Unlike Forest in 1978, who came up in good form and were full of confidence, they should have been riddled with doubts. A great escape didn’t mask their deficiencies. Sacking their manager, Nigel Pearson, after a series of explosive moments could have upset a fragile dressing room. Then they brought in The Tinker Man.

Claudio Ranieri, a man that had never won a top flight championship, was hired to ensure they reached 40 points. Many pundits claimed his arrival would send Leicester down, whenever anyone questioned this they were reminded his Greece side lost to San Marino.

As a polar opposite to Brian Clough, he remained a man happy to be in the shadows. Humble rather than full of Clough’s bravado. He was living the dream along with his fans. His humility sowed the squad together. He protected them from pressure, maintained expectation.

It was a case of all the pieces coming together at the right time. A manager with years of experience, a bunch of players with a point to prove, and the bigger boys struggling for one reason or another. That latter point shouldn’t be used against The Foxes. If teams failed to meet their personal targets for the season it doesn’t take away from Leicester’s success.

The league table never, ever, lies. Only three defeats speak volumes in a season where so many teams have struggled for form and stability. Some of the big guns may have been shy, but somebody had to take the chance. It was Leicester that came out head and shoulders above the rest.

A man that once tinkered stuck with familiar players. Unlike so many current managers, that claim to have an “ideology” or “project” as a cover for stubbornly sticking to rigid tactics, Ranieri evolved along with his players. They started the season almost playing like a Sunday league side, fast on the counter, looking like grinding out results was above them and it was only a matter of time before they became unstuck. Rather than become stale, they morphed into a side capable of chalking up one-nils.

It proves that cash doesn’t guarantee victory. The football goliaths should hang their heads in shame. Extensive scouting networks and the best facilities in the land have continued to show snobbery and fail to give talent within the lower leagues a chance. How many more Jamie Vardys are hidden, waiting for someone to take a gamble?

Naysayers have pointed to Leicester’s summer transfer spend but it is small fry compared to the likes of clubs expected to finish in the top four. With the new TV money coming into the game next season they now have the ability to spend. The sad fact is they will probably have to with the extra European games filling up their schedule.

Even if they do now splash the cash, it will be brought about because of success, not the pursuit of it.

The fear with Financial Fair Play was that football would be plunged into a status quo. That the dreams of fans up and down the land, clubs big and small, would be extinguished unless a rich benefactor spent billions. Leicester may have the new rich owner but it is good old-fashioned on the pitch ethics that have brought about the fairy-tale title.

The gap between the top and bottom has never been so high, the scope for daring to dream the impossible so low, but Leicester have changed this. Winning the Premier League is an achievement unlikely to ever be matched. Unless they go onto further success in Europe next season. But that can’t happen . . . can it?

It’d be a brave person that placed any restriction on hope following this triumph.

How to Sweep up the Premier League Tactical Problem

How to Sweep up the Premier League Tactical Problem

It may be regarded as the most competitive top flight European league, but the Premier League has been going backwards tactically for some time now. This is evident by the declining performances, year after year, by English sides in the Champions League. It seems top sides here have suffered from acquiescence regarding their place in the pecking order. But there could be a way to stop them from faltering further.

On a weekly basis we see goals conceded that, while making the Premier League exciting and unpredictable, are a tactician’s nightmare. Some of the errors border on the schoolboy variety; others highlight how the pace of the English game makes defending a thankless task.

The solution could come from – quite ironically – an old European favourite: the sweeper system.

Before we go on, it needs to be pointed out, my personal level of football coaching begins on Championship Manager (the version before CM’93) and ends with Football Manager 2016. As a player, my greatest contribution was the post-match karaoke for the Sunday team I represented.

However, I did take England to two World Cup final victories and scored a screamer when hungover once (and just once, making me the least prolific striker in history). But you don’t have to be an all-time great to have valid observations. Indeed, the majority of top managers were, at best, average players.

The call for Premier League teams to adopt a sweeper system isn’t borne from some romantic notion. I’m not expecting John Stones to be the next Franco Baresi, although, it’s not too difficult to imagine. It comes from common sense.

The reasons that made European teams evolve away from the sweeper system are no longer valid in this country. Some factors apply across the board, including the Champions League.

Take the inability to apply a successful offside trap when employing a sweeper. When was the last time you saw an English side lockout Bayern Munich or Real Madrid because of their quick-thinking high defensive line?

Moreover, the offside trap requires linesman to never make a mistake. Okay, perhaps they can be afforded a few. And in days gone by the odd error would have been taken on the chin. But nowadays we have an overcomplicated offside rule. A defender can play a perfect “trap” and be caught out by the second or third phase of play. He can lose to the official’s interpretation.

A sweeper removes this area of potential ambiguity. He just clears up and prevents shock counters and breakaways.

Another argument against could be the modern defensive midfielder already does the role of sweeper but in a more advantageous position on the field.

To a certain degree, this is clearly true in some cases. The current Barcelona team never look like they need a sweeper. And Pep Guardiola’s conversion of Philipp Lahm to the defensive midfield role shows how versatile and effective it can be.

Under Guardiola, Lahm performed a similar role to the one Busquets had in Pep’s Barça side. Sometimes they slotted back, making a line of three centre backs, with the option for one to sweep. But it wasn’t an in-game reversion. The role of sweeper is too complex for players to cameo in the position. These instances were an example of a team responding to pressure and adapting for short bursts.

But aside from the very top sides, the role elsewhere is either performed by charlatans or capable players stuck in teams that don’t know how to support it. Take Manchester City, it can’t be argued they have the talent to play the modern defensive midfield role. They also have demonstrated how deadly it can be at times. But sides from Bournemouth to Middlesbrough to Juventus, have all shown how easy it is to bypass their midfield.

When that happens, you don’t have a sweeper sat in front of the defence – you have nothing but empty space protecting two centre backs.

This lack of cover combined with today’s blistering pace means even the best defenders will be made to look stupid. Eliaquim Mangala would have had an entirely different season if he’d have been given better protection in front of him. With a sweeper behind, he’d have excelled.

A sweeper would make teams more solid in the Premier League, the question then becomes: How would they fare in Europe.

This is harder to answer, mainly because it reduces some of the advantages English sides take into a game. The play goes slower still, the intelligence of the midfield to receive passes from a ball-playing sweeper needs to increase, and the best forwards in the world can try and camp out on your defensive line.

But the current weak imitation of how to play their style is sending Premier League teams backwards.

Perhaps a perceived disadvantage of the system would help English sides in Europe. The sweeper is seen as a waste of a defensive player when so many modern sides play with only one striker. This is an illusion at best.

A 4-3-2-1 soon becomes an out-and-out 4-3-3 when a good side is in possession.

The extra insurance at the back can deal with the morphing forward line.

Many will believe it’s outdated or impossible to try the system now. They’ll say defensive midfielders shore up a team. But ask yourself: when was the last time you saw a player properly anchor a side during a Premier League match?

Marcel Desailly? Nigel de Jong, at a stretch.

The sweeper system is a solution that keeps getting ignored. Someone needs to try it. Failure to do so ensures the European dominance stays with the German/Spanish power share and the domestic game will continue to suffer tactical devolution.