Carragher for England!
by Herr Ed
The main question raised by the England v Hungary friendly is: who will fill England’s defensive midfield role? In the first-half of the fixture this post was handed to Carragher who looked very comfortable. He won the ball well, looked competitive and confident, and his distribution was sound. I think it was an excellent idea to experiment with Carragher in this position, and he should be played here again against Jamaica. Although he doesn’t have the passing range of Michael Carrick (England’s other option for this berth) his unpretentious commitment and ability could be applied to good effect.
The BBC studio panel at the Hungary game postulated that Carragher wasn’t forward-thinking enough for this role, and demonstrated via their footage at half-time that he always played unadventurous passes. But France’s Claude Makelele is often held up as a template of the ideal defensive midfielder, and is lauded for keeping his passing neat and simple. And I lost count of the number of times Alan Hansen singled out Patrick Viera’s qualities on Match of the Day, which was accompanied by a montage of Viera picking up the ball in miles of space then passing sideways to a teammate five metres away. Unfortunately if English players approach their task in such a way it is considered ‘negative’. Every single player in the England team seemingly has to be an attack-minded creative genius. It is well documented that Gerrard and Lampard don’t click as a central midfield pairing, but we are still unable to accept anyone joining the midfield who isn’t a rangy playmaker: an attention-grabbing superstar must fill every position! The selected BBC footage displayed Carragher passing to England players who were in space - he didn’t give the ball away or play anyone into trouble, but this wasn’t deemed good enough.
Ignore such carping! Not every player needs to be a baroque maverick. Never mind that the rest of the midfield is attack-focused and we have full-backs who like to push-on; the English defensive midfielder is supposed to be a ball-spraying galloping cavalier scoring hatfuls of goals! But Carragher’s robust no-frills approach at the back of the midfield can provide the requisite stability to enable players like Lampard and Gerrard to find a comfortable niche further upfield.
In some sense, playing inferior opposition did Carragher no favours. Whilst Hungary did little to expose any potential defensive limitations Carragher may possess in his new role, he requires a sterner test to prove his worth to the team. Against a side like Brazil or Argentina, perhaps even a BBC pundit might appreciate an English player who can break up the opposition’s play then pass sideways. England can boast a midfield which comprises the flair and creativity of Joe Cole, Beckham and Lampard - with Gerrard just ahead of them. We don’t need another Beckham or Gerrard-style player supporting them. Carragher will do nicely!
June 1st, 2006 at 9:54 am
Pundits for some reason think England should decide on their first XI and stick to it regardless of the opposition. Every other nation has a number of different ways of playing, formations and personnel that can play in each position with different roles.
I’d be happy to see Carrick start against Paraguay and Trinidad & Tobago and Carragher against Sweden.
Personally I don’t know why everyone thinks Carrick is a great passer of the ball. Admittedly I haven’t seen all his games for Spurs but the times I have seen him play he doesn’t strike me as another Hoddle.
June 1st, 2006 at 10:15 am
England’s superstar complex shapes much of what is written about our national team. For example, in the Guardian today Kevin McCarra provides his views on the England line-up. He notes that Owen did not play well against Hungary - so the solution is to drop Gerrard back to midfield and pair Crouch with Owen. Owen played poorly, Crouch and Gerrard played well (and both scored whilst Owen didn’t) but heaven forbid Owen should be dropped. It’s a classic case of the ‘Big Breakfast Fallacy’ - named after the early morning show which kept changing its female presenters to address falling ratings, but no one recognised it was the irksome male presenter Johnny Vaughan who was the problem.
McCarra also queries why Sven ‘reverted to’ a 4-1-3-1-1 formation against Hungary. But Sven hardly changed his usual formation! Gerrard played in Rooney’s regular position, so the only difference was that he incorporated a defensive midfielder. This is a change which addresses the fact that Lampard and Gerrard don’t gel in midfield - a problem the press has been bleating on about for two years. Who’d be an England manager?!
June 1st, 2006 at 11:40 am
Since when was a midfield required to be either focussed on wither attack or defence. I was under the impression midfields should be ready to be any thing at any time. I don’t believe in ‘total football’ but do have faith in ‘flexible football.’
June 1st, 2006 at 3:41 pm
I have watched several games that Carrick has been involved in this year and he is a marvellous passer of the ball both long and short; threaded, lofted or threadbare. If we have marauding midfielders and attacking fullbacks I think we require somebody with his range to pick them out and alter passages of play as seamlessly as a Surgeon mix. Carragher is also a fabulous player but at the World Cup, against top teams and systems, it would be nice to have somebody who is a genuine passer of the ball, rather than somebody who does it functionally because that what his new role needs for him to be deemed a success at it. Also Carrick did not play well against Belarus, but what good did lumping him staright out of the team in favour of somebody who is a relative novice in this area do? Against Jamaica Lampard will start. Owen will start.
It all seems about as well thought out as a Charlatans greatest hits album.