England v Sweden
by Herr Ed
I’ve tried to remain upbeat about England’s recent performances, but this one has crushed my optimism somewhat! England showed faint promise in the first-half and shaded a two-dimensional Sweden. Most of England’s attacking threat came down the left from Joe Cole, and it was his long-range strike which gave England a 1-0 lead. What little promise England displayed in the first-half soon dissipated after the interval: they were bereft of ideas in attack, and in disarray at the back when faced with set-pieces. Allback scored for Sweden with a good header straight from a corner, but it seemed England were heading for an undeserved victory when subsitute Gerrard took it to 2-1 with a header from Joe Cole’s cross. But of course it’s impossible for England to beat Sweden, and on 90 minutes Larsson toe-poked the ball in the net from close-range.
So a 2-2 draw: undefeated England win Group B and head into the knockout stages. Ecuador should be overcome in the next round: a 3-0 defeat to Germany suggests that the South Americans may be the weakest team in the last 16. Our first major test will come in the quarters, and on current form England will be on the ferry home before the semis. It is possible England will raise their game when faced by superior opposition, but it’s also likely that we just don’t have sufficient imagination in attack to beat high quality sides. England’s five goals thus far have either been strikes from well outside the box, or converted from crosses - not a single one of them has been intelligently contrived. The injury to Owen also means that England now only have one fit striker of international standard - rather than one-and-a-half. But at least the excitement-free zone that was Group B is over, so we can relax and enjoy the conclusion of the more interesting groups! [Selected ratings below]
7/10 – J. Cole: A real menace in the first-half, less impression after the break as England lost their way.
Hargreaves: An effective midfield anchor - sensible distribution and strong in the tackle.
6/10 – Ferdinand: Composed and solid until withdrawn.
A. Cole: All of England’s good work came down the left in the first period.
5/10 - Crouch: Worked hard, but end result lacking.
Terry: Solid enough, but one notable error and defence was a shambles at set pieces.
Lampard: Failed to impose himself - some diligent work in the first-half though.
Rooney: Bright moments early on but faded.
Carragher: Respectable defensively, but no attacking presence.
4/10 - Beckham: Offered next to nothing: England’s right-hand side was toothless.
June 21st, 2006 at 7:40 am
I’m surprised that you’re not counting Gerrard’s goal as “intelligently worked”. It was a magnificent ball in from Cole. Still, Ecuador, eh? That must be do-able…
http://200percent.blogspot.com
June 21st, 2006 at 8:00 am
I think the Gerrard goal is counted as a goal from a cross. Although it was a fabulous cross by Cole from open play. I can’t remember David Beckham making one good cross the whole game.
Given that we supposedly have the ‘best crosser of the ball’ in Becks and one of the tallest strikers in Germany in Crouch I find it amazing that Crouch isn’t getting 3-4 decent headers on goal every game.
June 21st, 2006 at 8:26 am
I thought England played okay last night with Rooney, Cole and Hargreaves our better players. I would have prefered to play Germany in the next round though. I don’t think Ecuador were even trying yesterday.
June 21st, 2006 at 10:22 am
It was such a thoroughly disappointing second half that I’ve only just remembered that we played quite well in the first. Two very big positives to take are the performances of Cole and Hargreaves. However, the loss of Owen, the impotence of Beckham and the anonymity of Lampard are very worrying. I may be somewhat blinded by my club allegience, but I don’t think Neville can come back soon enough. I’m not claiming that Carragher is a bad player, far from it, but I feel that Neville brings much needed balance to the side. He’s a solid defender and an underrated crosser of the ball, but more importantly, he brings the best out of Beckham. With Owen probably out for the world cup, we really need Beckham to prove he’s as good as his sponsors make out.
June 21st, 2006 at 10:27 am
Apart from a few flashes in the first half, it was another strangely subdued performance from England - Sweden fully deserved their point and a victory would have flattered us. The verve and energy seem to be missing - we have enough to see off Ecuador but on such form how do we expect to cope with Argentina or Brazil, unless ‘big’ opponents force us to raise our game to the levels we are expecting. Is Walcott going to get a game? When do we introduce him, 0-2 down to Argentina at 70 mins? Could really use Defoe now.
June 21st, 2006 at 11:03 am
Hubris Alert! We’d be foolhardy to dismiss Ecuador too readily - okay they lost 3-0 to Germany, but that was while resting five first-team players having already qualified. If England defend as against Sweden second-half, esp. on set-pieces, can we really be confident of avoiding an upset?
(c. Doom-Mongers-R-Us 2006)
June 21st, 2006 at 11:05 am
Very disappointing, we looked (relatively) impressive in the first half, but carragher and Beckham on the right doesn’t work. Carragher is of course excellent, but unlike Neville he doesn’t seem to push forward and overlap often enough which means beckham seemed to rarely get into a good crossing position. In fact why didn’t he take Beckham off he was pretty much MIA anyway. Finally Hargreaves is given a proper chance and plays well, hopefully this might get people off his back.
The problem is it feels like we’ve barely progressed at all in four years - second half collapse and desperately defending too deep - how many times does this have to happen - Brasil, France, Portugal - we know what happens when we play like that against good teams - we bloody well lose!!!
To agree with Big Ron you really do have to ask what the point of Walcott being there is - I mean we all like surprises but any game he brings him into now, the pressure is going to be massive. Heh ho on we go
June 21st, 2006 at 12:47 pm
Beckham has become a joke. For a start he doesn’t tackle properly, he makes 50-50 challenges into 40-60 (by slowing down!) and then either jumps three feet in the air to get out of the way or makes out he has been fouled. He does the same for headers either by holding/pushing or making out he has been pushed/held. When has Beckham ever beaten a player? Never! He is too scared of being shown up to have no pace whatsoever and no skill one-on-one. Beckham may as well be brought on for corners and free-kicks and sit out the rest of the game. I played football from age 8 to 25 and not once did I hit the front defender with a corner. Beckham manages it 50% of the time. The other 50% go out for a goal-kick or a throw-in.
Although Ashley Cole performed better last night than in the previous two games he was still below the level he was prior to his injury. I’d like to see Wayne Bridge play the next game (chance of this happening 500/1).
Campbell played as if he’d been sitting on the bench drinking strong lager. Terry was ok but no better than that.
Lampard is now incapable of shooting on target. Is he wearing his boots on the wrong feet?
I’m glad the real Joe Cole played last night, the ‘Faking It’ lookalike who was on versus Trinidad was poor.
June 21st, 2006 at 1:25 pm
I don’t know about strong lager - i thought it was more the performance of a man on tranquillisers. Lampard did look better than he has done though I think - mind you if we are going to increasingly rely on him and Gerrard to deliver the goals then the former needs to stop driving them into row z.
June 21st, 2006 at 2:17 pm
Campbell was comedic and it was nifty of Ferdinand to pass the Klutz baton to him without anybody noticing, although Rio hasn’t used it all that much this tournament to be fair to be fair.
Hargreaves was a nice surprise and I think a mark of 5 for Rooney is a little conservative; really played well in the first half and was hardly to blame for the midfield fallout in the second.
I think Sven ballsed by maybe not giving Lennon a go up front before the knockout stages instead of putting Crouch on…fair enough if it had backfired then stick Mr 5 minutes of a game doing something worthwhile on in his place, but now we have but one pairing tried before the last 16. Also we should note that the 3-0 reverse to Germany means less than nowt as Ecuador rested all of their key players, and played without the urgency of the first 2 games, which seeing the mediocrity on offer from the Swedes and us last night makes perfect sense as it doesn’t matter who they face.
With supposedly a massive stock of central defenders that are the envy of all other nations, the inability to deal with repeated lumps into the box is also a major worry, especially seeing how Ecuador played against (ok ok weak) Costa Rica…who they also attacked with pace down the flanks. It isn’t going to be easy this one, and I don’t think a defeat would actually constitute a shock as it doubtless would have done before the Gold Cup started.
But still, the Golden generation’ll come good. Pity we only have 2 strikers in the country in this era who are worthy of playing and fit. Safe.
June 21st, 2006 at 6:28 pm
Key points from last night:
– Shame about Owen
– The two Coles linked up well first half, but some of that was down to how Sweden played. It was obvious that Sweden would shore up their right side in the second half, but Eriksson didn’t seem to predict that this would happen. When J Cole, our main threat, was nullified because of double teaming, he should have been moved out to the right.
– David Beckham. Dreadful, dreadful, dreadful. Utterly one-dimensional, off the pace and his loss of mobility is worrying. Our most ineffective midfielder. He now seems capable of delivering passes (90 per cent of them showboat long balls) in only a stationary position. Also poor defensively at the corners. Get rid, immediately.
– Owen Hargeaves. Very good I thought. Not your normal holding player who just sits there and passes left to right – bags of energy, quick to recover positions and half decent passing.
– Why did we panic when Sweden equalised? We needed Beckham to calm things down, tell the team to keep the ball for 10 minutes to take the sting out of the situation and build again.
– Rooney was decent, and was a threat. The passing was better, had more variety and was more incisive in the first half, but it was a worrying performance in the second half.
June 22nd, 2006 at 11:27 am
I thought Owen was rubbish and Sven was right to bring him off.
June 23rd, 2006 at 11:34 am
I can think of a couple of reasons for this split-personality England side, not-too-awful in the first half, totally rubbish in the second half, either :
1) There is an England Cricketer in the side somewhere, causing ying/yang instability and a lower order collapse
OR
2) Englands 1st XI just aren’t used to playing with each other for 90 minutes, In all of the friendlies where they should be learning how to play together, they spend 45 minutes together, and then all get subbed for the 2nd half, leading to the situation where the players don’t know what they are supposed to actually be doing in the 2nd half, because they haven’t found themselves in that situation before.
Also, they should have brought Trevor Sinclaire. You need a player called Trevor in a side.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:19 pm
Peter Crouch’s real name is Trevor.
June 26th, 2006 at 2:34 pm
Peter Trevor? No wonder he changed it to Crouch!
June 27th, 2006 at 11:32 am
Not Peter Trevor, Trevor Sinclair.