England: the final word
by Herr EdWhy, when England can draw upon a host of talented players who match the best in the world at club level, has our international team only managed a thimbleful of commendable performances over the last five years? A word that has been widely used to describe England’s performances in Germany, which seems quite apposite, is ‘joyless’. Sven Goran-Eriksson may have made some dubious tactical decisions, but can one man really be to blame for the joyless malaise which grips English international football?
Several members of the England team consistently under-perform when representing their country, even against lesser opponents than they typically face every week in domestic matches. Steven Gerrard provides perhaps the clearest example. In the highly competitive Premier League he is the individual most capable of imposing his will upon a game and dictating the play; yet at international level he rarely intimates that he has the capacity to reach these heights. Do we really think that Gerrard is completely stifled by the tactics Sven deploys, or that the close proximity of Frank Lampard somehow diminishes his ability? Surely a player of Gerrard’s range and skill should have managed a couple of spirited performances for England over recent years, regardless of the team’s structure or the surrounding personnel. This is a footballer who has put in exemplary performances for Liverpool in several different positions. Why then should he suddenly require the minutiae of managerial strategy to be in his favour to play well for England?
We must therefore seek a deeper reason which can explain the disparity between players’ club and international form. I suspect that the pressure imposed by an expectant nation and hostile media pushes players beyond the optimum level of arousal required to realise skilled performances. An onus on success at all costs and fear of vilification means that performing for England is a joyless experience. The only release from the burden of expectation is victory; there is no pleasure to be derived from the means of attaining victory – playing football! The constricting impact of over-arousal is most apparent in penalty shoot-outs. During open-play England fail to work as cohesive unit, but queries over tactics and form conceal the core factor [pressure] inhibiting performance. In a penalty shoot-out, however, we are presented with a discrete unit of activity and it is apparent that England, more than any other nation, are afflicted with pressure-induced anxiety.
The destructive effects of this anxiety seem to weigh heaviest on England’s midfield. Shackled by excessive fear of defeat, it is asking a lot for a midfielder to reconcile defensive duties with attacking verve and imaginative link-up play. It is also interesting that one of the few players to have performed to their capabilities for England recently is Wayne Rooney - notably at Euro 2004. In the aforementioned tournament, Rooney was a highly confident teenager not yet beset by the neuroticism engendered by such a high pressure environment. Perhaps this is why Sven took a chance on Theo Walcott!
It may appear that that England, post-Sven, require a highly charismatic and Machiavellian leader to shield the team from counterproductive English ‘support’. But how long would it be before a Jose Mourinho-type figure was ridiculed and typecast as a bombastic whinging loser? The media will never change their approach and the fans’ expectations will not relent: playing for England will therefore continue to be a joyless experience for the foreseeable future. Pity Steve McClaren!
July 13th, 2006 at 9:58 am
Good points - how often have we watched England footling around forlornly until on comes a new and usually surprisingly young sub who injects pace and excitement? Beckham & Owen in 1998, Rooney in 2004, Lennon this time.. So can’t help but wonder, might the best plan be to send out an entire team of 18 & 19-year-olds?
July 13th, 2006 at 10:08 am
Spot on, while Sven may have made some dubious selections (Jermaine Jenas anyone), ultimately we went out because two of the best players (Gerrard & Lampard) in the premiership missed their penalties.
While people keep banging on about the poor quality of play produced by England we were a penalty shoot out away from the semi’s. If Sven had got there it would have been only the third time we’ve gone past the quarters. He would have achieved what Bobby Robson did and people would have regarded it broadly as a success.
People appear to have forgotten quite how often we have simply not qualified for major tournaments or have failed to get out of the group stage. The last time we had a similar run of three consectutive appearences in the quarters of world cup & euros was 66-72.
Maybe we will now see normal service resumed. I look forward to two years time when newspaper columnists start to revise their opinions of Sven.
July 13th, 2006 at 10:54 am
I think the Sven reign was a missed opportunity. At a time when world football is desperately short of stars and great teams, England could have snuck through the back door and stolen the World Cup. A more attack-minded coach and a little more belief and we would be world champions!
July 13th, 2006 at 1:31 pm
Argentina had plenty of starts and a supposedly cracking team as the press constantly told us - after their hammering of the mighty Serbia -where did it get them -exactly where we got to.
It’s not as if the most dynamic attacking team always wins either
2006 - Italy - workmanlike performance
2004 - Greece - organised, defensive uninspiring
2002 - Brazil, exciting (but the supposedly rubbish Germans got to the final again)
1998 - France - Zidane , but they played one up front
1994 - Brazil - so much lack of beautiful football that there own press were booing them.
England went out because we can’t score penalties, even apparently after they’ve been practised alot.
Saying that I do agree that if we were more attack minded then if we go out, at least at seems as tho you’re trying to win. But its not as tho every other winning team puts in a free flowing attacking performance - and thats my tuppence on the matter
July 13th, 2006 at 3:52 pm
England went out because they couldn’t score in 120 minutes against a rubbish Portugal team.
July 17th, 2006 at 3:03 pm
There are lots of reasons why England did not play as well as we had all hoped. Cosmetically, I think Sven didn’t do any favours with his awful team selection and pretty non-existant tactics. I have nothing against Sven at all, but was disappointment at his lack of creatively.
But I think the malaise runs deeper, and taps into the very cultural fabric of our country. Ed said a lot of fine things about media and fan expectation in his piece above – perhaps we should, as a nation, try and drop the now confirmed football arrogance English fans project and finally except that we’re just not as good as we think we are. Yes, we have some fine players, but a mixture of money and fan adoration have somehow twisted their thick heads into thinking they are more than just football players.
I can count on one hand during the past 15 years when England have played as a team – the Germany 5-1, a couple of times against Argentina, 0-0 away to Italy, 4-1 Holland etc – and I think this is McClaren’s main problem… how do get these people to play on a team. Again, someone mentioned earler that the last two tournaments have been won by hard-working teams. We need that to happen instantly. Perhaps it’s time to come up with a solid, creative system and fit the players around that, instead of trying shoehorn all the good players into a shit system that patenty doesn’t work.
On a brighter note, I do think England have the resources and the talent to potentially succeed. See you in the Transvaal!