“We wanted to nullify Ecuador and win the game, and we achieved all three.”

This is the logical and philosophically unrestrained wisdom we can now look forward to for the next 4 years. With one brief wordy punch, Steven has probably banished all criticisms of his appointment - the pack of journalists assembled before him simultaneously stockpiling a mound of positive reports to adorn the pages of the national press throughout his era to come. Thank goodness for the FA!! Well done chaps!

Before the World Cup started our team members predicted who would be the leading lights in Germany. (Click here to review these predictions). Now that just eight teams remain in the tournament Herr Hippo thought he’d give his team another chance! An addition to these updated predictions is the ‘Golden Ball’, which is awarded to the best player at the World Cup, as chosen by journalists. Eastern correspondent Jimu has also provided our readers with a comprehensive predictions package. Click here to read the concluding article in his series.

Herr Danny
1st – England
2nd – Argentina
3rd – France
4th – Italy
Golden Ball: Juan Roman Riquelme (Argentina)
Golden Boot: Hernan Crespo (Argentina)
Lev Yashin award: Roberto Abbondanzieri (Argentina)

Herr Ed
1st - Germany
2nd - Brazil
3rd - Portugal
4th - Italy
Golden Ball: Michael Ballack (Germany)
Golden Boot: Lukas Podolski (Germany)
Lev Yashin award: Olexandr Shovkovskiy (Ukraine)

Herr Neil
1st – Argentina
2nd – Brazil
3rd – Italy
4th – England
Golden Ball: Robinho (Brazil)
Golden Boot: Hernan Crespo (Argentina)
Lev Yashin award: Paul Robinson (England)

Herr Paul
1st – Argentina
2nd – England
3rd - France
4th – Italy
Golden Ball: Juan Roman Riquelme (Argentina)
Golden Boot: Ronaldo (Brazil)
Lev Yashin award: Gianluigi Buffon (Italy)

Herr Mark
1st – Brazil
2nd – Argentina
3rd -  Portugal
4th – Italy
Golden Ball: Ze Roberto (Brazil)
Golden Boot: Ronaldo (Brazil)
Lev Yashin award: Ricardo (Portugal)

Boffins at The University of Didcot have undertaken a bold experiment to establish the effects that different football teams have on spectator behaviour. Clinical Sociologists at the university played footage of football matches to spiders and recorded the effects that these matches had on their patterns of web construction. Dr Kold Porij from the University explains all:

Fig 1 demonstrates a standard, perfectly constructed spider’s web. This design remains unaffected when we show the spiders footage of organised, tactically astute football sides. At this World Cup, for example, the spiders actually seem to take encouragement from watching a side such as Argentina, and continue to spin their regular intricate webs.

However, the results change quite drastically when other teams are shown. Fig 2 shows what happens to a spider’s web when it is confronted with a tedious bore draw such as that served up by Switzerland and Ukraine in the second round. The spider started off spinning a typical web and seemed oblivious to the dour, cagey affair happening on-screen. However, as the game progressed, the unimaginative defensive orientation of both teams seemed to sap the spiders’ energy and their web-spinning accordingly became lethargic. By extra time they were completely drained of vitality – and they fell asleep before the penalty shoot-out.

The findings derived from the showing of Brazil games are also very interesting. When we show a Brazil match with the sound muted the pattern remains very similar to that displayed in Fig 1. There are a few deviations when Brazil score as the spiders seem to get irritated with the players’ pointing at the sky celebration. But these are negligible compared to the radical changes that are displayed [Fig 3] when the sound is turned up and the spiders can hear the commentary. The simpering and hyperbole spouted by the commentators about the ‘magic quartet’ really angered the spiders. The hard angles of the web and rhombic patterns demonstrate that the spiders were actually trying to escape from their own aurally tormented minds. They didn’t know which way to turn and became increasingly anguished.

It is perhaps England matches, however, that have yielded the most fascinating results: even if these findings are contestable. We showed the spiders all of the games that have featured England thus far in Germany, but unfortunately the laboratory technician we left in charge of observation wasn’t of the sturdiest mental constitution. During the screening of the England v Ecuador game he had a breakdown and trashed the laboratory killing all of the spiders. Fig 4 shows the picture that this lab technician repeatedly drew in hospital and we assume it is the same as the patterns the spiders were weaving before their untimely end. The long unbroken linear strands demonstrate a creature crushed by tedium and utterly bereft of hope. 

This could be Herr Hippo’s last throw of the tactical dice for World Cup 2006! Before the tournament we suggested that the adoption of a 4-5-1 formation could maximise the potential of England’s midfield. However, although this configuration was in place for the last game, the midfield still failed to deliver.

The only thing that can resolve this ongoing malaise is rigorous statistical analysis! WCH has worked out overall ‘form figures’ for our midfielders and attackers (from match ratings obtained in the Paraguay, Sweden and Ecuador games). This has enabled us to calculate how the team should shape up against Portugal on Saturday. The ratings are as follows:

J. Cole 7.5; Carrick 7.0; Hargreaves 6.5; Gerrard 6.5; Crouch 6.5; Rooney 6.0; Lampard 5.3; Beckham 5.3

These ratings demonstrate that lacklustre heavyweights Beckham and Lampard must make way, with the remaining six players then fashioned into a workable midfield/attack. To get the best out of this sextet England must retain a 4-5-1 formation but tweak it slightly from the 4-1-4-1 used against Ecuador, to 4-2-3-1. Hargreaves and Carrick have both performed respectably in Germany and should comprise a defensive midfield pairing. Rooney intimated against Ecuador that he can play as a lone striker, but he is surely better in a freer role running at defences from deep. He therefore drops back to to act as one part of an attacking midfield trio positioned behind Crouch. Joe Cole and Gerrard take up the remaining midfield slots.

England have shown nothing to suggest that their creative impulses are even simmering below the surface. The team’s shape must therefore be dictated by its performative limitations. The best we can hope for is to keep a cleansheet and steal our remaining game(s) from set-pieces or with long-range efforts. The Hargreaves-Carrick barricade can shut down Portugal’s attacks - and if we do somehow make it to the semi-final, this approach provides the best means with which to stifle Brazil’s free-flowing game. However, there is nothing intrinsically defensive about this configuration: the reinforced midfield base may enable the advanced players to flourish and the full-backs to push on. So if England serendipitously develop some attacking prowess, this formation will not be a millstone but a firm foundation on which to build.

How exactly has this team of workmanlike, semi-skilled, negative journeymen made it into the quarter finals of the World Cup? A truly shambolic display against a hardly awe-inspiring Spain, a walk in the park against the dismal Saudi Arabia and a skinny victory over Tunisia courtesy of Shevchenko tripping over his own leg. The performance against Switzerland was mediocre at best, against a team that offered no attacking threat whatsoever. World Cup winning form? I don’t think so!

Has there ever been a team less deserving of a place in the last eight?

A hippo goalkeeper is on average 3.5 metres long, and 1.5 metres tall. A human goalkeeper is on average 1.9 metres tall and 0.5 metres wide. This means that a hippo goalkeeper (parked sideways on the goal-line) takes up 29% goalspace, whereas a human goalkeeper takes up just 5%.

A human ball-winning midfielder weighs about 84kg. A hippo ball-winning midfielder can weigh up to 3200kg. This means that a hippo midfielder’s bodyweight is about 38 times greater than that of a human midfielder. I think we can guess who has the better tackle success rate!

Some hippos strikers have been clocked running as fast as 30mph! The fastest human athletes run at 23mph. A hippo forward is therefore 7mph quicker than its human counterpart - and has a surprisingly good touch for a large mammal!

Hippos typically live for 40 to 50 years, so there may be some who remember England’s World Cup triumph! The first World Cup that Herr Hippo remembers is España 82.

It may seem premature to write a footballing obituary for a 31-year-old man at the peak of fitness, who captains his national team, scored the winning goal that took England into the quarter finals of the World Cup, and who may even lead Hinglan to World Cup glory. But David Beckham is a shadow of the footballer that exploded onto the scene in the mid-1990s, went on to captain his country and become England’s first ever global footballing superstar.

How different it once was. Beckham announced himself to the world with a goal for Manchester United against Wimbledon, scored from the half way line. The media immediately cast Beckham as a world-class player in the making, and he quickly fulfilled this promise and established himself in the Premiership-winning Manchester United teams of the late-1990s. His ceaseless work rate and extraordinary crossing and dead ball delivery marked him out as one of England’s best prospects for decades and the spearhead of United’s second golden generation. The zenith of his contribution to United’s successes was the Champions League final of 1999, where he expertly whipped in the corners from which Sheringham and Solksjaer scored dramatic late goals.

His domestic form soon transferred itself to the national side. Given his bow by Glenn Hoddle, Beckham made his mark in the 1998 World Cup by scoring a now trademark free kick against Columbia, but revealed a petulant side of his personality when he kicked out at an Argentine player and was sent off. Many blamed Beckham for the World Cup exit, but he showed enormous strength of character when he started the next season, playing as well as he had ever done for United. Beckham entered his halcyon period – he was made captain of the national team and his one-man show against Greece in a vital World Cup qualifier in 2001 was one of the few performances this correspondent has seen where one player has dragged the rest of the team on to victory. But the cracks started to show during the subsequent World Cup in Japan. A half-fit Beckham had a poor World Cup (excluding the victory against Argentina), and his Real Madrid and England form since has been patchy at best.

Beckham has always played to his strengths, but even those now seem to be weaknesses. During this World Cup, a fully fit Beckham has become England’s worst midfield player. His lack of mobility, his over-reliance on long balls and his lack of defensive nous means that he has now reached the end of his international career.

Beckham – the footballer, the sex symbol, and the style icon – is a proud team captain and has been a wonderful player in the past. But, as international football at the very top level now requires fluidity and variation, he may now be at the end of the road.

A 1-0 victory over Ecuador progresses England to the quarter-finals, but does little to advance their credentials as potential world champions. The format was a familiar one: Ecuador presented little threat, but neither did England display any offensive nous. It required an impressive free-kick from Beckham for England to win the game. This performance therefore cultivated no further belief that England have the capability to breakdown better teams from open play.

It was hoped that a 4-5-1 formation would allow Gerrard and Lampard to play their natural games, unfettered from excessive defensive concerns. However, both underperformed despite a structure being in place which should have enabled them to flourish. In fact it was Carrick playing just behind the regular midfield quartet, and Rooney playing in front of them, who put in the most convincing displays. Rooney was isolated at times, but improved as the game went on and was full of confidence. England should persist with the same formation in the next game: if our talented midfielders can muster some collective enterprise and provide effective support for Rooney, we can make it to the semi-finals. But a realistic appraisal suggests that England will be departing the World Cup on Saturday!

7/10 – Carrick: A sound display with some good distribution. Provided a platform for the rest of the midfield, but they failed to perform on it!
Rooney: Not much impression early on, but showed aggression and dynamism in the second-half.
6/10 - Hargreaves: Secure replacement right-back, but no real advance on Carragher going forward.
A. Cole: Great block early in the game to thwart Tenorio.
Ferdinand: An assured performance.
Terry: An uncertain header almost gifted Ecuador the lead - regained his composure though.
5/10 - Beckham: Meagre presence on the right, but won the game with a great free-kick.
Gerrard: A long way off his best, although he was livelier in the second-half.
J. Cole: His most subdued performance of the tournament so far.
Robinson: Misjudged one cross badly and booked for time-wasting.
4/10 - Lampard: Made very little impression.

It’s a populist cry, but England would surely be better off without captain David Beckham in their starting XI. Beckham’s work-rate cannot be faulted and his delivery from the right is still impeccable at times, but these qualities are more than counterbalanced by his limitations. The accommodation of such a plodding wide player must lead to a diminution of the team’s impact. Beckham is one of the most pedestrian midfielders at the World Cup, and his performances have become increasingly two-dimensional, the nadir being his latest outing against Sweden.

As far back as January we were suggesting that Beckham was England’s most expendable midfield resource. If England retain a 4-4-2 shape against Ecuador, with Crouch and Rooney upfront, the midfield quartet should comprise Joe Cole, Hargreaves (or Carrick), Lampard and Gerrard. The mandatory inclusion of Beckham is actually what sustains the Lampard/Gerrard central midfield dilemma. This issue is quite simply resolved if Beckham makes way, and Gerrard is played on the right.

However, England look set to adopt a 4-5-1 formation for their second round match against the South Americans. But even with an extra berth in midfield available, Beckham is still a hindrance. Aaron Lennon provides far more pace and attacking verve and should come into the starting line-up. This broadens the range of England’s attack: the two-wide players, Lennon and Cole, can switch flanks to keep opposition defences unsettled. Much has been written about the requirement to realise the full potential of both Lampard and Gerrard, but on current form it is surely as important to optimise Joe Cole’s attacking role. He has been our player of the tournament so far and has looked really bright on England’s left-side, but as a natural right-footer he may also relish the chance to take on defences down the right. With added pace on the flanks 4-5-1 can easily mutate into 4-3-3 and an attacking triumvirate of Lennon, Rooney and Cole could be one of the best forward-lines at the World Cup. Beckham does not have the pace to play as a winger in a 4-3-3 set-up, so if Sven utilises just one forward, with Beckham included in midfield, England may find it difficult to deviate from a defensive structure.

As a one-paced wide player, whose primary trade is crossing, Beckham is something of an anachronism. Top domestic sides in England no longer rely on crosses to provide goals: yet at international level this approach somehow retains sovereignty. This is why the lack of a suitable left-footed midfielder has always been such a problem for England (whereas Arsenal managed a huge unflustered unbeaten streak with the right-footed Pires at left-midfield). Whilst there should be scope for a dash of dirty ‘route one’ in any side, David Beckham’s ongoing reign propagates a dynamic which exemplifies the traditional shortcomings of English football.