Time to Believe in England or Disappointment Once Again?

England look in as good a place as they've been for some time, yet Hodgson needs to be brave and embrace a new core of players if England are to have a chance of success

It’s that time once again, the time where the hopes and beliefs of a nation rise, where that feeling of ‘this is the tournament, I can sense it’ comes out of people’s mouths as their heart reigns over their head. Each tournament has provided the same format; write them off, start to believe, elimination, and then crisis discussion ensues with very little change afterwards. 

But this time we see a very different England, one very different to that which failed miserably in Brasil. We were told it would be a new start after that and finally it feels a new generation of England has emerged. After waiting so long for the ‘Golden Generation’ to retire Hodgson has now been able to focus on the new era. 

Much has changed since 2014. As this article explains, we see a new beginning for England, one of youth and exuberance, however can the tournaments youngest side really have what it takes to succeed in France and is there one more player from the Golden Generation holding England back?

They say winning becomes a habit and if the past two years are to go by, England have become very accustomed to winning football matches. They were the best side in Europe during qualifying, winning all ten of their matches, scoring 31 and conceding just 3 goals. A very impressive performance regardless of the level of opposition within the group. They played some very good football along the way, scored a lot of goals and kept their focus high throughout. We have been used to seeing a 0-0 or 1-1 draw against a Slovenia or Estonia type opposition but this England looked determined and, dare I say it, enjoying their football. 

A lot has changed since the 2014 World Cup and for the best. The retirements of Gerrard and Lampard have helped without question, their time had ended around 2012, yet through sentiment they were persisted with until they decided it was time. That kind of drawn out process, which shows respect yet lacks the ruthlessness which football often requires, stagnated England and Hodgson’s plans for progression. Hodgson should probably have paid for the showing in Brasil with his job yet the FA have a plan and they've trusted him to push it through. And in fairness to Hodgson, four and bit years after he took over, we now see a new team in front of us. 

Cohesion is the key to success

For the first time in arguably 12 years, the time Rooney broke on to the scene, we now have a feeling of something new and fresh with England. And truth be told, this squad which we are taking to France is markedly different to that which achieved qualification these past two years. At the last World Cup players like Barkley, Sterling, Sturridge and Lallana seemed to be the guys in which this team would be built around. Yet it hasn’t turned out that way. It seems even these players, 'the future' at that time, have been replaced by another group of players. Yes these players are still important figures in the squad, but the starting XI has found a new nucleus to build around, one which contains the fingerprints of Mauricio Pochettino. 

This blog has argued before that a strong national team requires a nucleus of the team to be comprised of one club team. The reason is simple; continuity, understanding and cohesion. National teams don’t get to train together enough to build the chemistry required to become a fully cohesive unit. 

Spain have shown through their Barcelona contingent and embracing the style of that club that they can build success on the back of the clubs success, using the national team as a continuation, rather than a separate entity. Germany too have used the Bayern core to build their team and style around, evolving tactically as Bayern have evolved. And it’s worked. Since 2008 it is these two nations which have dominated international football. 

It is also no surprise that these national sides have had a steady and consistent pathway from youth level international sides through to the senior teams. Along the way they’ve won youth tournaments and thus developed a cohesion and understanding of playing style and understanding each other, along with achieving success from it.

And these points address that word ‘experience’. The more experience you have of something usually the more you understand it, the more confident you feel and in terms of teambuilding and success, the more successful you can be. International caps are a good indicator to see what kind of experience a player and team possesses. Those who have played more understand what is expected and those teams who have played a significant amount of games consistently together as a unit know each other and thus play better together. Spain and Germany have had a consistent core of players for a long time, adding new pieces incrementally to help the team evolve, but never making radical changes which destabilises the chemistry and cohesion of the team.

England have struggled on all three areas. I’ve always felt that England lacked a strong ‘core’ of players from one team in which to build the national team around. United were the obvious team to embrace and build from during the 90's and 2000's, yet England managers never did so effectively and thus an opportunity was lost. 

In terms of youth development through the international youth sides the progression between U21’s and senior has often been impenetrable for many players, with the ‘most talented’ youth players bypassing the U21’s and moving straight to the seniors. The pathway hasn't really worked very well. The continuity and cohesion is lost by not appreciating the steps needed of teambuilding. But the system is improving, and credit to Dan Ashworth et al at the FA who have improved this system very well. 

Yet if the pathway is set down well, there seems to be an issue for England which is that promising talent is emerging later in the pathway. The development pathway for players isn’t easy to identify long term, players often vary in performance levels, some go, some go down and some stay the same. Players who seemed two years the future of the team, now have been challenged and perhaps even replaced. 

Look at the strike partnership which many believe should start for England this coming weekend; Harry Kane and Jamie Vardy. Two years ago you wouldn’t be able to justify having these in the squad, yet alone starting for England. Dele Alli is a slightly different case as he is regarded as an early developer, but truth is this time last year he had just finished a season playing in League One. Now he’s one of England’s guaranteed starters. 

It is great we have competition for places, yet this feeling of changing the team based on form (not saying this is a bad thing necessarily) can affect the chemistry of the team and how they play.

Utilising players to maximise their ability

In the past five friendly games England have won four and lost one. That's not bad. Defeating World Cup champions Germany and last year defeating the favourites for this tournament France 2-0 (granted under difficult and distracting circumstances). However friendlies aren’t always a true indicator of performance of course as teams experiment and subs are made half way through games. 

Take for instance the Germany game. At 2-0 down in a tournament you have to say England have lost. However this game is now regarded as one of England’s finest for years because of the sprit and character shown to come back to win 3-2. It is slightly naive to consider this game in that way and ignoring the poorness of certain defensive issues. But this is a nation which still talks about the 5-1 defeat of Germany as some sort of significant moment in English football. 

Yes, Alli was brilliant throughout the game and Kane’s goal was excellently worked and taken. However we can often get lost in the result and forget about the problems within a performance at times. That being said, winning breeds confidence and belief and it’s no doubt this result helped the players. 

In the past three games England have won 2-1, 2-1 and 1-0. Very much tournament style results. And it has clearly been a chance for Hodgson to experiment and gauge the best approach for the team. However this is where the problem of form, pressure to play certain players and stylistic issues arise. 

Vardy and Kane were the Premier League’s top scorers this past season, they should start based on that. Fair enough. But if that’s the case you then need to build the team around these players and importantly play to their strengths in order to bring out the type of form which they showed for their clubs. 

Vardy profited from quick transitions from quick direct balls over the top of the defence and from crosses from wide areas. Kane developed a fantastic relationship with Alli as the season progressed and Alli became a key assiter for Kane. Both players favoured pulling out to the left of the pitch from central areas to create space for themselves to drive inside with the ball and to allow midfield runners to break lines centrally. Most often these players benfitted from transition/counter attacking football. The problem for these players and a reason why they’ve struggled for England in recent games is that they haven’t been serviced like they thrive on. 

Spain played like Barca because they had a core of players who knew and lived the ‘tiki-taka’ possession game. And the national team thrived playing that way. In the 2014 World Cup they struggled as they attempted to fit in Diego Costa who thrived on quick, direct vertical passes and the clash of styles killed the rhythm and affected the mentality of the players. 

England have the potential to cause a lot of damage at the Euro’s, yet only if they play to the strengths of the players they have who on form. If you are going to build your attack around Kane, Vardy and Alli then you must play them how they have played all season. Which is why playing Vardy as a left winger who becomes a left midfielder when out of possession is baffling and unnecessary. Either he plays in the position he did for Leicester or he doesn’t play. 

Those who read the blog and have read my books know I’m a big fan of universal type footballers who can play in a multitude of positions, yet Vardy isn’t one of them. Vardy is a centre forward who wants to play on shoulders and run behind. He’s proven he can do impressive things when provided the service and space (which you would think intelligent national teams and coaches will recognise and surely seek to prevent this kind of opportunity) which he thrives in. If you’ve decided you are going to embrace Vardy why not bring Albrighton in and allow him to provide the service which Vardy excels from? Because it's clear England still lacks of out and out winger, particularly from the left. He also is excellent defensively and has been tactically very good for Leics. Again if you’re going to go for a certain style, go all the way with it, see which players fit that style and pick them not based on their ‘quality’ per se, but on their ‘effectiveness’. Of course that would have been mocked and laughed at I’m sure but Albrighton was excellent this past season in a title winning side. It wouldn’t have been that ludicrous. 

As for Kane, he is a better all rounder who can play between a 9, 10 and an inside left forward when required. He is England’s most complete forward and has the legs which Rooney doesn’t. He also possesses a very good game intelligence which is often ignored. A Kane, Vardy and Alli trio could cause a lot of problems. And yet, there’s a problem, and that problem is Wayne Rooney. 

The Rooney conundrum

In 2004 Rooney came in like a Vardy/Kane in terms of his attacking ability, speed and directness. Like Alli he showed little fear and worry as a young player, he played to his strengths and was tremendous (until he got injured). Since that time he has become England’s leading goalscorer and has been England’s best player for the past decade (on paper certainly, proven so at club level and in qualification, yet struggled to make the impact in tournaments often because of injury/fitness).  However he is now an issue for England’s progression forwards.

Gerrard and Lampard’s absence has opened up more dynamism and energy in midfield and allowed a better balance within the team. England now look tactically smarter in how they play. Yet Rooney is the last one of the ‘Golden Generation’ creating a problem, and it’s a big one. 

Kane can’t play to his best with Rooney in the team, as Rooney takes up the same kind of positions Kane likes to do for Spurs. As a forward Rooney takes up Vardy’s spaces so Vardy is moved out left more, and yet a winger he is not. Rooney as either a 10 or 9 slows the game down too often yet he needs to because whenever he tries to play quickly, often off 1 touch, he loses possession. 

Rooney can show moments of excellence (as in he looks good, sprays some good passes around and sees the passes because he has time) with time on the ball, which is why he likes to play deeper and why the midfield role ‘suits’ him more than a forward. But is he really good enough to be a midfielder? Does he have the defensive attributes needed, the tactical understanding to lead the midfield with and without the ball? Or is he just a luxury player who likes to spray ‘Hollywood’ passes from wing to wing, often without the tempo or penetration needed and often, like Gerrard, missing their target and giving up easy possession. 

Rooney may be the most universal footballer England have had for sometime but I still think playing Rooney in midfield is a little bit like his coaches thinking “well, I need to play him because he’s the captain, but I have better attackers with more speed in my team, who offer more and put more fear into defenders, but I can’t drop him to the bench, so I’ll just drop him to the midfield”. 

The truth is he is past his best, I think we can all agree with that. The problem is England will play him and will suffer because of it. If we want to have a chance of winning this tournament Hodgson needs to embrace the ‘nucleus’ of players from Spurs. He needs to build the team around Dier, Rose, Walker, Alli and Kane. All five have been excellent this season, they play a high tempo attacking game, they embrace the transition game wonderfully and they have shown to have a great understanding as a group of players. 

Dier has been a godsend to the England team, as we finally have a holding midfielder who is allowed to play (we had this player for the past decade yet it’s still amazing to me that Carrick was overlooked for so long, yet trying to play a 442 with Gerrard and Lampard untouchable in midfield was always an issue). Dier provides the balance and intelligence we’ve missed in midfield. 

Walker and Rose both show much more intelligence in their wing back roles, they show a greater understanding of their role and responsibilities (credit to Pochettino again for that one!). And as mentioned already, Alli and Kane have a relationship like that of the old 9 and 10 of the past. Breaking this up and keeping them apart is not conducive for bringing out the best in either. Add in Vardy for quick penetration behind and you have a scary and balanced proposition. It’s just where you stick Rooney in to that. 

And unfortunately in every area you see him limiting the team, not helping it. The only option is to build the team around him instead, and then you change the dynamics of the team. The style and tempo becomes slower, the build up more pedestrian and the chances more limited against a deeper block. The case in point was versus Portgual last week. Now I know not every team will provide you with space and chances to counter, better teams are more intelligent in that area. In fact I’m still amazed teams didn’t alter their style against Leicester earlier this past season. 

Smart coaches seek to limit your strengths and if England’s strength is speed and counter attacking then teams will let us have the ball more and ask us to break them down more. This is where a Lallana, Barkley and Wilshere can figure more, with their playmaking ability. However all three have their flaws as well as their advantages. And one has to question if any of these are of the level required to be regarded as a world class playmaker, capable of truly making a difference in games. The answer for me is no. 

Yet the big issue for Hodgson, picking up on the point raised earlier about experience and international experience, is that the "Spurs approach" leaves you putting your trust in faith in players whose experience with England is merely in its infancy. There are two issues with England. Effectively you have a group of players who at this moment aren’t considered in many people’s starting XI’s; Wilshere (30 caps), Henderson (24), Lallana (22), Milner (59) and Sterling (22).  Add in Rooney (110) and there’s a healthy(ish) amount of experience in there, with that 20+ caps sense of being regarded as "experienced" in international football. 

Those ‘core’ players I’ve suggested who many believe we should be playing don’t get close to the 20 cap mark; Rose (3), Walker (15), Dier (6), Alli (7), Kane (11), Vardy (6). What an extremely inexperienced group of players in which to build your team around for a tournament, don’t you think? 

But when you consider the games these players (minus Vardy) have played together in the past two years and you see chemistry and cohesion. And you see dynamism, energy and potential success. But if Hodgson went down this road and we exited (especially early) then he would be accused of not using more experience. It’s that double edged sword and needing experience to be ‘experienced’ but not getting experience because you’re not experienced enough. Could this core of players be part of England for the coming 6 years, it’s very possible. Walker and Rose are 25, Kane and Dier 22 and Alli is 20. Taking us up to the 2020. Therefore it makes sense to embrace them now, take a risk now and build for the future at the same time. 

As much as you would want Hodgson to be brave and take a risk you know he won’t be brave enough to go for the system and team which will bring out the best in the group he has, therefore it will either be a style which suits Rooney or he will seek to blend the two together, ultimately limiting the majority of the players and we will see a clash of styles like Spain were in 2014, and we know how they turned out.

Hodgson says he feels loyalty to the group of players who got the team through qualifying, but the truth is the key players who on are on form and look most suited to helping England achieve something in the coming weeks are late entries into this squad. Wilshere and Welbeck were the key threats during qualification and both have suffered with injury this season, with Welbeck ultimately missing out. 

Hodgson needs to ask if loyalty is the key, or if making the best coaching decision is the most important element for this tournament. For me he needs to brave and embrace the Spurs core and style and make the hard choices necessary to bring out the best in these players, not just for the next several weeks but for England's future long term. Unfortunately he will embrace Rooney, play a style which won't suit us and we will be in the same position after we’re eliminated wondering what could have been, with that sense of de ja vu hanging over us once more.

The Whitehouse Address @The_W_Address