The Beautiful Team - In Search of Pele & The 1970 Brazilians - Garry Jenkins

This book had been residing on my shelves for some time, but I had never read it properly, feeling that in some ways it outwardly appeared a little on the flimsy side. I am now more than happy to retract any such verdicts.

The Beautiful Team is essentially an examination of the celebrated Brazil team which triumphed so memorably in the 1970 World Cup in Mexico. As part of his project, author Garry Jenkins was able to interview most of the members of that famous footballing outfit, and also to take in the legacy and historical and cultural context of its achievements.

For some little time I have nurtured a feeling that the team of 1970 was a bit overrated, and increasingly became irritated at the "lazy", even corny, eulogies spouted by even seasoned and knowledgeable football pundits. However, this enjoyable effort has helped to partially negate some of those sentiments.

Although I think that the 1974 World Cup, and even the 1982 edition, were superior by many footballing parameters, my appreciation of the 1970 vintage Brazilians has been enriched and buttressed by learning some more about what made that team tick, and what made its collective heart beat.

There is much insight into the behind-the-scenes side of things, such as the meticulous preparation, the evolution of the team's tactical approach, and the personal dynamics within the squad. It is interesting to note, for example, the prominence of Gerson, both as a guiding influence on the pitch and as a prime mover in the cohesion of the ensemble overall.

Anyone wishing to learn a little something about Brazilian domestic football in the period prior to the Mexico tournament will also be rewarded. The cultural and social importance of the game is amply and capably illustrated.

It is worth mentioning that this work was first published in the late 1990s, so some of the observations and assertions about "modern football", and the game in Brazil itself  might not now hold as much currency or credibility, but still an intriguing read.

2014 World Cup Final - Germany 1 Argentina 0

Well, in the end I think that Germany were deserving winners of the 2014 World Cup. They were comfortably the most impressive and consistent team in the tournament, and it was quite apt that one of their substitutes scored the winning goal, thus emphasising the strength in depth of their squad. This excellent generation of German players finally fulfilled its destiny on the global stage.

 

Credit has to go to Argentina for making a genuine game of the final. Their shrewd counter-attacking game plan could not quite carry them over the finishing line, and they had several very good chances to score.

 

Those anticipating a tight contest were to be slightly disappointed, as it was reasonably open, for a final, throughout, although tiredness naturally set in during extra-time. I felt that at times Germany played more fluently than they had during the entire tournament, although they were possibly made to look more impressive by the nature of the Argentine tactics. The pre-match loss of Sami Khedira had the potential to be very significant, but if any team was equipped to cope with this setback it was Joachim Loew's.

 

Early possession was dominated by Germany, but Argentina were far from overwhelmed, and threatened down their own right hand side. The match had a pleasing tempo to it at that stage. The glaring miss by Higuain, after being released by a misplaced German header, will rightly be seen as pivotal. It was almost as if he could not believe his luck. However, at the end of the first period, Argentina would have been quite happy, having kept a clean sheet. They were still very much in the game.

 

As ever, Thomas Mueller was a constant thorn in Argentina's side, posing a real threat down the right flank, and wherever else he popped up. I thought that the "early" arrival of Andre Schurrle might have been a blessing in disguise. Manuel Neuer was as commanding and decisive as always between the posts.

 

At the start of the second half, Argentina had one of their best spells of the match, with Lionel Messi missing another opportunity around the 47 minute mark. Germany's fluidity had diminished, and their play was not as confident and crisp as it had been. 50/50 challenges were going in favour of their opponents. Argentina were proving disciplined and resilient, and one has to praise Alejandro Sabella for the way he prepared and set up his team.

 

In the final analysis, though, Argentina failed to convert any of their chances, with Rodrigo Palacio failing to take another one later in the second half. Extra time proved a physical ordeal for weary players. It was often technically "end to end" stuff, but the flow and elan were much reduced.

 

When it came, Mario Goetze's goal was a marvel of technique and composure, and was worthy of winning any match.

 

This triumph can only strengthen German football. We can expect that attendances and general interest will increase, and that the careful programmes of development will continue to flourish. It is up to other nations to rise to the challenge.

 

 

.

2014 World Cup - Greatest Ever?

Readers of BBC Sport have voted the 2014 World Cup the greatest ever....

 

Greatest-ever World Cup

 

One does have to wonder what criteria people are employing in making their selection. On the surface, it would seem that patriotic considerations and immediacy in the memory are the prime factors involved in this particular process.

 

Don't misunderstand me, I have greatly enjoyed this year's tournament, but I would hardly describe it as the best ever. Not the worst, certainly, but not the greatest by an stretch of the imagination. Yes, the group stages got proceedings off to an interesting start, with surprises and goals aplenty. However, I would also contend that some of the "surprises" were due to overall mediocrity and the disinterestedness of some players. There have been spectacular and exciting moments, but not to excess.

 

Some of the other results in the poll are disappointing, but not surprising.  Italia 1990, widely perceived by experts as one of the drabbest, least entertaining World Cups ever, somehow gets voted second best, presumably on account of the Gazza/Pavarotti/England doing well combo. 1966 was another tournament characterised by much negativity and cynicism, but because England emerged triumphant, it must be absolutely great, right?

 

How the 1974 World Cup, technically and tactically one of the most fascinating and accomplished ever staged, only comes in 13th place is beyond me, even when taking account of the likely average age of the people who participated in the vote.  Switzerland 1954, which had similar delights and attributes to 1974, is similarly largely ignored, despite the brilliance of the Hungarians, the high goalscoring rate, and the earth-shaking surprise in the final.

 

Of course, this is only a poll, and it's not the end of the world, but people do need to think critically and dispassionately.  Either that, or they need to start studying the football history books...

 

2014 World Cup - Media Coverage and Myths

I'm not sure whether I am just becoming hyper-sensitive to such things, but some of the media coverage of the World Cup, at least in England, has been truly woeful.

 

One of my major gripes is the ease with which myths and clichés are ceaselessly perpetuated, often by pundits and commentators who should know better. Just to get things off my chest, I will detail one or two of my bugbears, in no particular order of preference...

 

Not least amongst the myths is the notion that Brazil have always played glitteringly skilful, intricate and carefree football. They just haven't.  In my lifetime, they have lived up to the inflated hype in 1970, 1982 and, very very occasionally, in 1998/2002.  Most of the rest of the time, they have been like all other football teams - pragmatic, cautious, functional and concentrating on winning, or at least avoiding defeat. This endless "romanticizing" of the Brazil team has become tired.

 

One of the roots of the delusions of media and public alike is the undue reliance placed on short video clips and "highlights" of old football in forming judgements. Live television coverage has clearly become much more widespread in the past couple of decades, and this has led many to indulge in inaccurate denigration by comparison. During a live game, the humdrum, scrappy and "uneventful" nature of most football of all ages is there for everyone to see. Old and brief clips of spectacular goals and feats of skill leave us with the impression that plodding mediocrity did not exist in "the good old days", as it is filtered out of the collective memory.

 

In addition to the skewed perception of past "glories", there is an automatic assumption that "entertaining" and "exciting" should be equated with "great", "good" and "accomplished".  Concomitant with this is a resort to "all or nothing" thinking if the fare on offer does not comply with the commentator or "journalist"'s distorted expectations. So, we are urged to welcome shoddy and comical defending, and end-to-end basketball-style freak shows are valued above cerebral, tactical duels.

 

Pointless comparisons are made, and pointless discussions about superlatives take place, about the "best this" and the "greatest that". It is little wonder that the level of discussion across social media is of such paucity when take their cues from the lazy nonsense served up by the mainstream media?  The term "lowest common denominator" springs to mind.

 

There are some pundits who are infuriatingly pompous, self-righteous and overbearing, but ironically they are often the ones who deviate most pleasingly from the dreary norm. It is therefore often a choice between a nondescript but comfortable listen and meaningful content.

 

I will rely more on "specialist" media next time.  Mind you, I said that after 2010...

Netherlands v Argentina - 2014 World Cup semi-final

Well, the second World Cup semi-final manifestly lacked the drama of the first, although I would contend that it constituted a more meaningful and genuine contest than Tuesday evening's surreal exhibition.

Although the opening minutes of the match saw a period of fluent and confident Dutch passing and possession, I thought that by and large Argentina had more penetration and energy for the bulk of the semi-final. They seemed much more capable of getting in behind the Dutch defence than Louis Van Gaal's men did with their backline. The tactic of targeting the Dutch left flank was particularly profitable, although ultimately it did not bear fruit in the form of a goal.

After the interval, it seemed that the Netherlands coach had remedied the problem by taking off Bruno Martins Indi. However, the overall pattern and tempo of play barely altered until the penalty shoot-out. Both teams were quite pedestrian, with only the very occasional moment of inspiration and/or incisiveness to relieve the general monotony and inertia.

I found the tense and tactical nature of the match quite interesting and absorbing, although I can appreciate how the billions of neutrals around the globe would have found it less than enthralling!  The Netherlands team defended capably, but their colleagues further forward seemed bereft of real ideas and panache. Were the rigours of the quarter-final against Costa Rica still afflicting Dutch limbs?  That said, the late chance spurned by Arjen Robben will haunt them.  He seemed to half-stumble, half-hesitate, and general weariness may have played its part.

Since the commencement of the 2014 World Cup, the "experts" have been bemoaning the apparent demise of the defensive arts in football. Well, last night they finally got some proper defending, from both teams, although the exponents were not over-taxed by the creative players on either side. Robin van Persie seemed listless and only half-interested, and it was little surprise when he was substituted, so ineffectual was he.

The Dutch again had a good spell in extra-time, but rarely did they look like achieving a breakthrough. Dirk Kuyt as ever was willing, honest and conscientious, and was one of the best players on the night. The Dutch again faded, and it was Argentina who had a couple of late chances to avert a penalty shoot-out, through Palacio and Maxi Rodriguez.

Argentina were emphatic and confident in the penalty competition, and we may eventually find out more about what went wrong with the Dutch in this regard.

On balance, I am glad that Argentina got through, both because of "the Messi factor", and because they were the better team overall during the match itself. Germany, though, must start favourites for Sunday's final. They are stronger on paper, and will be fresher. 

Brazil 1 Germany 7 - 2014 World Cup semi-final

In four decades of watching football, that was possibly the most extraordinary match I have ever seen. Although I expected Germany's all-round excellence and professionalism to ultimately prevail, I also anticipated a tight, nervy affair, with the Brazil team sustained and lifted by the fervent support of the crowd and the emotion of the moment.

In the event, we were confronted with a result which will echo down the ages. Perhaps the ease with which Thomas Mueller slotted home the opener, with Brazilian defensive marking almost non-existent, should have hinted at what was about to unfold. The German players themselves appeared to sense what might be afoot, and went about their task with evident relish.

Brazil had got this far in the tournament through a combination of emotion, patriotic zeal, guts and good fortune. However, they were found out when faced with a team with the single-mindedness, savvy and ability to fully exploit their underlying shortcomings. Those who predicted that the absence of Thiago Silva would be even more keenly felt than that of Neymar may have had a point, but in all honesty Brazil would probably have still lost heavily even if their captain had been available for selection. They were that shambolic, especially in the first forty-five minutes.

It goes without saying that this result will prompt much soul-searching within Brazilian football, but the response of Germany in the final will be interesting. With any other team one might query whether they will have an adverse reaction of some kind to this somewhat bizarre semi-final. However, from the quotes emanating from the German camp afterwards, and from what we know of the players, we can only assume that this will solidify their self-belief, and make them even more formidable come Sunday evening in Rio.

Argentina and the Netherlands will have to go some to match the drama and the momentous nature of the encounter in Belo Horizonte.....

2014 World Cup - semi-finals preview

Some have declared that this World Cup has gone into decline since we reached the quarter-final stage, citing the dip in the "entertainment" factor.  This of course assumes that one became caught up in the hype about this being a "great" World Cup in the first place, and whether one falls into the trap of automatically equating "entertainment" with "quality".

 

First of all, teams cannot afford to take as many risks, and make mistakes, because one error could mean instant elimination.  What do the football "hipsters" expect coaches to do, leave gaps everywhere and allow the opposition's creative players the freedom of the park?  Secondly, the quality of defending, so derided by the pundits earlier in the tournament, as become greater and more consistently solid. Hence the relative lack of space, and goals, in the recent games.

 

I find it a bit puzzling why most people are citing Brazil v Argentina as the "dream final". Yes, it would be a dream to see the hosts pitted against Lionel Messi and co. in a feverish atmosphere. However, Germany and the Netherlands has equal allure and potency, and would arguably be a more interesting footballing spectacle overall. As it happens, in recent days, my mind has been wandering gradually towards the likelihood of a final between those two European nations.

 

Germany, to me, still look overall the best team in the tournament, with more options in creative areas, greater cohesion as a unit, and more energy and vigour in reserve. The fact that they will be facing a weakened Brazil in the semi-final only strengthens their prospects, although the circumstances surrounding the Brazilian team, particularly the Neymar injury and the Thiago Silva suspension, can not be under-estimated in their potential to produce inspiration from the hosts.

 

People are saying that the absence of their most talented individual will in some ways benefit Brazil, because it will force them to play more as a unit, and to vary their approach. This theory, of course, involves a pretty big assumption - that is, that the remaining Brazil players are up to the task of making such a revised approach work, and delivering a victory against Joachim Loew's side. Several individuals will very much need to "step up to the plate".

 

The emasculation of Brazil's attacking options must surely make it easier for Germany to concentrate on playing their own game, and fully utilising their manifold strengths in midfield and forwards. If they so desire, they could well dictate the tempo of the match. If Loew gets the balance and tactics right, then I can see Germany progressing to the final.

It seems that the outcome of the Netherlands v Argentina semi-final will rest primarily on what more outlandish tricks Louis van Gaal has up his sleeve!  In all seriousness, I see this tie as more evenly balanced than the other one, and therefore more difficult to call. Argentina have Lionel Messi, of course, but may be deprived of Angel Di Maria for the semi-final. He is their second most talented player, and after that the options begin to look a little barren in truth.

The Dutch have stagnated a little since their dazzling displays in the group stages, but Arjen Robben still seemed buzzing with energy and positivity against Costa Rica. Although Robin van Persie looked a little out of sorts, I can't see the starting line-up at least being affected by the coach's imaginative "horses for courses" initiatives. Further back, plans may be hatched in an attempt to negate the influence of a certain Barcelona player.

Notwithstanding the fact that it is my preferred final line-up, on balance I can see the last two standing after Wednesday evening being Germany and Netherlands.

France 0 Germany 1 - 2014 World Cup quarter-final

The self-appointed armchair and keyboard arbiters of footballing morality will doubtless rage about the supposed lack of spectacle and free-flowing fare in today's World Cup quarter-final in the Maracana, but I thought that the German team provided an object lesson in how to get through a tricky game with an apparent minimum of fuss. They were clinical, professional, pragmatic and economical, and got their tactics exactly right.

 

The hot conditions may well have dictated the somewhat sluggish tempo, and once the Germans scored from a set-piece, it was always going to be an uphill struggle for France. The French, when they fashioned promising positions, displayed a lack of composure in front of goal, and Joachim Loew's men were happy to soak up what passed for French pressure in the last hour, relying on their pacy and talented forward players to search for a possible second goal on the counter.

 

Before the match, I thought that the French might be able to cause problems for the German defence. Mertesacker's was omitted, and although he lacks pace, the backline did look potentially a little thin without him. In the event, the German defence played solidly, although of course they were aided by the lacklustre French showing.

 

Did the buoyant French showing in the group stages flatter them?  Possibly. This could have just been a bad day at the office, and they chose to have it at a particularly inconvenient time, for there are no second chances in the knock-out phase.

 

It will be fascinating to see how the Germans line up in the semi-final. Miroslav Klose was a touch ineffectual today, although he had a plausible penalty shout in the first half when his shirt appeared to be tugged. Will Mertesacker return to the heart of the defence?  They are likely to be confronted with a much sterner test by either the Brazilians or the Colombians.

 

 

The Class of '82

Not surprisingly, the past couple of days have seen some media comment about how the Brazil team of 2014 compares with the dazzling outfit of the 1982 World Cup - Zico, Socrates, Eder et al, and how the current line-up will not be remembered as warmly, even if it lifts the famous trophy later this month.

 

Don't get me wrong, I was as enthralled as anybody by the samba-propelled 1982 generation, and they are probably the most entertaining football team which I have ever seen.  However, we need to draw a distinction between "entertaining" and "great".  When all is said and done, Junior, Falcao and company failed to even reach the semi-finals in Spain, and had key, ultimately decisive, weaknesses. They had a mediocre goalkeeper, a poor defence, and no top-quality centre forward, and these deficiencies were hinted at throughout their stay in the tournament, before finally being fully exploited by Paolo Rossi and the Italians in that never-to-be-forgotten contest in the second group stage.

 

The present Brazilian team is a thousand times better defensively, has a better goalkeeper, is much better organized and prepared, and is much more tactically aware and astute. No, they don't appeal to the emotions and to the football romantics like some of their illustrious predecessors, but they may well succeed where the '82 team failed. In any event, does anybody seriously think that if a team played like the 1982 team in 2014, they would get anywhere? The game has changed, and in many respects for the better.

 

This all brings me on to an aspect of World Cup TV and media coverage which continues to infuriate me. That is, the often simplistic and shallow analysis, apparently calculated to appeal entirely to people who have never watched football before, let alone the World Cup. Can we not have separate "feeds", one for the neophytes, and another catering for a more discerning, nuanced and cynical audience?

2014 World Cup - Down To The Last Eight

It might be argued that some of the freewheeling spirit on display during the group stages disappeared in the "round of sixteen" matches, but the matches have been dramatic and compelling.

 

The match last night between Belgium and the USA was a marvellous spectacle. I thought that the Belgians subtly moved up a gear, their play was more cohesive, direct and threatening than it had been in previous matches, and the players in midfield and attack looked as though they had begun to believe in themselves, although they were frustrated for long periods by a combination of their own finishing and Tim Howard's goalkeeping heroics. Belgium have the talent and the options to go very close to winning the whole thing, but they need to improve a little more to realise their full potential.

 

The Argentina-Switzerland was less immediately satisfying from an entertainment viewpoint, but the tension was palpable, as the Swiss frustrated Argentina's creative players, and the South Americans struggled for ideas to break through. I have heard criticisms of Switzerland's approach, in supposedly not entering into the prevailing spirit of the World Cup by going all out for the win, but surely they adopted the tactics which they thought would equip them with the best chance of progressing?  As I watched the match, I reflected that this Argentinian team is, in terms of overall strength, not in the same league as its counterparts of the recent past, most notably the exceptionally formidable generation of Zanetti/Veron/Ayala/Batistuta/Crespo etc. The squad is just not as uniformly talented. It was perhaps inevitable that Messi would provide the inspiration for the winning goal, and the onus would seem to be on the Barcelona man to keep doing that.

 

The Belgium-Argentina encounter in the quarter-finals promises much, as Belgium are likely to allow Argentina and Messi more space to play.

 

Germany are still doing enough to win each game, and still appear to have something in hand, with more gears in the box if needed. The frailties in their defensive system were much remarked upon following the victory over Algeria, and will doubtless have been fully noted in the French camp. Although France have impressed, some might contend that they have yet to be fully stretched and tested, and they can be sure that the Germans will oblige in these respects. Do the French go with two fully-fledged strikers, in order to exploit the perceived lack of pace in the German back-line?  It will be a very evenly-matched contest, but my hunch is that the greater experience and resilience in the German team will see them narrowly prevail.

 

The Netherlands had to dig deep to overcome the Mexicans, but I think that they should easily have enough to see off Costa Rica. It is unlikely that Louis van Gaal will need to undertake the tactical manoeuvrings and innovative substitutions which proved necessary in the second round. Costa Rica will probably run out of steam, and the Dutch momentum and all-round prowess should be just too much for them.

 

The Brazil-Colombia is hugely intriguing and mouth-watering. Much will depend on how the Colombians react to their surroundings. If they are inspired rather than inhibited by the occasion then they could well capitalise on the anxiety and pressure which is bound to afflict the Brazil team. Concerns about the fitness of Neymar will only add to the unease. On the other hand, the hosts may feel liberated a little by their "escape" against Chile in the previous game, and could play with slightly more freedom and panache. It should be an amazing occasion.

 

If I was pressed, I would predict that Brazil, Germany, Argentina and the Netherlands will emerge as the four semi-finalists.

 

 

The Next England Captain

There is much speculation about who might replace Steven Gerrard as the England captain, assuming that the Liverpool man either retires from international football or relinquishes the title of captain.

 

When surveying the current England squad, there is not exactly an abundance of players with the requisite combination of leadership qualities, experience and diplomatic skills. There are one or two who may become strong candidates in the future (Ross Barkley springs to mind in this regard), but few whose current claims are too compelling.

Once the post World Cup "shake-out" has been concluded, Wayne Rooney is likely to be by far the most senior member of the set-up, both in terms of caps and honours won. He also satisfies another criterion, in that he is (despite some protestations to the contrary), pretty much assured of his place in the starting line-up.

To some people, Rooney might not seem like captaincy material, especially for the national team. So what are the alternative options? Well, Joe Hart is the undisputed first choice in his position, he has now accumulated considerable experience with England and at club level, and he has a pretty good public image. Although it is often opined that goalkeepers do not make ideal captains, there are some precedents. Dino Zoff made a pretty good job of it with Italy in 1982. The one counter-argument in the current context is that England, with a youthful bunch of players, lack natural leaders on the pitch, and it might be sensible to give the captaincy to someone in the heart of the action, in central defence or midfield.

Leighton Baines might have been an outside bet for the role, but his shaky performances in Brazil have not helped his cause, putting his position at left-back in potential peril. Gary Cahill has been mentioned by some, and in truth he does not have much competition for his position in the heart of the defence, but does he have the galvanising personality of the great captains of the past? 

In the absence of any other blindingly obvious choices, I would be inclined to give the armband to Rooney at the beginning of the Euro 2016 qualifiers, and see how he fares. Who knows, the responsibility might bring out the best in him?  If the team does well, and his own playing form is good, then there would be no reason to change the situation. As is often observed, the captain in football is less important in an overall tactical sense than in many other team sports, but his effect can often go beyond the symbolic, and help to motivate and inspire those under him.

It will be fascinating to see how Roy Hodgson resolves this matter....

England Out Of the 2014 World Cup

The hopes that Italy could give England a hand proved forlorn, and the Three Lions have exited the tournament with a whimper rather than a roar. Unlike most people, I do not see the prospects as quite so bleak.

It may be a case of interpretation, but England have been nowhere near as miserable in Brazil as they were in some other major tournaments (Euro 1988, Euro 2000, even World Cup 2010).  And at least this time around the ineptitude was concentrated more on defensive frailties than the usual paucity of creativity and technical skill.

Some of the more alarmist pronouncements of the pundits are a bit exaggerated, I feel. There is reason for optimism, in the form of Sturridge, Barkley, Sterling, Wilshere and Lallana. To my eyes, many of the shortcomings in forward positions looked to be a product of a lack of experience, rather than inherent defects in "the system".  Yes, the deficiencies at the back are a matter for concern, but the prospect of remedies in that department somehow always seems less intractable. Good defenders are arguably less difficult to find than those elusive creative and flair players.

All the same, the current England defence is probably the least impressive that I have seen in my time watching England, which goes back four decades. It was unfortunate that the likes of Terry, Ferdinand and Cole all disappeared around the same time, leaving the back line with a very threadbare and mediocre look about it.

I would be inclined to keep Roy Hodgson in his job, not least because there is a lack of realistic candidates to replace him.  Many of the players are still developing and improving, and more promising youngsters will undoubtedly emerge in the next year or so. It would be tempting, in the interests of stability and continuity, to give Hodgson a free run up to the next World Cup, but football in the real world does not work like that. Provided that England qualify for Euro 2016 and give a reasonable account of themselves, it would then be perhaps sensible to use that as a staging post for Roy and the team on the way to Russia 2018.

Another thing which England need to bear in mind is that football is a team game, and cohesion and harmony are very important. It is therefore sometimes necessary to leave out "star" players in the interests of making the machine operate more smoothly. Just picking your eleven best players does not always translate into a more efficient team performance. Putting square pegs in round holes, and picking "names", are not the road to success.

The English media is full of the usual anguished post-tournament talk of bringing in winter breaks, grassroots reform and quotas on foreign players, but I for one am not quite so downcast.  I'll let you known in two years' time whether my (very) cautious optimism was justified. I have been known to be wrong before....

Uruguay 2 England 1

Before last night's World Cup group match in Sao Paulo, I was reasonably optimistic that England would be capable of building on their creditable performance against the Italians, and getting their tournament "back on track", to use an irritating modern phrase.

My cautious buoyancy gradually evaporated, however, as the match developed. The shortcomings in England's defence were manifest even in the early stages, and Uruguay's team changes and the return of Luis Suarez to the fold clearly made them a much tougher proposition than the one which had turned out in the match against Costa Rica. There was much more purpose and cohesion about their play.

The sense of foreboding which had developed within me during the first half was partially ameliorated by Wayne Rooney's equaliser, but it was a temporary respite, and Suarez's emphatic finish for the second goal brought England back to earth, and reality, with a bump.

Were there any positives for England?  Well, Wayne Rooney was clearly happier and more dangerous in his more central role, and could have scored one or two more goals in addition to his close-range leveller. One hopes that Rooney will continue to perform well in the final match, even though any such efforts may prove academic.

Daniel Sturridge may not have been quite as effective as he was against Italy, but he was quite industrious and energetic, and never afraid to try something a little different in order to carve out an opening.

It probably won't happen, but I would make some changes for England's final group match against Costa Rica. How about "resting" Steven Gerrard, who has been ineffectual and lacklustre, and playing a midfield of,say, Henderson, Barkley and Lallana?  The team would have added zest and freshness, and even if England are eliminated, you would be giving the England stars of the future valuable experience on the world stage.

I guess that England's fate depends to some extent on the attitude of Italy to their final game, assuming that they defeat Costa Rica later today. Would they rest one or two players against Uruguay under those circumstances, and seek to conserve their energy for the latter stages, knowing that a draw would see them through?

If we assume that Italy will win the group, I have to say that, even as an Englishman, part of me would rather see Luiz Suarez in the later stages of the World Cup than England.  Yes, Suarez has his faults, but he is also a magnificent player, who offers more in a purely footballing respect than anything which England have to offer.

2014 World Cup - so far

Well, we have now had three-and-a-bit days of World Cup action, so how are things going?

 

I remember that around this stage in the 2010 World Cup, the general consensus was that the tournament had been "boring", giving rise to anguished phone-ins on radio stations here in the UK, speculating on the reasons for the malaise. Happily, the 2014 edition of football's global spectacle has started quite brightly, although there is a tendency to get a little over-excited. World Cups have that effect on people....

 

The football has generally been enterprising and positive, with a decent goals-per-game ratio, which is often employed (somewhat simplistically, I feel) as the barometer of a tournament's quality. One or two pundits have remarked cynically (or level-headedly) that we are also witnessing the further demise of defending as an art. Having said that, you can attribute the high level of goals scored in the World Cups of the 1950s to the prevailing lack of tactical acumen and defensive solidity in those times.

 

The conditions, at least in some parts of Brazil, should promote high-scoring games, as defenders tire towards the end of matches, and become more prone to committing errors. Substitutions could become key in deciding the outcome of many games as the World Cup progresses.

 

Of the teams which we have seen so far, Brazil clearly have abundant talent, even if they were deemed to be slightly fortunate in their opener against Croatia. Holland have potent attacking resources, although the overall level of quality and flair in their line-up is perhaps not as sparkling as some Dutch outfits of the past.

 

Before the tournament, I thought to myself that France might do well. Nobody was talking about them, the discord and disunity of the last World Cup was gone, and a quite confidence was being exuded. In their game against Honduras they played some constructive football, with a few of the younger, more hungry players really catching the eye. Deschamps has achieved some real cohesion, it would appear.

 

A mantra before every World Cup is "never write off the Italians", and in their game against England they proved the wisdom of this maxim. Playing in their compact and economical style, they gave England, and other teams, plenty of food for thought, Andrea Pirlo strolling imperiously around the pitch as if he was in the local park on a Sunday afternoon.

 

Although the football has been entertaining, the undoubted highlight of the World Cup thus far has been the employment of "vanishing spray" by referees, to discourage encroachment by defenders at free-kicks. This has to be the most important innovation in football in decades, and a significant boost to the level of entertainment!

 

 

 

 

 

 

Early World Cup Memories

With the football World Cup rapidly approaching, I am trying to summon up some enthusiasm for the tournament. Even the current flurry of squad announcements has not totally succeeded in this regard, and my next resort may be to watch some old footage. Of course, wallowing in nostalgia may also aid the process...

 

I was a mere toddler when the much-mythologized 1970 World Cup took place, so the 1974 version is the first one which I can vaguely remember, although clear recollections are cloudy and elusive. By 1978 I was a fully paid-up football fanatic, and so Argentina 78 was a big deal, although I was oblivious to some of the manifold unsavoury aspects of that tournament, and the fact that in strict footballing terms, it was quite mediocre.

 

Because of the time difference between South America and Europe, many of the games were televised live late in the evening here, and satellite technology was thankfully still a touch rough and ready, so the picture quality was not always pristine, and the commentary came through in that gloriously evocative "telephone line" flavour. Digital technology soon arrived and ruined everything....

 

My chief recollections of the 1978 edition are falling asleep shortly after the start of the epic Argentina v France match, and being told the next morning by my brother of the numerous dramas which had unfolded. Another incident which lingers in the mind is the France v Hungary encounter, where a clash of kits resulted in the French players donning the shirts of a local club team.  In another match, a pitch-side microphone picked up a piercing cry of pain from one of the Italy players who had been heavily fouled - I think it was Renato Zaccarelli. Of course, any summary of 1978 would not be complete without mention of Archie Gemmill's slalomesque exploits against the Netherlands, or indeed of the two remarkable long-range goals scored by Arie Haan, or the "plaster-cast" gamesmanship immediately before kick-off in the final...

 

A central part of World Cup culture in those days was the Panini sticker album. Agonisingly, my older brother collected all the stickers in 1978 except one.  I recall that the missing player was one of the Scotland squad;it might have been someone like Bruce Rioch or Don Masson...

 

In 1982, I was at secondary school, and I vividly recall the customary rush home after lessons to catch the beginning of the afternoon game. It was faintly surreal to see England involved, after their absence in the previous two World Cups, and many must have found this disorienting. The preponderance of bubble perms and excessively tight shorts could not disguise our abject mediocrity, despite a misleading opening win against France. We duly ran out of steam and ideas in the second phase games. Unbeaten, yes, but that was really meaningless.

 

Spain 1982 was a curate's egg, featuring some excellent football alongside some less appetizing aspects. The Brazil team of that year entranced everyone with its panache and flair, and I was one of many who struggled to come to terms with their exit at the hands of Italy. Even then, I failed to grasp the idea that a team needed to defend as well as attack in order to prevail against the better opposition. It was only with the benefit of time and discernment that I was able to recognise the overall quality of that Italian team, and the fact that they were very worthy winners.

 

People generally tend to wax lyrical, and make inflated claims, about "cultural" events which occurred just as their consciousness of those types of events was dawning. 1978 and 1982, I can see now, were nowhere near as good as 1974. Indeed, I think there is a strong argument for saying that 1974 was the best World Cup, in terms of the strength in depth of the teams involved, and the overall quality and tactical interest of the football on display. 1970 and 1986 were both lavishly entertaining, but the altitude and heat distorted matters, leading to tired defences and innumerable mistakes. 1974 was "proper" football, physically robust but enterprising.

I just hope that the 2014 competition approaches the glories of the past.

 

 

 

 

 

 

2014 World Cup Draw

I often think that the draw for football's World Cup Finals has more suspense and excitement about it than the tournament itself. The prolonged and tedious nature of the preliminaries and ceremonies, the esoteric and incomprehensible draw itself, and the conspiracy theories and forebodings of doom which customarily follow the conclusion of the proceedings.

Mercifully, today's draw in Brazil seemed to go by quickly, and it has thrown up some intriguing match-ups for the group stages, and possibilities for the later stages. As the draw unfolded, though, my over-riding sentiment was that the draw felt a little unbalanced, with some groups packed with strong teams, and others looking weak, at least on paper. The seedings undoubtedly contributed to this state of affairs, but at least it has spiced things up;for example, Switzerland now look like a good bet to reach the quarter-finals...

Firstly, England have been handed a very arduous group, being drawn against Uruguay, Costa Rica and Italy.  As England's first match is against Italy, some hopes might be pinned on the Azzurri making their traditionally sluggish beginning to a major tournament! The Uruguayans are brimming with talent and confidence, and Costa Rica will in theory be favoured by factors of climate and support.  In fairness, England were probably "due" a tough draw, having been given some comparatively easy tasks in recent tournaments, not always capitalizing on them.

There will be a scramble to finish on top of Group B, in order to avoid the likelihood of facing Brazil in the second round. The hosts facing the Netherlands at that stage would be a very enticing prospect, although the talented Chileans should not be under-estimated.  I am assuming here that Spain will top Group B, but I wonder whether by next summer the World and European champions will be even further past their peak....

Groups C and E both look quite even, and a case can be made for almost all of the countries in those groups qualifying for the knock-out phase.  Bosnia-Herzegovina must have a good chance of emerging as second in Group F, assuming that Argentina finish in first place there.

I have taken the liberty of doing some quick calculations, to see who is most likely to progress to the latter stages of the tournament. The upshot was a semi-final line up of Brazil v Germany and Spain v Argentina. Hardly earth-shattering, I know, but the reality of World Cups rarely conforms to deliberations conducted on a cold evening during the previous December. The vagaries of form, climate, injuries and luck will all play a part.....

Back Home - England and the 1970 World Cup - Jeff Dawson

Continuing the thread of a few of my recent posts, another football book which is well worth checking out is Back Home, Jeff Dawson's immensely readable and vivid account of England's campaign in the 1970 World Cup in Mexico.

When reading this book, I was almost persuaded that I had been transported back in time, and was looking over the shoulders of the members of the England party, and bearing personal witness to those dramatic and poignant events.

The author also weaves into the tale a sense of the changing times in the wider world, and how these were reflected in the realms of football. He evokes the tenor of the era; a period of uncertainty and opportunity, innovation and upheaval. Football was enduring its own parallel growing pains with the onset of commercialism, the increasing role and power of television, and a perception that artistry was being negated and marginalized by violent play, negativity and "pragmatism".

To be frank, I found the "behind-the-scenes" parts of Back Home, dealing with England's preparations and training camp, much more entertaining than what happened out on the pitch. The main incidents in England's four contests in the tournament have been recounted a million times over, but many aspects of the build-up and aftermath were less familiar.

The story is partially told through the eyes of the media and press, perhaps aptly, because 1970 was when the media and commercial circus and hype surrounding the World Cup really began in earnest.  Colour television pictures, beamed by satellite into every living room, coupled with the "reflected glory" from 1966, undoubtedly contributed to this. Dawson deftly conveys how the World Cup had become a global communal celebration, which of course it remains to this day. The novelty and freshness of this concept at that time is one of the things which created a mythic glow around the 1970 event.

The Bobby Moore/Bogota saga is covered in some detail, the most comprehensive account of it which I have encountered.

Alf Ramsey is treated quite sympathetically overall, I think, although the book does not shrink from pointing out his occasional lapses, and the shortcomings in his team from an aesthetic standpoint.

The over-riding feeling which emerges from this highly enjoyable work is how well prepared England were for the 1970 event, even more so than for 1966. Much is said about how they addressed the problems of altitude and heat. The first-choice eleven, and indeed the overall squad, was stronger, more experienced and more resilient than before. However, I think that the team fell victim to its own compactness. The preparation may have been too meticulous and rigid, failing to allow some slack for unforeseen occurrences, and possibly omitting any credible Plan B. The lack of wingers, and the consequent burden placed on overlapping full-backs, were also factors in the downfall.

Overall, Back Home really brings to life a fondly remembered event, being evocative, amusing and informative. Highly recommended.

England 2 Poland 0

Last night's match was agony to watch, and it can't have been much fun for the England players either. The expressions on the faces after the final whistle betrayed relief more than jubilation, of a great weight being removed from the collective shoulders. Anyway, the important thing is that qualification has been secured, and the hard work and planning for Brazil 2014 can commence in earnest.

On paper at least, England picked a more compact and solid formation, but still the defence was much more of a worry than the creative element of the team. In the event, the feared threat from Robert Lewandowski barely materialised.  Also, England did not require "impact" substitutes, but men to replace tired legs and help to run down the clock...

The game was surprisingly open and stretched for long periods, which was great from an entertainment perspective, but surely not totally to the liking of Roy Hodgson. Whilst England sustained some of the good habits which had been a feature of the match against Montenegro, particularly the interplay involving the front four players, in other respects they were patchy and tentative. The defence just about did enough whenever a threat presented itself, but no more than that.

Once again, Andros Townsend was a breath of fresh air with his uninhibited and direct runs at the opposition defenders. As has often happened in the past, England have discovered a valuable and potent new weapon from an unexpected source ahead of a major tournament. It is hard to see how, fitness permitting, he can be ignored when the party of twenty three is chosen for Brazil.

Much of the second half became very worrying for England, and it was a case of battening down the hatches, and hoping for the storm to pass. It seemed that Poland eventually lost heart and morale when they failed to convert their spells of pressure and dominance into goals. Once this occurred, it was a case of bolstering the midfield with fresh substitutes, avoiding mistakes and using up the remaining seconds.

It was appropriate that Steven Gerrard scored the crucial second goal, as the skipper has shown real commitment to the cause, in his understated way.  Quiet, unfussy leadership, in a similar vein to Roy Hodgson.

Thoughts naturally turn now to next summer, England's prospects, and the likely shape and composition of the team and squad which will go to the World Cup. If Gerrard, Lampard, Rooney and Cole are removed, then this group looks desperately short on experience. Lampard is clearly in the autumn of his career, but will Hodgson feel obliged to take him to Brazil, purely for his experience?. He may yet have work to do to fully cement his place.

The Baines versus Cole debate is very intriguing, and a healthy dilemma to have. It is one of the few areas of the pitch where England have an embarrassment of riches.  It would be very harsh on the Everton man to have to step down, despite Cole's excellence and consistency over a decade or more. Baines looks very much at home in the England side, and I would be tempted to give him the nod. The competition from Cole should spur him to maintain, or even surpass, his current standard.

Another issue which entered my mind when watching the Poland game was whether England need more of a focal point in attack, to hold the ball up.  Whilst the system exhibited in the past two matches has been effective and exciting, it is always nice to have a Plan B, particularly if the stronger nations work out how to effectively combat the likes of Welbeck and Sturridge.  In citing the need for a conventional "centre forward" however, one has to confess that no strong candidates for such a role exactly scream out for consideration!

More fine-tuning in friendlies will hopefully help England to find the correct balance, and the feasibility of the current style in Brazilian conditions will also have to be factored in. England have sometimes struggled when trying to maintain a high tempo mode of playe in warmer climes, although it seems that the weather in Brazil will not be uniformly hot as it was in, say, the two Mexico World Cups of the past.

It looks though as though Hodgson and the players have engendered a good spirit in the camp.  This group of players is noticeably less flamboyant and "showbiz" than previous generations, and this may be no bad thing. There appears to be a real determination to do well, coupled with realism and pragmatism.  You never know, the Three Lions might just surprise a few people....

England 4 Montenegro 1

This was the most nervous I have been whilst watching an England game for a very long time, but after some alarms and nervy passages, the victory seemed relatively comfortable in the end.

England's brisk start, as embodied by the positive runs of Andros Townsend, turned out to be illusory.  The intent was not really matched by end-product, and soon a measure of frustration and impatience entered into England's play, and the crowd became restless. That all too familiar malaise of the national team, the grip of fear and anxiety, has not been remedied.

The widespread wisdom was that an opening goal by England would dissipate much of the tension. In the event, this did not occur. Even after Wayne Rooney's effort early in the second period, England were ill-at-ease.  Even the comical second goal did not fully liberate England.  Watching them is seldom a straightforward or serene business, and the Montenegrins, who showed occasional glimpses of real quality, duly pulled one back!

At times, another old England failing showed itself; the inability to control proceedings by retaining possession in order to soak up pressure and draw the sting from teams. The initiative is surrendered too regularly for comfort.

Andros Townsend really deserved his goal, having shown enterprise and drive all evening, and crucially lacking the inhibitions of some of his colleagues.

This match did throw up some intriguing questions about the shape of the England team going forward. The Rooney-Welbeck-Sturridge axis shows genuine promise, with the kind of interplay and pace which is required to unlock defences at international level. If Townsend manages to consolidate his position, is it not desirable in this system for a proper holding midfielder to be introduced to this system of play?  This would help to provide a more durable platform for the attackers. In addition, it would give some insurance in a defensive sense.  Whatever our technical deficiencies may have been in recent decades, England have usually been quite solid at the back, giving away comparatively few goals. The current occupants of the back five do not quite inspire such confidence.

I would be tempted to be more radical still, and have perhaps two "holding" players in the middle of the field, and leave out one or two prestigious names to accommodate this innovation.  I can't see Roy Hodgson doing this, though. The England coach should be applauded for playing such an adventurous formation against Montenegro.  Time will tell whether he will persist with that formation, but it does have potential.

Of more immediate concern is the match against Poland on Tuesday evening. It should be monumentally nerve-racking!

'66! - Roger Hutchinson

Just lately, football, and in particular football history, has acted as something of a "comfort blanket" for me. This process has extended to re-reading some football books.  One of these was "'66", by Roger Hutchinson, which describes itself as "The inside story of England's World Cup triumph".  Reading it, and studying other material, has given much food for thought.

As well as being a detailed and enjoyable chronicle of Alf Ramsey's stewardship of the England team from the time of his appointment to the end of the 1966 jamboree, this also serves as a dispassionate and frank assessment of the merits of that team, and its effects on football at home and in the wider world.

Even at the time, many football connoisseurs, including some in England, expressed unease about the methods employed to achieve the "triumph", even amid the patriotic afterglow of the tournament.  This book gives considerable rein to those sentiments, and the feeling is reinforced, rightly or wrongly, of a monochrome and functional team, surrounded by embittered and aggrieved opponents and detractors.

This is not to say that honest toil, organisation and endeavour should be deplored, but the author's contention is that the events of the summer of 1966 represented a defining moment in the ending of football's "Age of Innocence". The signs of corrosion had been there in defensive, cautious and violent tactics employed in various areas of the planet, but the World Cup seemed to place some kind of seal on the process, and looking back, was the 1970 event in Mexico perhaps an anomaly, conditioned by heat, altitude and a freakishly talented Brazilian outfit?

I don't altogether share the pessimism, and for me the football played in the early to mid-70s, particularly by Dutch and German teams, was intoxicating and exhilarating, combining technical excellence, tactical sophistication and physical ardour when needed. What the author, and other observers, seemed to judge correctly was the knock-on effect of Ramsey's approach on British football, its distrust of maverick, non-conformist talent, and the subordination of virtuosity to industry, and to the mundane and prosaic. The quotes attributed to some British footballing luminaries on this topic are especially eye-opening....

There are some fascinating quotes from the members of the England squad, providing an insight into the times, and Ramsey's own personality and methods. Long-forgotten episodes from the 1966 World Cup are recounted, many relating to the team's preparations and the national mood.

Despite the constant references to the contentious elements of his tenure, many of Alf Ramsey's admirable virtues and traits come through, including his man-management skills and his steadfast loyalty to the players. The respect which he commanded from the members of the team is also clearly evident.