Euro 2012 Final

In recent days, it had become almost fashionable to bemoan and decry the approach of the Spanish team. To hear some of the detractors, you would think that they had resorted to the same tactics employed by the catenaccio sides of the 60s and 70s, or the cynicism of some of the South American club teams of the same period. All that they were doing was examining a differing method of attaining the same objective - winning a football tournament.

The self-appointed arbiters of football "morality" and "righteousness" will have been disarmed by tonight's performance in Kiev. True, Italy were emasculated for the final quarter, after going down to ten men after Motta's injury, but it would be stretching credibility to imagine that this affected the ultimate destiny of the trophy.  Spain's performance represented an emphatic "take that" to those who had been doubting them.  It will also have made sobering viewing for those who aspire to topple them from their perch.

In the early stages, as Spain forced the pace, I thought to myself that they did lack a spearhead, or a focal point for their attacks.  However, if you have that many options, from such a myriad of sources, it does not seem to matter all that much, as long as everything clicks, which it assuredly did in the final.

Andrea Pirlo did still see the ball, but he seemed to be coming deeper than usual to collect it, and was having to work harder to find himself some space. Spain appeared to work according to the notion that if they kept possession well enough themselves, Pirlo would be denied influence by default.  The Milan midfielder rarely got into positions where he could hurt Spain.

One must have some sympathy for Italy, who did not do all that much wrong.  They were affected by injuries during the game, and their substitutions by and large made tactical sense.  I was impressed by Mario Balotelli tonight, both in his work-rate, and his demeanour during the match, remaining philosophical.  In Balotelli, Pirlo and Buffon, Italy supplied three of the tournament's outstanding personalities.

So for all the debate about their formation, Spain have proved a cut above the rest once again.  Personally, I prefer my football to have a bit more rough and tumble (following Leeds United does that to a man!), but it would be churlish to deny the aesthetic beauty and technical proficiency of this Spanish squad.  They are still the benchmark, amongst the European nations at least.

Now, bring on the English domestic season!

Germany 1 Italy 2

So, we have a Spain versus Italy final in Euro 2012, in Kiev on Sunday, after Italy gave a consummate display of tournament football last night, to overcome the much-fancied German team.

Many people I think expected Italy to employ "spoiling" tactics, to make the game fragmented and bitty, in an attempt to stifle Germany's creative resources.  We under-estimated the self-confidence, patience and quality of Cesare Prandelli's men.  This was a victory for planning and cool heads, as well as talent.

Andrea Pirlo's influence was perhaps not quite as all-pervasive as it had been in the quarter-final, with Germany doing a marginally better job than England of negating him, but he was still involved enough to help steer Italy to a victory.  Some of Pirlo's "minders" in the Italy midfield also raised their game, and this was one of the decisive factors.  For all the inevitable hype about Mario Balotelli's goals, this was a true team performance, dripping with unity, purpose and cohesion.  The versatility and flexibility of Italy's players, positionally and tactically, was key.

Other teams may have been intimidated or daunted by Germany's attacking options, but Italy backed their own tactics and ability, and the goals in the first-half were real "surgical" strikes.

Although Italy's own approach doubtless contributed to this, Germany just lacked a certain something. The final ball was lacking throughout the match, and they relied excessively on optimistic attempts from distance.  It is a moot point whether the Germany coach's recent "rotation" of his attacking players disrupted them, but the malaise I think went deeper than that.

Germany raised their level of intensity at the beginning of the second half, with the hitherto quiet Schweinsteiger taking up more prominent positions, but once this spurt had been repelled, they seemed gradually to run out of ideas.  Indeed, as the second-half progressed, Italy increasingly looked like the sharper outfit, and numerous counter-attacks should really have yielded additional goals.

Pre-match, there had been much debate about the supposed advantage conferred on Germany by the greater rest period which they enjoyed following their quarter-final.  However, Italy scarcely looked affected by fatigue, their economical style, ability to retain possession, and Prandelli's adroit marshalling of his men, all playing a part in this.

Where does this all leave this German team?  They were possibly not as surprised by the outcome of the semi-final as the outside world.  Still, they were out-witted and out-thought.  It was less a case of experience than one of "know-how".   Germany will learn lessons, and this side is clearly still a work in progress.  A case here of growing pains, maybe?  Eventually, though, excuses will not wash or suffice. There is still work to be done between now and the 2014 World Cup.

So, on to the final.  Italy, once again, will have less "recovery" time than the opposition, but strangely yesterday's game did not seem to take that much out of them, either physically or mentally.  Spain, on the other hand, were involved in a attritional struggle with Portugal.  There is a temptation to feel that come the final, Spain will be the "flatter" team, with Italy remaining ebullient and buoyant, still on an upward curve.

Much will depend on which Spain turns out on Sunday evening.  It has the potential to be a cagey affair, but Italy's alleged "caution" has actually been quite entertaining and enlightening to behold.

It should be an intriguing conclusion to the tournament.

Sweden 2 England 3

Prior to tonight's encounter in Kiev, I had frankly expected a rather turgid, attritional contest.  Sure enough, the first half was on the mediocre side, although not perhaps to the extent described by some pundits.  After the break, however, there was certainly no lack of incident, and although some of this was attributable to poor defending and luck, there were a few moments of genuine quality.

In the early minutes of the game I thought that England looked quite purposeful, busy and eager, if lacking a little in invention. James Milner was proving to be an effective outlet at that early stage. Predictably Zlatan Ibrahimovic constituted the main threat for Sweden, the doubts about his fitness notwithstanding.

Roy Hodgson's decision to play Andy Carroll from the start was vindicated when he rose majestically to meet a trademark Steven Gerrard delivery. As is often the case, however, one of England's main failings was a failure to retain possession sufficiently well, and Sweden continued to pose questions for the remainder of the first period.

I did not find the first forty-five minutes quite as woeful as some other people seem to have done.  Perhaps I find honest mediocrity strangely fascinating!

There was a noticeable upsurge in the vigour and intensity of Sweden's play right from the outset of the second half.  Maybe their coach had emphasised to them the extent of their predicament should they lose this game?  Whatever the case, the new approach soon bore fruit in the form of an equaliser, albeit a fortuitous and flukey one.

After the first Swedish goal went in, I thought to myself that England now faced a real test, and that they may be forced to show more tactical flexibility in order to respond.  Before they had a chance to demonstrate any of this, they were further pinned back by Swedish pressure, and the defence was found wanting as Mellberg rose largely unchallenged to make it 2-1.

The match now acquired a genuine sense of ebb-and-flow as England strove to get back on terms, with Sweden potentially dangerous on the break, even if they do not exactly possess blistering outright pace in their team.

England made a positive substitution, bringing on Theo Walcott for the fading Milner. Roy Hodgson must have sensed that England did not previously have enough in their armoury to get back into the match, but even he could hardly have anticipated the impact that the Arsenal player would make.  He had scarcely touched the ball before thumping in the equalising goal.

Strangely enough, I had been making notes to the effect that I found Danny Welbeck's performance unconvincing, when he and Walcott conjured up a moment of genuine quality to clinch victory for England. Welbeck's improvisation was most impressive.

Late on I became nervous, thinking that England were throwing too many men forward at times, but they held on reasonably comfortably.

So where does this all leave us?  Well, England need a point against Ukraine, and that is eminently achievable.  The coach does face a selection dilemma of sorts, with Wayne Rooney now available for selection after suspension, and both Welbeck and Carroll making their cases quite eloquently this evening.  Roy Hodgson has displayed a methodical, pragmatic streak during their tournament so far, and he may opt for the "horses for courses" approach again.

In the grand scheme of things, England have exuded a sense of unity and quiet determination thus far. These qualities, however laudable, will only take England so far. The fluidity and cohesion exhibited by Spain, Germany and even France in the past couple of days was sobering to see.  England look likely to face Spain, should they reach the quarter-finals.  Before that daunting prospect, however, they will need to rouse themselves once more for what is sure to be a pressurised match against the co-hosts.