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....
Showing posts with label roy hodgson. Show all posts
Showing posts with label roy hodgson. Show all posts
Wednesday, 16 October 2013
Saturday, 12 October 2013
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!
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!
Monday, 2 July 2012
Euro 2012 Review
So, the European Football Championships, or European Nations Cup (as they were variously called when I was a lad) is/are over for another four years. What, if anything, have we learned from the past few weeks of footballing endeavours?
Well, first of all, it would seem that reports of the decline of the Spain team have been greatly exaggerated. Indeed, many would opine that the tactical experimentation being instituted by Vicente Del Bosque is indicative of a further evolution of his squad. Can this generation of players maintain the motivation and zest to launch a credible defence of their world title in Brazil in two years' time? At this juncture, the answer would seem to be in the affirmative, although much can transpire over such a timespan.
Although defeated in the final, Italy also emerge with considerable credit from events in Poland and Ukraine. Before the tournament, they were not being totally discounted, but equally they were not exactly receiving rave reviews and endorsements, either. In the event, they applied themselves to their task, and relied on their inherent good footballing habits and tactical nous to progress to the final, augmented by the imperious play of Andrea Pirlo in midfield, and cameos from others.
One of the nations which has most to ponder in the aftermath of Euro 2012 is Germany. As the tournament went on, they were increasingly being feted as likely winners, but in the end flattered to deceive, more than meeting their match in the semi-final against the Italians. For me, the Germans had not been wholly convincing in the group stages, seeming to lack the fluency and bite which they showed in the World Cup in South Africa. Injuries and fatigue affecting key players may be partly to blame, but there is clearly also much work to do to turn this group of players into the "finished article".
As for England, they achieved one objective by reaching the quarter-finals, although their shortcomings were evident even as they accomplished that aim. It was acknowledged, and even accepted, going into the tournament the the current crop of players did not have the quality in depth of previous squads, and effort and organisation proved insufficient to make up the deficit. Without wishing to sound defeatist, the cupboard looks relatively bare as we look forward to the next World Cup. Roy Hodgson is no doubt keenly aware of the task facing him, but is at least being afforded some breathing space and leeway by media and public alike.
So, how will Euro 2012 be remembered? Despite what some are saying, I don't think that it was a sensational tournament. There were some bright moments and some entertaining matches, but these were counter-balanced by mediocrity. It did not have the entertainment, excitement or all-round quality of, for example, Euro 2000, which is probably the best international tournament which I have watched in my lifetime. However, it was played in a generally good spirit, and was blessed with exceptional victors in Spain.
Well, first of all, it would seem that reports of the decline of the Spain team have been greatly exaggerated. Indeed, many would opine that the tactical experimentation being instituted by Vicente Del Bosque is indicative of a further evolution of his squad. Can this generation of players maintain the motivation and zest to launch a credible defence of their world title in Brazil in two years' time? At this juncture, the answer would seem to be in the affirmative, although much can transpire over such a timespan.
Although defeated in the final, Italy also emerge with considerable credit from events in Poland and Ukraine. Before the tournament, they were not being totally discounted, but equally they were not exactly receiving rave reviews and endorsements, either. In the event, they applied themselves to their task, and relied on their inherent good footballing habits and tactical nous to progress to the final, augmented by the imperious play of Andrea Pirlo in midfield, and cameos from others.
One of the nations which has most to ponder in the aftermath of Euro 2012 is Germany. As the tournament went on, they were increasingly being feted as likely winners, but in the end flattered to deceive, more than meeting their match in the semi-final against the Italians. For me, the Germans had not been wholly convincing in the group stages, seeming to lack the fluency and bite which they showed in the World Cup in South Africa. Injuries and fatigue affecting key players may be partly to blame, but there is clearly also much work to do to turn this group of players into the "finished article".
As for England, they achieved one objective by reaching the quarter-finals, although their shortcomings were evident even as they accomplished that aim. It was acknowledged, and even accepted, going into the tournament the the current crop of players did not have the quality in depth of previous squads, and effort and organisation proved insufficient to make up the deficit. Without wishing to sound defeatist, the cupboard looks relatively bare as we look forward to the next World Cup. Roy Hodgson is no doubt keenly aware of the task facing him, but is at least being afforded some breathing space and leeway by media and public alike.
So, how will Euro 2012 be remembered? Despite what some are saying, I don't think that it was a sensational tournament. There were some bright moments and some entertaining matches, but these were counter-balanced by mediocrity. It did not have the entertainment, excitement or all-round quality of, for example, Euro 2000, which is probably the best international tournament which I have watched in my lifetime. However, it was played in a generally good spirit, and was blessed with exceptional victors in Spain.
Monday, 25 June 2012
Euro 2012 - England v Italy
This morning, the English nation is afflicted by an all too familiar feeling, having been eliminated from a major football tournament on penalties. This time, however, there is no discernible feeling of injustice, or even anger. There is a sense that the quarter-finals represented the limit of the abilities of this squad of players, and deep down many people realise that Italy were the superior team over the preceding 120 minutes of football.
The statistics on possession and pass completion tell their own story. Andrea Pirlo delivered a magisterial performance in the Italian midfield, and England proved incapable of stemming the flow of his passes.
As well as lacking in some technical areas, England also looked fatigued from quite early in the proceedings, as if the exertions and effort, both physical and mental, of negotiating the group matches had drained most of their energy. For the most part the effort was there, but it looked like a match too far, even if Italy were prevented from scoring. If the Azzuri's forwards had been less profligate in front of goal, the scoreline would have been more representative of the balance of play.
I discussed the match with a friend late last week, and he suggested that Wayne Rooney should have been omitted from the starting line-up, because he would disrupt and disturb the balance of the England team. As it happened, Rooney was ineffectual against Italy, but I don't feel that his presence unsettled England as such. Formations and tactics played no major role last night, as opposed to technique and fatigue. Rooney endeavoured to make things happen, popping up all over the pitch, but he was simply lacking sharpness.
After an early flurry from England, it was Italy who dictated the course and tempo of the match. The aforementioned Pirlo was a joy to watch, running the show consummately. In fairness to England, they rarely lost their shape in defence, and I thought that John Terry and Glen Johnson in particular gave impressive performances.
So, not quite the sinking feeling of previous England "failures", as there is less thought of "what might have been". England did not disgrace themselves overall, even if they were ultimately found wanting. There is now time and space for Roy Hodgson to remould and reshape the team in accordance with his own vision and ideas, and some of the personnel might be different once the World Cup qualifiers get under way.
As for Euro 2012 itself, one has to favour Germany to reach the final now, not only because of their own potency and abilities, but because of the toll which last night's game will have taken on Italy.
The statistics on possession and pass completion tell their own story. Andrea Pirlo delivered a magisterial performance in the Italian midfield, and England proved incapable of stemming the flow of his passes.
As well as lacking in some technical areas, England also looked fatigued from quite early in the proceedings, as if the exertions and effort, both physical and mental, of negotiating the group matches had drained most of their energy. For the most part the effort was there, but it looked like a match too far, even if Italy were prevented from scoring. If the Azzuri's forwards had been less profligate in front of goal, the scoreline would have been more representative of the balance of play.
I discussed the match with a friend late last week, and he suggested that Wayne Rooney should have been omitted from the starting line-up, because he would disrupt and disturb the balance of the England team. As it happened, Rooney was ineffectual against Italy, but I don't feel that his presence unsettled England as such. Formations and tactics played no major role last night, as opposed to technique and fatigue. Rooney endeavoured to make things happen, popping up all over the pitch, but he was simply lacking sharpness.
After an early flurry from England, it was Italy who dictated the course and tempo of the match. The aforementioned Pirlo was a joy to watch, running the show consummately. In fairness to England, they rarely lost their shape in defence, and I thought that John Terry and Glen Johnson in particular gave impressive performances.
So, not quite the sinking feeling of previous England "failures", as there is less thought of "what might have been". England did not disgrace themselves overall, even if they were ultimately found wanting. There is now time and space for Roy Hodgson to remould and reshape the team in accordance with his own vision and ideas, and some of the personnel might be different once the World Cup qualifiers get under way.
As for Euro 2012 itself, one has to favour Germany to reach the final now, not only because of their own potency and abilities, but because of the toll which last night's game will have taken on Italy.
Friday, 15 June 2012
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.
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.
Monday, 11 June 2012
France 1 England 1
So, England have played their first group match of Euro 2012, in Donetsk.
It seemed to me that the French team had the edge in terms of quality and creative options, so a 1-1 draw is not a bad result by any means. France had superior movement and overall fluidity and fluency, but England remained resolute and committed.
If England were probably second best in the technical proficiency stakes, their spirit and application were difficult to fault. Some cohesiveness was evident, and in his short tenure thus far Roy Hodgson seems to have instilled some semblance of togetherness and esprit de corps. The blend of personnel in the first-choice eleven is probably not yet ideal and fully realised, but the lack of time available to Hodgson for experimentation may preclude any major changes.
My impression, for what it is worth, is that England are seeking to base their effort in this tournament on a solid platform of honest endeavour and toil in defence and midfield, and hoping that pace, and occasional flashes of inspiration, up front, will see them through. To make this work, successfully, I feel that the all-round excellence and tenacity of Wayne Rooney is essential. Improvisation will be necessary before the Manchester United player returns from suspension.
During today's match I was impressed with the attitude and diligence of captain Steven Gerrard, and Ashley Cole delivered his usual accomplished display. England really need these men, along with Rooney, to perform, because of the lack of genuine quality in depth in the squad, which has been exacerbated by injuries.
England were by no means outclassed by France, and this would indicate that neither Sweden nor Ukraine should hold any major fears. There is still everything to play for.
It seemed to me that the French team had the edge in terms of quality and creative options, so a 1-1 draw is not a bad result by any means. France had superior movement and overall fluidity and fluency, but England remained resolute and committed.
If England were probably second best in the technical proficiency stakes, their spirit and application were difficult to fault. Some cohesiveness was evident, and in his short tenure thus far Roy Hodgson seems to have instilled some semblance of togetherness and esprit de corps. The blend of personnel in the first-choice eleven is probably not yet ideal and fully realised, but the lack of time available to Hodgson for experimentation may preclude any major changes.
My impression, for what it is worth, is that England are seeking to base their effort in this tournament on a solid platform of honest endeavour and toil in defence and midfield, and hoping that pace, and occasional flashes of inspiration, up front, will see them through. To make this work, successfully, I feel that the all-round excellence and tenacity of Wayne Rooney is essential. Improvisation will be necessary before the Manchester United player returns from suspension.
During today's match I was impressed with the attitude and diligence of captain Steven Gerrard, and Ashley Cole delivered his usual accomplished display. England really need these men, along with Rooney, to perform, because of the lack of genuine quality in depth in the squad, which has been exacerbated by injuries.
England were by no means outclassed by France, and this would indicate that neither Sweden nor Ukraine should hold any major fears. There is still everything to play for.
Wednesday, 16 May 2012
England Euro 2012 squad
Just a few days after being appointed England manager, Roy Hodgson has unveiled his 23-man squad for the forthcoming European Championships in Poland and Ukraine.
As has become customary, there has been much comment on the dwindling pool of top-quality players which England have at their disposal, because of the prevalence of overseas players in the Premier League. For me, this time around it does not feel like the numbers were lower, but the average quality is not what it was, even in the recent past. Too many of the players are either past their prime, or else have major question marks hanging over them.
The headlines will doubtless concentrate mainly on the selections in attacking positions, but one thing which perturbs me is the flimsiness of the defensive resources which Hodgson will possess. A lack of genuine and proven international quality in this area, with one or two exceptions, and it could cost England dear. One thing which the side has generally been able to count on over the years is a solid foundation at the back.
There would appear to be more bounteous options in midfield and attack, and the likes of Ashley Young and Theo Walcott could provide the team with some proper cutting edge. Although the selection in midfield looks good on paper the secret, as ever with England in this area of the team, will be arriving at a suitable balance.
Personally, I would have preferred to see Peter Crouch selected, with his experience and good international goalscoring record. His inclusion might have negated some of the imponderables and variables.
Unlike many other people, I am not yet writing England and Roy Hodgson off. Many of the other competing nations are probably having the same debates and doubts. Much will depend on how the squad gels in the short time available with their new supremo before the beginning of the tournament.
As has become customary, there has been much comment on the dwindling pool of top-quality players which England have at their disposal, because of the prevalence of overseas players in the Premier League. For me, this time around it does not feel like the numbers were lower, but the average quality is not what it was, even in the recent past. Too many of the players are either past their prime, or else have major question marks hanging over them.
The headlines will doubtless concentrate mainly on the selections in attacking positions, but one thing which perturbs me is the flimsiness of the defensive resources which Hodgson will possess. A lack of genuine and proven international quality in this area, with one or two exceptions, and it could cost England dear. One thing which the side has generally been able to count on over the years is a solid foundation at the back.
There would appear to be more bounteous options in midfield and attack, and the likes of Ashley Young and Theo Walcott could provide the team with some proper cutting edge. Although the selection in midfield looks good on paper the secret, as ever with England in this area of the team, will be arriving at a suitable balance.
Personally, I would have preferred to see Peter Crouch selected, with his experience and good international goalscoring record. His inclusion might have negated some of the imponderables and variables.
Unlike many other people, I am not yet writing England and Roy Hodgson off. Many of the other competing nations are probably having the same debates and doubts. Much will depend on how the squad gels in the short time available with their new supremo before the beginning of the tournament.
Tuesday, 1 May 2012
Roy Hodgson
So, Roy Hodgson has been announced as the new England football manager.
After the feverish speculation concerning Harry Redknapp's potential candidature, many observers may view this news as underwhelming, but it is difficult to fault the choice from several perspectives. Hodgson may appear to lack the dynamism and media-savvy of some of the other people mentioned in connection with the job, but he does possess some admirable qualities.
Hodgson has a long and varied coaching career behind him, in many countries and many environments, building up a massive bank of technical knowledge and expertise. He is respected by those within the game, and from the Football Association's point of view, represents a safe pair of hands. Crucially perhaps, he has extensive experience of the international game itself, in addition to his endeavours in club football.
Some will no doubt point to his relative lack of major success in the absolute top echelons of club football, but are those credentials necessarily what is required for an international manager these days? Rather, tactical and technical nous and diplomatic acumen are seen as pre-requisites. In any event, Hodgson has done a solid job during his tenure with West Bromwich Albion, and elsewhere....
Of course, Euro 2012 is very much looming, but the lack of preparation time could actually work to England's advantage, engendering a greater team spirit and togetherness, as well as a determination to prove the doubters wrong. There are historical precedents for teams thrown together in less than ideal circumstances summoning up the resolve and cohesion necessary to prevail.
It is also gratifying that the position of England boss is to be occupied by somebody who desired the job for the right reasons, and sees it as the culmination of what he has been working towards throughout his career. This came through in this afternoon's press conference, as did the genuine affection and respect in which he his held.
I, and I expect many others, wish Roy Hodgson every success in his new role.
After the feverish speculation concerning Harry Redknapp's potential candidature, many observers may view this news as underwhelming, but it is difficult to fault the choice from several perspectives. Hodgson may appear to lack the dynamism and media-savvy of some of the other people mentioned in connection with the job, but he does possess some admirable qualities.
Hodgson has a long and varied coaching career behind him, in many countries and many environments, building up a massive bank of technical knowledge and expertise. He is respected by those within the game, and from the Football Association's point of view, represents a safe pair of hands. Crucially perhaps, he has extensive experience of the international game itself, in addition to his endeavours in club football.
Some will no doubt point to his relative lack of major success in the absolute top echelons of club football, but are those credentials necessarily what is required for an international manager these days? Rather, tactical and technical nous and diplomatic acumen are seen as pre-requisites. In any event, Hodgson has done a solid job during his tenure with West Bromwich Albion, and elsewhere....
Of course, Euro 2012 is very much looming, but the lack of preparation time could actually work to England's advantage, engendering a greater team spirit and togetherness, as well as a determination to prove the doubters wrong. There are historical precedents for teams thrown together in less than ideal circumstances summoning up the resolve and cohesion necessary to prevail.
It is also gratifying that the position of England boss is to be occupied by somebody who desired the job for the right reasons, and sees it as the culmination of what he has been working towards throughout his career. This came through in this afternoon's press conference, as did the genuine affection and respect in which he his held.
I, and I expect many others, wish Roy Hodgson every success in his new role.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)