England are Everton!

Should there really be such a substantial degree of dismay and disbelief when England are eliminated in the second round of a World Cup? A hubristic sense of national entitlement in these circumstances seems to subvert rationality. England made it to South Africa via a convincing qualification campaign and it was appropriate that a reasonable degree of hope accompanied the approach to World Cup 2010. However, the only time England have made the final of a major tournament was 44 years ago‚ and that was with the assistance of home territory.

The composition of the top teams in international football shows a high degree of consistency, and in this regard it is similar to major domestic leagues. Since 1966 there has been a big four: Brazil, Germany, Italy and Argentina. And since 1966 these four teams have won nine of the ten World Cups – in fact, only two other nations have been able to make the final over this period. The two teams to threaten the hegemony have been the totaalvoetbal-inspired Dutch side who made the final twice in the 70s, and France who made the finals of 1998 and 2006. France also won European Championships in 1984 and 2000, whilst the Dutch were successful in 1988. We can therefore consider these nations to be on the margins of the big four. In addition, Spain won Euro 2008 in some style and their current form suggests that they are in the process of challenging the orthodoxy. England on the other hand have done little to suggest they are about to break into the world’s elite.

Germany have made the final of a World Cup five times since 1966 compared with England’s zero. Yet patriotic hubris means that we enter a second round game against these international heavyweights expecting to win. Why does the second-round exit of a nation, which is peripheral to the international footballing superpowers, elicit such hand-wringing and finger-pointing? It seems highly likely that at any World Cup England will be up against between four to eight superior nations. This means that a second round or quarter-final departure is England’s rightful finishing point in terms of probability.

Of course it’s not just defeat, but the manner of defeat which is important, and England performed poorly over World Cup 2010 and the loss to Germany was heavy. But England weren’t a great deal better at World Cup 2006. It’s just that narrowly losing out on top spot in the group this year pitted them against a member of the elite a little earlier than usual. So surely all of the responsibility cannot fall on the shoulders of one man‚ i.e. the coach. Regardless of how much he is paid, Fabio Capello has circumscribed capacity to propel England into the global elite. There may be ways and means by which English football can steadily rise into the highest ability stratum, but it will take more than competent management of the international team.

It’s thus misguided to vilify the England coach for failing to singlehandedly arrest and then invert the weight of history. Regardless of who is managing England, their place in the international football hierarchy is quite clear; they are good, but a palpable distance short of the very best. Directing frustration at an allegedly incompetent coach, when England have predictably failed to perform above themselves again, is about as rational as an Everton fan ripping up their season ticket after they have finished sixth in the league. England aren’t Man Utd – they are Everton. But despite evidence indicating England’s second-tier status being clearly demonstrated over and over again, the sense of entitlement will never be diminished. If only that idiot coach knew what he was doing!