Cheerio & Thanks!

That’s all from World Cup College! We would like to thank our loyal readership – and pass on special thanks to those who have left regular comments. It’s been a lot of fun keeping the site going over the past few months. We hope you’ve enjoyed it too. We were also very pleased to be considered one of the best World Cup websites by respected football magazine When Saturday Comes.
 
WCC has been running in earnest since early January and in total we have posted more than 200 football-related articles. Most of these have featured in the College’s main faculties: Arts and Law, Life Sciences, Physical Sciences, and Social Sciences. If we needed any light relief, the Student Union was always open where we could grab a cheap lager whilst shaking our heads indignantly at the antics of Wing-back’s Ashley Le Sansom.
 
We followed England through their successful qualification campaign for South Africa, and accordingly believed that a reasonably successful World Cup 2010 lay ahead. This hope should perhaps have been tempered by plentiful historical evidence which suggests that England aren’t a member of the world’s footballing elite. But it was an enjoyable tournament overall: Spain were worthy winners and it’s nice to have a new name on the cup. WCC’s favourite team of the tournament were semi-finalists Germany who gave England a hard time in the Round of 16. WCC predicts that Germany will be the first European team to win a World Cup in South America at Brazil 2014.
 
The site will stay online as the definitive academic guide to World Cup 2010 – cheerio!

The Capello Project 2010: the end!

Throughout the qualification campaign it appeared that Fabio Capello had struck upon a workable formula. His England side were arranged under 4-4-2, but it appeared that 4-2-3-1 inhered in this approach as Gareth Barry and Frank Lampard were conservative in central midfield and Wayne Rooney would drop deep from attack. Capello also fielded a target man, Emile Heskey, so that he could provide an advanced apex for the team structure. Steven Gerrard tucked in from left-midfield to help out in central areas when required. An orthodox winger, such as Theo Walcott or Aaron Lennon, was placed on the right.

This approach did not yield great success over World Cup 2010. England left the tournament having beaten just one team – Slovenia. Tournament football does come down to fine margins – whilst the international elite are fairly hermetic, isolated events can still be the difference between an excellent and indifferent tournament for a second-tier nation. If it was not for Robert Green’s unfortunate error against the US, then England should have won Group C. This outcome would have opened up the knock-out rounds much more kindly for England, and they could have made the semi-finals. And whilst Germany very much deserved to beat England in the initial knock-out round, it was only an incorrect decision from the officials which prevented the score from being levelled late in the first-half. Entering the second-half on equal terms would have left England less vulnerable to an excellent counterattacking side.

Capello did deviate somewhat from the strategic pattern that he had established over the qualifiers. For example, Jermain Defoe replaced Heskey following the Algeria game. Whilst Defoe scored the winner against Slovenia his broader contribution was slight and Capello should perhaps have reverted to a target-man for the Germany game. Against superior opposition, Heskey or Peter Crouch might have offered the team a broader range of attributes than a goal-poacher such as Defoe. James Milner also came into the side, as a more pragmatic right-sided option than Aaron Lennon. Whilst Milner played well against Slovenia, he made little impact against Germany.

Better England line-up v Germany?

The inclusion of Gerrard on the left worked over the qualifiers as he had the freedom to drift inside to influence the play. But in South Africa this ploy merely unbalanced the side. Against Algeria in particular, England seemed to be playing a lopsided 4-1-3-2 with no left-midfielder in place at all (when 4-3-3 would have been a better configuration against Algeria’s three-man central-defence). The populist call was to play Gerrard centrally behind Rooney. But Rooney did not carry his good form from the Premier League into this tournament and would have been ill-equipped for a lone-forward role. Against Germany it may have been a better ruse to move Gerrard centrally and position Rooney on the left. This would have reinforced the team in midfield, and Rooney’s presence on the flank might have meant that Thomas Muller would have been more distracted by defensive duties.

The central-midfield was also exposed at World Cup 2010. Neither Barry nor Lampard is a natural holding player, with Lampard very much an attacking midfielder at club level. They may have provided a pragmatic pairing over the qualifiers, but were undone badly against Germany. During the tournament it became apparent that 4-2-3-1 does not inhere in Capello’s 4-4-2: operating within an outmoded system England were overrun,  outmanouevred and unable to respond to the tactical superiority of Germany (and Algeria). 

England missed a genuine defensive midfielder such as Owen Hargreaves who would at least have offered pace and snappy challenges in front of the back four. A fit and in form Rio Ferdinand would also have helped. So injuries and bad luck may have hindered this campaign, but the Capello Project lost both flexibility and coherence over World Cup 2010, as England were again exposed as being some way short of the best international sides.

England team v Germany

There is a tendency to extrapolate form indicators almost exclusively from a team’s most recent performance. Following a poor game against Algeria, root and branch change to the England line-up was apparently required. But after an improved showing against Slovenia, it’s likely that the team from this final group game will be viewed as sacrosanct.

For the second-round contest against Germany it would, admittedly, be rash to make many changes to an England side that has just performed well together. The team functioned respectably against Slovenia and the players should have the opportunity to consolidate the improvements that were displayed. Prior to the Slovenia game, England’s defence, particularly the central-defence, had been an area of concern. However, John Terry and Matthew Upson provided a convincing barrier and, in the absence of Ledley King, should remain the central-defensive pairing. Ashley Cole has played very well on the left-side of defence, whilst Glen Johnson has presented the usual combination of exciting attacking forays and defensive lapses. Behind the back-four, David James put in an assured display against Slovenia, so England can enter the Germany fixture with reasonable confidence in the defensive unit.

James Milner asserted his credentials for right-midfield and should also be retained in the starting XI. Milner’s work-rate, confidence and crossing ability mean that he is a better option than Aaron Lennon or Shaun Wright-Phillips. The rest of the midfield should have a familiar Capello-look with Gareth Barry and Frank Lampard in the middle, and Steven Gerrard on the left. And Gerrard may need to retain a left-sided focus to limit the advances of German right-back Philipp Lahm.

If Fabio Capello is to make a change from the Slovenia line-up, then it should be in attack. Jermain Defoe fulfilled the principal striker’s objective against Slovenia by scoring the winning goal. But he was a peripheral figure overall, making just four passes over the 86 minutes he was on the pitch. His positioning at the tip of England’s attack did allow Wayne Rooney freedom to drop deep, but this is a role that could be undertaken by a forward who can make greater use of such potentially isolated positioning. Against Germany, England may need a centre-forward that can offer more than just goal-scoring ability! Emile Heskey played well against USA but was less impressive against Algeria. When Rooney was on top form over the qualifiers, Heskey’s selfless performances could be readily accommodated: but with Rooney providing just one goal and one assist over his last ten games, Heskey’s lack of goal-threat becomes an unsustainable feature of the team. Peter Crouch is therefore the player to lead England’s line against Germany – he has a fantastic international goal record and should provide a broader degree of contribution than that offered by Defoe.

Germany should set up under 4-2-3-1 with Mesut Ozil behind Miroslav Klose in attack. If England are overrun in midfield, then Gerrard may need to take up a central position behind Crouch, with Rooney moving to the left.

England team v Slovenia

England v Slovenia: Plan A

After one poor performance, England are in crisis. The only option following one sub-standard showing is root and branch change. That’s why Fabio Capello should be radical and stick with Plan A against Slovenia!

The approach which is perplexing fans and pundits is the very same approach which enabled England to qualify emphatically. In the first tournament game against USA the format differed slightly from Capello’s first choice arrangement, as Gareth Barry was unavailable. Barry returned for the Algeria fixture and England did, admittedly, put in a distinctly laboured showing. Such is the nature of the international tournament crapshoot; one dismal performance can equal total failure. But to date, Capello’s record for England in competitive games is Won 9, Drawn 2, Lost 1, yielding a points-per-game average of 2.42.

Although England would have expected to beat most of their lower ranked competitors, a club side like Chelsea (backed by Roman Abramovich’s millions) would also expect to beat most of their rivals. However, in the English Premier League last season, Chelsea were champions with a points-per-game average of 2.26. Of course, a short run of indifferent results for a top club side often initiates knee-jerk suggestions that their season is in terminal decline. However, the team have the opportunity over 38 league games to respond to dips in form. In international football the tendency to impute deep underlying problems to isolated examples of poor performance is more acute, due to the knock-out basis of competitions and accompanying national sentiments of entitlement. England have made the final of a major tournament once, and that was with home advantage 44 years ago. England would certainly be expected to advance beyond the group stage of this tournament, but their failure to do so would not be solely attributable to a coaching/formational system that, until Friday evening, had been highly successful.

Against Slovenia, Capello should therefore utilise Emile Heskey in attack with Wayne Rooney again. Steven Gerrard should start on the left, but with Valter Birsa on the right of Slovenia’s midfield, Gerrard may need to retain more of a left-sided focus than he did against Algeria. The team was topologically unbalanced against Algeria: the formation resembled a  lopsided 4-1-3-2 with Gerrard and Frank Lampard in front of Barry in central-midfield, with Ashley Cole the sole left-sided player. A similar approach worked against Egypt in the friendly in March, with Gerrard relinquishing his post on the left to bolster central areas. But ingrained asymmetry ceases to be flexibility and will undermine the functioning of the team. With regard to personnel, Capello must choose whether Matthew Upson or Michael Dawson partner John Terry in central defence. Aaron Lennon should also make way for Shaun Wright-Phillips on the right of midfield, as Lennon has failed to convince in the two games so far. Joe Cole is another option for right-midfield, and it is a surprise that Cole hasn’t seen any action yet at World Cup 2010, particularly after his bright performance in the pre-tournament friendly against Japan.

England v Slovenia: Plan X

Of course, if Plan A yields the same level of performance as that witnessed against Algeria, Capello will have to take recourse to a back-up plan for the second-half against Slovenia. If Rooney’s performance level remains painfully low then he will have to be replaced. And without Rooney, Heskey’s lack of goal-threat would become an intolerable hindrance. England should then, therefore, switch to 4-2-3-1 with Peter Crouch leading the line and Joe Cole joining the midfield.

From the WCC archive

WCC has been running in earnest since January. Here are a few articles you may have missed from each of our faculties. Click on the article title to view.

Physical Sciences
Wonders of the Capello System – Emile Heskey is Saturn; and why you can’t pair a comet with a moon in attack.
Adidas Jabulani – philosophical questions raised by this perfect orb.

Arts and Law
Defoe v Heskey = Category Mistake – Defoe cannot be divided by Heskey without remainder.
Being and Nothingness – how football matches are shaped by competing aspirations to pour-soi status.

Life Sciences
Motivation and Sexual Selection – it’s the WAG watching in the stand (not the pay packet) which is why players keep on running.
Home Advantage – insights from a study into speckled wood butterflies.

Social Sciences
The Bancroft Gardens – backless benches equal international failure.
Capello: Keynesian Reformer – interventionist tactical reforms required to address Sven Goran Eriksson’s laissez-faire legacy.

England team v Algeria

Against Algeria, Fabio Capello should employ the same approach as that utilized against USA. Frank Lampard and Steven Gerrard should continue in central-midfield – but Gareth Barry should be afforded some playing time (he can then start against Slovenia.) Without a fit and functioning Barry, Capello is severely limited with regard to how he can configure his midfield. A midfield comprising all three of the above players provides a more robust platform for the side, and this will be crucial when stronger teams are faced in the later rounds. This would move Gerrard back out to the left, and this provides him with more scope to break into attacking areas without compromising the shape of the team. In the absence of a secure/fully fit alternative for central-midfield, Gerrard will be unable to take up this inside-left role, nor a more advanced central position in a 4-2-3-1. For the time being, however, a Gerrard/Lampard axis provides England with a creative midfield engine room.

Emile Heskey showed his value to the side again at the weekend and was probably man of the match. He won a substantial amount in the air and provided a powerful advanced apex to the team structure. Despite his lack of composure in front of goal, he remains the best partner for Wayne Rooney in attack. There is some suggestion that Capello is faced with a tactical dilemma and that Heskey might make way if England make the latter stages of the tournament – with Rooney spearheading the attack as a lone forward in front of Gerrard. Capello is so engrossed by this dilemma he has given the aforementioned Rooney/Gerrard combination a total of 45 minutes playing time – back in 2008! The target-man function will be an increasingly important outlet against the tournament’s best organized teams. There’s little point isolating Rooney in attack against technically adept opposition that will retain the ball well. In such circumstances Rooney will be best deployed behind a forward such as Heskey who can create space via selfless legwork.

Jamie Carragher’s lack of pace was exposed by Jozy Altidore on Saturday, and Algeria would surely seek to exploit a slightly sluggish Carragher/John Terry central-defensive pairing. Carragher is a fine defender, but (with Ledley King absent) Michael Dawson or Matthew Upson could push for a starting place. Upson performed capably next to Terry over the qualifiers, but isn’t the quickest of centre-backs either, whilst Dawson offers more pace but lacks Upson’s international experience. I’ve opted for Dawson, as a pace-free central-defence could become an increasingly sizable millstone as the tournament progresses.  But this area of the team will remain a minor concern whoever is selected.

The key change I would make to the side is on the left-flank. James Milner and Shaun Wright-Phillips were both slightly disappointing against USA. Therefore Joe Cole should come into the line-up. Cole is a confident and influential attacking player at international level. With a flyer like Lennon on the right, Cole would offer a broader range of attacking attributes on the left and could move infield if necessary to take up more playmaking duties. If Aaron Lennon fails to fire on the right, then Wright-Phillips could be introduced.

Following Robert Green’s unfortunate error, I’ve selected Joe Hart for goal. Hart looked confident in the pre-tournament game against Japan and should have the self-assurance required to take on an increasingly scrutinized role. I’m not sure Green could be trusted to retain his composure after such a shattering error against USA. Ideally, Green will be selected and have a good game, thereby re-establishing his confidence and position as No.1.