It’s quite simple, the TV pundits keep telling us, you just have to play your best players in their best positions. This is usually stated with reference to Steven Gerrard being positioned on England’s left (when he should be situated more centrally.) Gerrard is one of England’s most exciting and skilful players and the notion of him marauding through the centre in support of the striker is certainly appealing.
But this perspective overlooks the fact that Gerrard’s form has been better under Fabio Capello then under any previous England coach. The current suggestion seems to be that Capello has neutralised Gerrard’s effectiveness by placing him on the left of midfield. But this more defined, but still flexible positioning has improved Gerrard’s performances at international level. Gerrard was consistently disappointing for England prior to Capello’s arrival and never replicated his impressive Liverpool form for England in central-midfield. Admittedly Gerrard was paired uncomfortably with Frank Lampard for many of his appearances, but even when situated in a more advanced central position (such as the knock-out phase of World Cup 2006) his performances were decidedly lacklustre. There wasn’t a huge amount of marauding through the centre in support of the striker!
Best players in their best positions
The populist model also suggests that Wayne Rooney should be fielded as a lone centre-forward, which is a role he performs well for Man Utd. This approach works within the familiarly of a high-functioning club side, but may not translate comfortably to international level. Although Rooney has showed glimpses of form in South Africa, his performances have not suggested that he is presently equipped to lead the line on his own against reinforced international defences. Utilising him with a strike-partner or target man enables him more freedom to roam in search of the narrow margins of space which might be available.
Therefore, it isn’t simply a case of playing your best players in their best positions. A team is perhaps more than that, and Capello has to take many factors into consideration when reconciling the available talent with a functioning team structure. To the left, WCC demonstrates how a line-up of England’s best players in their best positions might look for the Germany game.
Tournament outsiders New Zealand went into the final group game undefeated and with a chance of making it into the second round. However, Paraguay (who topped the group going into the game) would provide the All Whites with stiff opposition.
A draw was not enough to take New Zealand to the next round, but they have far exceeded expectations. They leave South Africa undefeated and finished ahead of World Cup 2006 champions Italy in Group F. Coach Ricki Herbert had the team well set up for this tournament and, as a result of their collective endeavour, they proved very hard to break down. If they had managed to nick a goal in this final game, then they would have made the knock-out phase.
Way back in February, WCC explored how 
England looked determined to put the memory of the Algeria fixture behind them, but their early efforts looked slightly nervous: a couple of rash challenges were made and a few errors were apparent. Fabio Capello set the team up under 4-4-2 again but with Jermain Defoe replacing Emile Heskey in attack. Steven Gerrard started on the left and, whilst he had the freedom to roam, he retained a more defined position on the flank than against Algeria.
As this idea becomes more entrenched throughout the 21st century, and the biological overlap between types of species gains further acceptance, it will no longer be possible to exclude other animals from events which had previously been exclusively human. Therefore WCC predicts that future World Cups will have to allow for the participation of animals. This will raise a number of practical and ethical issues. For example, it may be discriminatory to rule out the participation of water-based species such as dolphins. Pitches will therefore have to be covered in sufficient water to enable water-based animals to swim, but which still allows land-based creatures to run. Accommodating animals on the same pitch that traditionally hold some antipathy towards each other may also prove difficult, e.g cats and dogs.
The World Cup that I have most affinity with is Spain 82, as I was just old enough to have an appreciation of what was going on. But interestingly, the principal elements of fascination have endured into adulthood. As a youngster it seemed a distant and exciting affair, full of mysterious countries and players and this still feels the case today. The World Cup is a vibrant tournament of colour and anticipation. The early stages of the tournament are perhaps the most exciting when all of the nations are still involved and the possibilities are at their broadest. Magazines and sticker albums show a multiplicity of countries with a kaleidoscopic array of different flags and strips. It’s not possible to take in all of the detail, but one absorbs the overall sensation.
My interest far exceeded the tribulations of England however. Even at a young age it was possible to discern that the Brazil v Italy game represented what sport should be about. The thrilling Brazilian side in their yellow shirts were defeated 3-2 by the underdogs Italy in the brilliant Spanish sunshine.
Chile set up under an assertive 3-4-3 for this fixture against a more conservative Switzerland. The South Americans played with plenty of attacking intent early in the game, but it was frenetic and hasty rather than measured and incisive. Early chances were limited to long-range efforts from Beausejour and Carmona.
Despite Chile’s attacking line-up they perhaps lack key creative individuals to dismantle defences: without more influential players the attack-minded approach is workmanlike rather than dazzling. Switzerland are a well-organized team, boasting a miserly defence, but as they were down to 10 men for the majority of the game, Chile should have perhaps demonstrated more cutting edge in attack. Valdivia appeared more influential than Fernandez in behind the centre-forward, whilst wide players Sanchez, Gonzalez and Beausejour made reasonable inroads down the flanks. The defensive trio was sound, although fairly untested, whilst Carmona was solid at the base of midfield. It could perhaps be queried why Biesla retained three central-defenders when faced with a Switzerland team playing 4-4-1. Perhaps an assertive 4-3-3 would have been more fruitful with just two central-defenders marshalling the lone Swiss forward.
