England and global football tournaments follow a familiar script. Qualify for a tournament by topping the group, trudge along in the group stages of the main competition, lose in the early stages of the knockouts and go back home to enjoy the rest of the tournament. While the third phase hasn’t yet arrived, the second phase too hasn’t really been according to that script, no matter what the naysayers say.
Yes, England were in an easy group and yes, England should’ve topped it. But they finished second behind Wales, a team they beat. The British media, before the horror of Brexit hit them, were predictably pessimistic of Roy Hodgson and his wards. Words like “spineless”, “gutless”, “pathetic” and “bottlers” have been routinely thrown at England’s football team who drew twice and won once in the group stages of their Euro 2016 campaign.
Better finishing
There is no denying the fact that England, on paper, had the better players compared to their Group B rivals – Wales, Slovakia and Russia. They have the better strikers and forwards in the tournament on the whole. Yet they only scored three goals in three matches. It is the finishing that has let them down. If England didn’t concede the last-minute equaliser against Russia or scored more goals after having 16 shots at goal and had just scored from one of the 27 shots they had against Slovakia, we would be discussing how good they have been.
Football is a game of very fine margins. It is one of the only sports where playing well and being better than your opponents doesn’t necessarily result in victories all the time. As a team only has to score one goal to win a match, the margin for error is very low. The error in defence led to them conceding against Russia, despite being very dominant throughout the match.
In previous tournaments, England have made a meal of their progression from the group stages. In the 2014 FIFA World Cup, they didn’t even get past that stage. In the 2010 edition, they came second in a group consisting of USA, Slovenia and Algeria. This was England at their absolute worst in terms of playing football. They seemed lacklustre and bereft of ideas on the pitch, despite having well-established players like Steven Gerrard, John Terry, Frank Lampard, Wayne Rooney, Ashley Cole, Jamie Carragher, Gareth Barry amongst others.
On the right path
The squad for Euro 2016 is less-experienced and many haven’t played tournament football before. But there seems to be a plan and their play looks far better and easier on the eye. They are passing better and moving the ball with more purpose.
Many football pundits say that if given two options between i) getting results and playing average to poor football or ii) not getting the desired results despite playing in a cohesive and attractive manner, the second option is the better one for the long term. England are right now closer to the second option. They are not yet an accomplished side, but there is more cohesion in this group than the previous ones.
Of course, at the end of the day, football is a results business. England could very well be beaten in the Round of 16 and return home far earlier than expected. But that needs to be assessed according to expectations. With a relatively inexperienced squad, getting to the semi-finals itself was considered as a success according to the chairman of the English Football Association, Greg Dyke. Hence, a realistic expectation would be a quarter-final finish for England.
Their predecessors used to reach the quarterfinals by huffing and puffing despite having better players on paper. This team will do well to reach that same stage. Anything more will be considered as a bonus. Spain lost in the Round of 16 at the 2006 FIFA World Cup to France. But until that point, they had played the best football of the tournament. Even against France, they played the better football but didn’t take their chances. And it cost them in the end.
That was a young Spanish squad playing with freedom. They would then go on to win the next three international tournaments they participated in. Most of the players present in the 2006 World Cup, played in Euro 2012 as well. They had gained experience and knew how to play with each other. At the end of the day, international football does not always make for a great spectacle as it involves players who are available and not necessarily the ones the coach wants.
Building towards the future
It is not right to compare this England team with the 2006 Spanish side. And nobody is saying England will start winning international tournaments in the near future. But if most of this team is retained for the 2018 FIFA World Cup, England will have a far greater chance of looking towards the next step, a semi-final finish.
England played better than Russia, Wales and Slovakia and pinned their opponents to their own penalty area for large parts during the matches. This has almost never happened before. As mentioned before, finishing is what has let them down. And scoring goals is the most important and difficult aspect in football.
Maybe creating more and finishing off the chances will take time for this team. They need to play more competitive matches together to develop an understanding of each other’s play. Many in the squad didn’t even take part in qualifying. There is also no superstar this time around. Wayne Rooney is the captain, but not the main man anymore. A true team ethic can be created in the following years.
They might go out early again in the knockout stages to Iceland, giving England fans a familiar pain. But hidden under the disappointment and pessimism, there will be hope.
Buy an annual Scroll Membership to support independent journalism and get special benefits.
Our journalism is for everyone. But you can get special privileges by buying an annual Scroll Membership. Sign up today!