God save the Queen

And English soccer

Ajitpaul Mangat, Staff

The Canadian national men’s hockey team failure to win a medal at the 2006 Winter Olympics, the American national men’s basketball team settling for bronze at the 2004 Summer Olympics, and six-time defending champion Takeru “Tsunami” Kobayashi losing the 2007 Nathan’s Hot Dog Eating Contest. Now you can add England’s national men’s soccer team to this disappointing list, as they have failed to reach the 2008 UEFA European soccer championship. The English team’s hopes were dashed with a shocking 3-2 loss on Nov 21 to Croatia.

In typical fashion, the British sports media, like a pack of beer-bellied “Nancy Graces,” have been quick to point the finger and cry foul at the top of their lungs. The number of hair-balled schemes contrived in such a short period of time to save English soccer is staggeringly prolific and astoundingly foolish. An astute traversing of this dense cloud of hot air, however, can lead to the discovery of some interesting, provocative notions.

“Part of the problem is that we haven’t got lots of English players playing regularly in the Premier League . . . Because the money is in England we don’t export people and it blocks the flow of young English players coming through,” said Gareth Southgate, Middlesbrough manager.

This is a common notion. With the English Premier League (EPL) currently the most desirable European soccer league, there has been an enormous influx of foreigners leading to a shortage of squad spots for home-grown talent.

Italy is often employed as a case-in-point, as Italy won the 2006 World Cup with every player on the squad practising their trade in the Italian Serie A, which apparently resulted in greater team unity and chemistry. However, this fails to take into account the mid-1980s to mid-1990s. The Italian Serie A, during this time period, was what the ELP is now: the desired destination for the sport’s top talent. There is a reason the likes of Diego Maradona, Zinedine Zidane, and Gabriel Batistuta spent the prime of their careers in Italy. Yet, the Italian national team reached the 1988 Euros and 1990 World Cup semi-finals, and 1994 World Cup final. Certainly the great quantity of foreigners did not affect the national team. Consequently, this idea proves contentious.

“In my opinion the England manager should be English,” said Arsene Wanger, Arsenal manager.

“It would be great if the next manager was English but when you look for English candidates with the criteria you want, there are not many around who dominate the Premier League. Much has been said about the lack of English players at the top level; the same must be said of managers,” said Lawrie Sanchez, Fulham manager.

The first action of the Football Association — the governing body of soccer in England — after England’s elimination was to release manager (and an Englishman himself), Steve McClaren. Thus, the search for a manager began. Many are of the opinion that he must be English, while others believe there simply are not enough first-rate English coaches for the search to be so narrow.

If you are wondering why it matters what a manager’s nationality is, then you are not alone. An analysis of the past 15 years of the English national men’s soccer team proves no correlation. English managers have succeeded (Terry Venables) and failed (Graham Taylor and Steve McClaren), while the lone foreign manager had moderate success (Sven-Göran Eriksson).

McClaren did not fail because of his nationality, and would not have won because of his nationality. He simply was not a good manager. His first major move was to excise talented, but inconsistent midfielder David Beckham. This was the right move, as Beckham was going through a rough patch of form.

However, the fact that he stopped there was the problem. He then failed to drop either David Gerrard or Frank Lampard, the equally talented and popular, but far too similar, pair of central midfielders. England simply is not as effective with both playing. An effective mid-field requires players of different talents; England does not have that when Gerrard and Lampard play alongside one another. Thus, McClaren failed to win because he wanted to appease a public, which now demonizes him.

“The big four clubs in the Premier League have English players with a wealth of experience in the Champions League. We need to reflect on why those players can perform week in and week out for their clubs but not for their national team,” said Alan Curbishley, West Ham United manager.

This notion appears to lie closest to the heart of the matter. The flux of foreign players has not hurt other countries’ national teams (i.e., Italy), and an array of managers have all failed to capture a trophy. Thus, much of the fault it appears must lie on the quality of players.

An examination of the English squad finds a team overflowing with midfield and defensive talent, however, lacking in strikers and goaltenders. The absence of effective strikers is not immediately obvious as the teams starting strikers, Wayne Rooney and Michael Owen, are both world-class. But with players like Alan Smith and Jermain Defoe backing them up, the insufficiency becomes obvious.

The lack of quality goaltending is even more obvious. As it was Paul Robinson’s infamous gaffe, allowing a back pass to trickle under his foot for an own goal, that set the team on a path to non-qualification.

So I propose my own remedy:

“The grass roots of English soccer must be fixed. Greater emphasis should be placed on training superior strikers, and goaltenders,” say I, Ajitpaul Mangat, the Manitoban sports reporter.

But, hold on . . .

“There’s no point in looking at these players and saying that everything is wrong with English football to the grass roots. That’s got nothing to do with the present players. There are enough good players there to have a decent future for that particular squad,” according to Sir Alex Ferguson, Manchester United manager.

Touché, Sir Alex. And so: the hair-balled remedies continue until qualifying for World Cup 2010 begins.