As a disclaimer I must admit, as a non-Englishman (but a lover of the English game nonetheless), my perspective might be slightly skewed here.
As I see it, with disaster fast approaching in the national side's Euro 2008 qualification campaign, English media hacks are doing the inevitable, sharpening their knives and seeking out a sacrificial lamb. Steve McClaren has (rightfully) suffered the brunt of the nation's displeasure to this point, but the prospect of non-qualification is too devastating for one man alone to take the blame. More than the failure that Beckham was held responsible for in '98; that Phil Neville apparently caused in 2000; Seaman in 2002, here there is also a sense of utter embarrassment, possibly the worst of the myriad ways in which the beautiful game can express its sadistic streak. On paper, England are better than both Russia and Croatia, and though no nation (save the hosts) are automatically entitled to a place at the tournament, England should be there. The painful will become the downright unbearable for some if neighbours and rivals Scotland advance from a group containing both of last year's World Cup finalists.
So where did it all go wrong? No one outside of the F.A. ever had faith in the manager, but surely the players were more than good enough to progress, if not comfortably, at least occupying the automatic qualification spot. As such, will there be an inquest into the failure of the nation's superstars? This may happen, but in recent days the blame has been pointed in the direction of Premiership clubs' supposed over-reliance on foreign players. How this bears any direct relationship to the national side's poor performance is unimportant. It is reminiscent of the hysteria that saw Cristiano Ronaldo take the blame for Wayne Rooney's red card in Germany, the young Englishman's blatant stomp on Ricardo Carvalho seeming to have faded into irrelevance. Logical or not, an argument proclaiming the nation's suffering at the hands of foreign saboteurs, out to ruin the national game provides instant gratification for the xenophobe in all of us.
However, I see this as little more than a big cop-out. The likes of McClaren and stand-in England captain Steven Gerrard have been quick to jump on the scare-mongering bandwagon, as it suits their interests to deflect attention from their own blunders. Alex Ferguson has also used it to put pressure on his counterparts at Arsenal and Liverpool, who have fewer Englishmen in their first team squads. Ulterior motives aside, their is a strong argument for setting clubs a minimum number of English and homegrown players, to help domestic football maintain its identity. Some would also wish to restrict the big clubs' habit of signing increasingly younger players through their international scouting networks, for the good of the players (as the clubs are virtually cradle-snatching in some cases), their domestic clubs and the English youth being displaced. Arsene Wenger for one would dispute this, and considering how well Fabregas's signing has worked out it would be hard to blame him.
All that being said, a quota on foreign players will not resurrect - assuming that this is what is required - the English national game. It does not automatically follow that forcing out more talented foreign players will make better players of the mediocre Englishmen brought in to replace them. Premier League revenues will suffer from the loss of some of the league's great entertainers and who is to say the English players will not suffer in the absence of imports of the calibre of Berbatov, Elano and Arteta, whose presence surely inspires their younger team mates to raise their own game. Of course, the Premiership will not lose all its foreign players, but some of its cosmopolitan aura is sure to be lost. The league will be hit in the pocket and its reputation as one of Europe's best, based on its clubs attracting the world's best players, will suffer. This is before bringing up the fact that such restrictions would defy EU law. The old First Division (without foreign players) provided the nation only one international trophy, so it would seem folly to sacrifice the Premier League's success for a policy that would not necessarily guarantee that of the national side.
So if limiting player imports won't do the trick, what is the answer? It is one that is simple to identify, but not the easiest to apply, quite likely the reason it has been put on the back burner by many in the media. Recent success - relative to England - for the likes of Italy, France and Germany has not been because of or in spite of the foreigners in their respective leagues, but rather down to a simple combination of good players and good coaching. None of the leading sides in these countries see the need for foreign managers, as they boast the likes of Hitzfeld, Ancelotti, Lippi and Wenger. It has been a decade since any of Europe's footballing giants coveted an English manager, as they are simply not good enough. Of the English managers in the top division, Harry Redknapp never enters consideration for the England job (maybe it was the bungs), Allardyce plays a striker (Smith) in front of his back four and his two best goalscorers (Owen and Martins) out wide to satisfy his 4-5-1 fixation (don't get me started on the route one tactics), Curbishley is Mr Mid-table-obscurity and most of the others will be satisfied with avoiding relegation. Somewhat in contrast, fellow Brits O'Neill, Hughes and Moyes have all led sides to European football and are breathing down the necks of the top six. Take into account the success of McLeish and Strachan and one wonders what the other home countries are doing that England aren't.
It is not just the top level where the coaching problem exists. Something needs to be done to reform the way kids are taught to play the game; less punt and chase, more pass and move; more patience and appreciation of possession and how to create space. No one can doubt the work ethic and passion of English players, but at the highest level, trying hard doesn't guarantee success. England's recent second half performance in Moscow, reminiscent of those against Brazil in 2002 and France and Portugal in 2004, proved once again that possession is nine tenths of the law and the midfield forgot completely how to play keep-ball.
Hopefully the academy system will bear fruit with a new generation of more technically gifted and tactically-astute English players to prove we do not need to chase out the foreign ones. We must also hope that the F.A. put a greater emphasis on training good coaches and managers, and with a few more English managers of quality, Premier League viewers will see more local players without the need to legislate in their favour first.
As I see it, with disaster fast approaching in the national side's Euro 2008 qualification campaign, English media hacks are doing the inevitable, sharpening their knives and seeking out a sacrificial lamb. Steve McClaren has (rightfully) suffered the brunt of the nation's displeasure to this point, but the prospect of non-qualification is too devastating for one man alone to take the blame. More than the failure that Beckham was held responsible for in '98; that Phil Neville apparently caused in 2000; Seaman in 2002, here there is also a sense of utter embarrassment, possibly the worst of the myriad ways in which the beautiful game can express its sadistic streak. On paper, England are better than both Russia and Croatia, and though no nation (save the hosts) are automatically entitled to a place at the tournament, England should be there. The painful will become the downright unbearable for some if neighbours and rivals Scotland advance from a group containing both of last year's World Cup finalists.
So where did it all go wrong? No one outside of the F.A. ever had faith in the manager, but surely the players were more than good enough to progress, if not comfortably, at least occupying the automatic qualification spot. As such, will there be an inquest into the failure of the nation's superstars? This may happen, but in recent days the blame has been pointed in the direction of Premiership clubs' supposed over-reliance on foreign players. How this bears any direct relationship to the national side's poor performance is unimportant. It is reminiscent of the hysteria that saw Cristiano Ronaldo take the blame for Wayne Rooney's red card in Germany, the young Englishman's blatant stomp on Ricardo Carvalho seeming to have faded into irrelevance. Logical or not, an argument proclaiming the nation's suffering at the hands of foreign saboteurs, out to ruin the national game provides instant gratification for the xenophobe in all of us.
However, I see this as little more than a big cop-out. The likes of McClaren and stand-in England captain Steven Gerrard have been quick to jump on the scare-mongering bandwagon, as it suits their interests to deflect attention from their own blunders. Alex Ferguson has also used it to put pressure on his counterparts at Arsenal and Liverpool, who have fewer Englishmen in their first team squads. Ulterior motives aside, their is a strong argument for setting clubs a minimum number of English and homegrown players, to help domestic football maintain its identity. Some would also wish to restrict the big clubs' habit of signing increasingly younger players through their international scouting networks, for the good of the players (as the clubs are virtually cradle-snatching in some cases), their domestic clubs and the English youth being displaced. Arsene Wenger for one would dispute this, and considering how well Fabregas's signing has worked out it would be hard to blame him.
All that being said, a quota on foreign players will not resurrect - assuming that this is what is required - the English national game. It does not automatically follow that forcing out more talented foreign players will make better players of the mediocre Englishmen brought in to replace them. Premier League revenues will suffer from the loss of some of the league's great entertainers and who is to say the English players will not suffer in the absence of imports of the calibre of Berbatov, Elano and Arteta, whose presence surely inspires their younger team mates to raise their own game. Of course, the Premiership will not lose all its foreign players, but some of its cosmopolitan aura is sure to be lost. The league will be hit in the pocket and its reputation as one of Europe's best, based on its clubs attracting the world's best players, will suffer. This is before bringing up the fact that such restrictions would defy EU law. The old First Division (without foreign players) provided the nation only one international trophy, so it would seem folly to sacrifice the Premier League's success for a policy that would not necessarily guarantee that of the national side.
So if limiting player imports won't do the trick, what is the answer? It is one that is simple to identify, but not the easiest to apply, quite likely the reason it has been put on the back burner by many in the media. Recent success - relative to England - for the likes of Italy, France and Germany has not been because of or in spite of the foreigners in their respective leagues, but rather down to a simple combination of good players and good coaching. None of the leading sides in these countries see the need for foreign managers, as they boast the likes of Hitzfeld, Ancelotti, Lippi and Wenger. It has been a decade since any of Europe's footballing giants coveted an English manager, as they are simply not good enough. Of the English managers in the top division, Harry Redknapp never enters consideration for the England job (maybe it was the bungs), Allardyce plays a striker (Smith) in front of his back four and his two best goalscorers (Owen and Martins) out wide to satisfy his 4-5-1 fixation (don't get me started on the route one tactics), Curbishley is Mr Mid-table-obscurity and most of the others will be satisfied with avoiding relegation. Somewhat in contrast, fellow Brits O'Neill, Hughes and Moyes have all led sides to European football and are breathing down the necks of the top six. Take into account the success of McLeish and Strachan and one wonders what the other home countries are doing that England aren't.
It is not just the top level where the coaching problem exists. Something needs to be done to reform the way kids are taught to play the game; less punt and chase, more pass and move; more patience and appreciation of possession and how to create space. No one can doubt the work ethic and passion of English players, but at the highest level, trying hard doesn't guarantee success. England's recent second half performance in Moscow, reminiscent of those against Brazil in 2002 and France and Portugal in 2004, proved once again that possession is nine tenths of the law and the midfield forgot completely how to play keep-ball.
Hopefully the academy system will bear fruit with a new generation of more technically gifted and tactically-astute English players to prove we do not need to chase out the foreign ones. We must also hope that the F.A. put a greater emphasis on training good coaches and managers, and with a few more English managers of quality, Premier League viewers will see more local players without the need to legislate in their favour first.
0 Comments:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
