England have quailed for an international tournament under a cloud once more. Never capable of doing anything simply or without controversy, Wayne Rooney’s petulant and frankly idiotic dismissal away against Montenegro has left the country in a collective state as to how Capello’s charges can cope without Rooney for the first and possibly second and third group games. But is Rooney as indispensable and irreplaceable as has been made out?
It’s worth remembering amongst all the doom mongering that Capello’s England actually qualified top of the group and unbeaten. For a simple refusal to leak team sheets and indulge certain sections of the press, Capello is pilloried for being the exact thing that the press cried out for after the chummy and fawning ill-fated reign of Steve McClaren – an authoritarian leader.
Rooney’s influence, when he’s in form at least, is fantastic. His goals are not what he’s in the side for. While he may never be capable of being the deep lying instigator of attacks that he’s often tried to be in an England shirt, his link up play is magnificent and he sets the tempo of our attacks. Despite slowing down the play at times in Montenegro, he was still heavily involved in both of England’s goals.
Rooney’s record at international tournaments is incredibly patchy, though. Magnificent at Euro 2004 until injury saw him taken off in the eventual quarter-final loss to Portugal, he was then seen labouring at the World Cupin 2006 until he was dismissed for childishly lashing out to a Ricardo Carvalho challenge. Whereas 2006 Rooney’s race back to fitness dominated the headlines, at the 2010 World Cup, it was Rooney’s terrible form that drew concerns.
The sensationalist nature of the tabloids will tell you that England are doomed at Euro 2012 before it’s even started, particularly if Rooney is suspended for more than one game. But this running need to create excuses for our downfalls has been a recurrent theme since David Beckham dreaded metatarsal injury in the run-up to the 2002 World Cup – the red tops always require a soap opera to help shift copy. To plan for failure is wise, but to simply expect because of the absence of one player is downright foolish.
There appears to be a school of thought that places a lot of stock in ditching many of the experienced and wiser heads from the England squad in time for the European Championships in Poland and Ukraine, simply because they’re not tainted by previous failures. Rooney’s absence may hasten such a revolution, with Capello admitting that the Man Utd man won’t be involved in any of the side’s warm-up games as the Italian bids to find a solution to his absence.
Before we get all misty-eyed about how good the England side are with Rooney in it, though, and revert to distorting history to suit our current predicament, it’s worth remembering that Rooney is just a culpable as anyone else of that great English disease – surrendering possession with regularity and ease.
He is without a doubt England’s finest player, the best of his generation, but is he as indispensable as has been declared in some quarters? Should England just throw in the towel before we’ve even gone a round?
There is certainly potential among the ranks to cover Rooney’s absence. Darren Bent is a natural finisher and a proven Premier League quality striker. He may not strike fear into the heart’s of the opposition’s defence, but he has a knack of being in the right place at the right time and could prove crucial in tight group games.