Short answer… Nowhere!
Experience, the word sends chills down my spine.
Why do we as fans, our illustrious press and even our specialist pundits believe that the majority of the England squad deserves a place according to their relevant top-level experience?
What has the so-called top-level experience brought us in the past? Have we won any top-level trophies recently, or even been close? No we haven’t.
Granted a lot of the favoured players in recent England squads have taken part in the Champions League final and in some cases even won it. But surely that is a measure of the team they were playing for and the set up of that particular squad. Should that mean that they automatically deserve a place in the England squad?
No it should not. The make-up of an International squad should depend on four simple things: philosophy, work ethic, fitness and form.
Philosophy
Every manager brings his own tactics and style of play to a team and Roy Hodgson is the personification of footballing philosophy. Harry Redknapp, for example, is very fluid about his tactics and style. We recently heard of how he asked Gareth Bale and Rafa Van Der Vaart to play where they like.
Roy Hodgson, however, is very different. He is cut from the same mould as the great Italian coach Arrigo Sacchi, he has a vision and every player must fit into the vision. He likes to have a highly organized team, he likes the players he puts into that team to fit his style of play. In other words he won’t select a player that doesn’t fit in.
This is exactly what English football as a whole needs, and that is why the FA has employed Hodgson not only as England manager but to oversee the development of English football.
In terms of the squad it means that Hodgson should only pick players that will fit his style of play, whatever he decides works best for England. The philosophy must also fit the type of players you have available to you.
Work Ethic
Introducing the neat little app that’ll pay you to view content tailored to your interests:
Roy Hodgson is famous for working players hard and expecting the players to work hard for him. This is even more important with only a few weeks of preparation and training together. He has to know that the players he selects will be willing to learn from him and work hard for him from the outset otherwise he will easily come unstuck.
He must also consider their discipline, does somebody like John Terry really deserve a place in the England squad after letting his team down so blatantly and the very highest level? Of course indiscipline can also be caused by the pressure of the game and the desperation to win. It can also be caused by outside elements, like Wayne Rooney’s recent England dismissal just a day or two after his Father was arrested.
This is down to a coach’s sensible selection at game time. Fabio Capello should probably have realized that Rooney’s mind wasn’t entirely on the game. Roy Hodgson needs to pick the players with strong minds.
Fitness
A pretty obvious criterion really, no point taking a player that can’t play most of the tournament or even at their fittest could not play every game. Prime examples of players who are excellent when playing but unfortunately can’t play every game are Ledley King and more recently Rio Ferdinand.
Sir Alex has recently said that this season Rio has been unable to play more than every 7 days. This is unfortunate for England but not the end of the world. Fitness also brings up other issues for England, and other International teams. Do you risk selecting a player that may not be able to feature or that may cause further injury if they do feature?
Currently there are fears regarding Scott Parkers fitness. This may or may not be the gamble and to some extent managers have to trust specialists for the right answer. Why take a semi fit player when there are fully fit players that can play a role.
Form
To most this is the other big question. Going on club form alone is very risky. In the past Steven Gerrard and Frank Lampard were the form players for their clubs. Various England managers tried, and failed, to shoehorn them into the national team. This does not work… It has never worked… It will never work…
This season and especially towards the end of this season there have been a few of our so-called experienced players that have been completely out of form. John Terry, Stewart Downing and Steven Gerrard to name just a few.
Do any of these players really deserve their places at this stage?
So here is a list of the twenty-four-man squad that was selected for the last Euro Qualifier against Montenegro, our last fully competitive match. I have put next to their names whether they should be in or out according to the four criteria and who should replace them according to their seasons statistics, known fitness issues and whether they may fit Roy Hodgson’s philosophy. Please feel free to supply your own opinions below.
Goalkeepers
Foster and Scholes have retired from international football, so probably not worth including them.
And how can you pick Daniel Sturridge, the man who has barely played or scored since Christmas over Andy Carroll, who has been playing well for his club since Christmas, especially in the last few games of the season?
Hi Dan, The premise of the article was the four reasons players could get picked for the England Squad. Playing Philosophy, Work Rate, Fitness and Form. The squad in the article was based on statistical deservedness rather than experience.
Foster and Scholes deserved to be offered a place, whether or not they chose to go.
Daniel Sturridge’s league statistics for this season are much better than Andy Carroll’s.
Carroll has only started to look like a good player in the last 3 or 4 games.
Appearances: DS – 28(2), AC – 21(14)
Goals: DS – 11, AC – 4
Assists: DS – 3, AC – 2
Shots per game: DS – 3.1, AC – 2.5
Pass Success %: DS – 81.6, AC – 64
Aeriel Duels Won per game: DS – 0, AC – 4.3
MOM: DS – 1, AC – 2
So as you can see statistically Daniel Sturridge deserves it more for the work he has done this season and tactically he would be a good choice because he can play out wide either side as well as up front.
Also I would like to add that the squad I listed wouldn’t necessarily be my favoured squad either.
Thanks for your comment anyway Dan. Lets hope that the actually squad can bring home the bacon. 🙂
We’ll agree to disagree, because ultimately, Fitness is an irrelevance to both of them, in terms of worth ethic, i think that of Sturridge could be questioned as he is fairly lazy and selfish. With regards to form, surely the form at the start of the season isn’t of importance. If you were talking about their overall performance over the season then yes, the stats do not lie, Sturridge should go. But, form is surely in relation to the last 10-15 games. I bet in that time, Carroll’s statistics would be more favourable, as this is when he has scored the majority of his goals and is one of the few times he has been given a run in the side. Tactically, his versatility is a factor, but Carroll’s presence and his style of play is also of tactical importance, given there are very few players like him, whilst we have an abundance of players in a similar mould and in similar form to Sturridge ie Walcott, Chamberlain, Lennon,Young, Dyer although I believe Sturridge to be one of the best of that bunch, his form and work ethic would drop him down the list.
With regards to this comment “Carroll has only looked good the last 3 or 4 games”, I have two issues. Surely that accentuates my argument with reference to form and secondly that is simply not true. If you have watched him since Christmas he has actually been very good in a lot of games, but a lot of his hold up play and other work go unnoticed due to his lack of goals and the fact that most people only see him via MOTD. But neither him or Sturridge are out and out goalscorers so their goals are not solely the criteria for going