Why England Succeed To Fail

Last night the England U21s crashed out of what appeared to be South Africa 2010 #2.

In the Euro U21s England showed we had failed to learn from England’s disastrous World Cup campaign last summer.

Many of the same problems we had in South Africa showed in our performances in Denmark. Previously people have blamed poor passing, poor close control, poor management and the list goes on. But what can really be to blame for almost 45 years without a competition win?

Most people reading this are probably thinking, “Poor coaching in grass roots football!” or “Bad passing!”. I think otherwise.

Let us look back at the 2006 World Cup for a second. Looking at our squad I think we had by far the best in the world. Frank Lampard was at his peak, Michael Owen was scoring goals and Joe Cole was actually fit, so why didn’t we win? We have had a team of individuals ever since we last won the World Cup.

In the 2006 F.A Cup final Steven Gerrard was superb, at the time it was probably one of the best performances by an individual ever. Soon after he travelled to join the England squad, and somehow he had hardly any impact on the World Cup whatsoever. That is just one example of England’s individuals.

The UEFA Champions League is often referred to as “the most prestigious club competition in the world”. I would even argue the quality of football in the Champions League surpasses that of the World Cup.

So why do the likes of Frank Lampard, John Terry and Peter Crouch succeed at the highest level and fail in the World Cup?

Most of England’s players are used to being their club’s star player, but unfortunately having a team of stars does not mean having a star team. In fact it means quite the opposite. While Spain have a team ethic that in most peoples’ opinion works, the Spanish players seem to have a belief that they are only as good as the player next to them. This results in passing football and everybody getting a chance to prove what they can do.

But England’s players tend to go it alone and the only way to win against the likes of Spain is team play. Arsenal proved this in their home leg vs. Barcelona in the Champions League last year.

So if England want to succeed they will have to rely on the Jack Wilshere’s of this world, in other words players who appreciate you only get from the team what you give to it.

Written by Thomas Munson

Abramovich Managerial Headache

As Roman Abramovich’s search for a new manager continues, it might be worth taking a look at who the prime candidates are to take over the helm at the good ship Chelsea.

First and foremost is the current Turkey boss, Guus Hiddink. The fans love him, he has an established friendship with the owner, and he has already proven himself at the club.

In Hiddink’s brief caretaker role in 2009 he led them to an F.A Cup win and third place in the Premier League. In addition, his team were unlucky to miss out on an appearance in the Champions League final.
Clearly, in Hiddink’s six-month spell at Chelsea he showed that his knack for managerial success was as strong with the Blues as it has been pretty much everywhere else in his career.

Hiddink is so far and away the favourite that it would be pointless even considering anyone else for the position if it was not for the salient point that he is still under contract with Turkish F.A, who are unwilling to let him go.
However, noises made in recent weeks suggest that the Turkish F.A might be open to negotiations with the Stamford Bridge outfit, and could reluctantly part company with Hiddink should they receive fair compensation.

Should Chelsea miss out on nabbing their man, they could turn their gaze towards Spain. Despite winning the Copa Del Rey, Jose Mourinho has a fairly frosty relationship with the powers-that-be at Real Madrid.

There have been rumours, though nothing concrete, that the ‘Special One’ has a release clause in his contract in the region of €25m, whereby if another club paid the compensation he would be free to leave Real Madrid. This is just speculation, but if there is any club that could afford such an outlay it is Chelsea.
In Chelsea’s current situation, Abramovich might look to the man who brought the Blues their first title in 50 years, a man who would in all probability relish the chance to finish what he started by winning Champions League at the club.

Nonetheless, Mourinho is still an outside shot. His position at Real Madrid, though rocky over the course of the season, has been strengthened by the departure of director Jorge Valdano, and he will certainly have foremost in his mind the wrestling of the La Liga title away from the imperious Barcelona.
It would not be entirely surprising if he rejoined Chelsea, but it seems unlikely at this particular point in time.

Finally, the bargain basement option. Having recently quit as manager of Fulham, Mark Hughes is freely available and has experience of higher echelon management at Manchester City.

Should Chelsea fail in their attempts to drag Hiddink and/or Mourinho away from their current contracts, he may represent their only choice. There is absolutely no way that Abramovich will even consider letting his team start the season managerless, therefore it is possible, though incredibly unlikely, that he may opt for Mark Hughes as a sort of ‘interim’ coach while waiting for Hiddink/Mourinho to become available.

VERDICT: Hiddink. Absolutely nailed on. Turkey receive generous compensation, Chelsea get their man. Everybody wins.

Written by Sebastian Clare