Tag Archives: Roy Hodgson

EURO 2016 Review: Portugal the surprising victors

The victors…all rights are reserved for this image ©

By Manish Pandey.

After 51 matches in an expanded tournament, Portugal ended as the champions of Euro 2016, beating France in the final in extra time.

The final was symbolic of the tournament as a whole. Dull, low quality and very defensive. It took Portugal 80 minutes to get a shot on target. France were slow and wasteful. Antoine Griezmann and André-Pierre Gignac missed easy chances to wrap up the game. Didier Deschamps was negative in his strategy, waiting until Portugal went 1-0 up to bring on Anthony Martial. In truth, it was a forgettable final.

Expanding the tournament to 24 teams was a big mistake. Yes it gave the opportunity to some nations to play on the biggest stage whereas they would not have had the same chance under the old system. This came at a huge cost. At the cost of quality of football, entertainment and excitement for the fans.

The statistics are a damning indictment of the lack of adventure shown by the teams. Euro 2016 produced 108 goals in 51 matches, an average of 2.12 per game, which is the lowest since 1996 and the third lowest since 1980.

Teams were happy to spend most of the group stage defensive and on the back foot. Even the winners Portugal were through to the knockout stages without needing to win a single match. 3 draws. 3 points. Easier half of the draw. Job done.

Northern Ireland made it as far as the round of 16 scoring only two goals.

The lesser teams being defensive had a knock-on effect on the bigger teams. They could not break down defences and play with the same assertive freedom that entertained in years gone by. Even Germany struggled to score goals. Games were largely decided by moments of individual magic rather than cohesive attacking performances.

A major positive of this tournament was the tactical nous and flexibility shown by most managers. Antonio Conte’s Italy were the best tactically, operating a 3-5-2 formation with class and determination. The sight of Conte barking out instructions every second of the game was a joy. The fact Germany changed their entire system to neutralise Italy is perhaps the greatest compliment that can be paid to Italy.

Wales under Chris Coleman were also magnificent. Operating in a 3-4-2-1 formation gave them balance and flexibility. Reaching the semi-final was a brilliant achievement and a testament to Chris Coleman’s abilities to get the most out of his players. Giving Gareth Bale and Aaron Ramsey – the two best players- the freedom to operate without being burdened by defensive roles meant Wales could create chances and score goals. Ramsey’s absence in the semi-final was a huge loss to Wales and had a major impact.

The tournament winners Portugal, were also tactically aware and well-drilled by manager Fernando Santos. Santos was probably the MVP of the entire tournament. He drilled his team defensively and they were exemplary in defending, with Pepe’s Man of the Match performance in the final a symbol of the rest of the tournament. They conceded one goal in 420 minutes of knockout football.

It was not pretty to watch for a neutral, but in a tournament, it is ultimately about winning. Santos also showed tactical flexibility in the final, even after the injury to Cristiano Ronaldo. Santos switched to a 4-3-3 once he brought on Eder for Renato Sanches. This shift was too much for Didier Deschamps to handle and ultimately was the decisive moment, with Eder getting the winning goal.

For all of the tactical marvel of some teams, there was equally tactical ineptitude to gargantuan levels, namely by England and Belgium. It should be no surprise really. Coached by Roy Hodgson and Marc Wilmots, there was a high probability that both of these teams would be dragged down to each manager’s low-level of tactical acumen.

The struggles of England under Hodgson are well documented. Marc Wilmots however, has consistently been responsible for Belgium’s failure at major tournaments. The ‘Golden Generation’ of England could not get past the quarter finals, it seems it will be the same story for Belgium.

So what will we remember this tournament for?

The tournament of the underdogs perhaps. Iceland and Wales inspired. Their attitude and sporting culture of unity was a lesson to others.

Possession is not as important as once thought. Spain, Germany, Switzerland, England, Belgium, Hungary, Russia and Ukraine were all in the top 10 for pass completion rates. Between them they won 11 matches out of 33. Four of the quarter-finalists were among the 10 teams with the lowest percentage of possession overall.  The champions, Portugal averaged just 51.6 per cent possession, the 12th highest of the 24 teams.

Age is just a number was rather true in this tournament. Talents who by age should be past their best showed some undeniable class. Dimitri Payet was a star in the group stages. Andreas Iniesta rolled back the years. Nani was perhaps the most exciting 103 cap stalwart around. Ricardo Quaresma was the most effective substitute in the tournament. Gigi Buffon showed his world-class abilities at the age of 38. Andrea Barzagli at 35 was part of the formidable Italy back 3.

The stress of being manager on the touchline can impact managers in very different ways. Some such as Roy Hodgson are left with a confused expression on their faces. Others such as Antonio Conte scream and shout, feeling every kick of the football. And some have a very unique and never seen before reaction on the touchline, namely, Joachim Löw. The adrenaline can make people do strange things.

There is also a debate to be had on the growing importance of club football against international football. Something needs to be done to cure the tiredness on show from most players at the Euros. It does not make for a good spectacle and ultimately, fans want to be entertained watching the game.

From the next Euros on, we will no longer enjoy the simplicity of watching football in one country. Instead, we will be taken on a journey around Europe, playing in some notable cities- 13 cities to be precise.

Let us hope future tournaments provide us with more entertainment than this one.

Team of the tournament: (3-4-1-2)

Rui Patrício;

Boateng, Williams, Bonucci;

Kimmich, Kroos, Ramsey, Guerreiro;

Payet;

Griezmann, Nani.

Player of the tournament: Antoine Griezmann

Abject England humiliated against Iceland

Dejected…England humiliated…all rights are reserved for this image ©

By Manish Pandey.

Who expected that? Iceland, a country with more volcanoes than professional footballers, outplayed England. They beat England. England, that supposed football powerhouse. Reality check? Yes. Wakeup call? Yes. The same old story? Damn right.

There are many reasons for why England continually fail to perform at major tournaments. We have exhausted the individual reasons down the years, from fatigue to youth coaching to senior coaching to the players. So why did England fail at Euro 2016?

Let’s start with the man responsible at the end of the day: Roy Hodgson.

Hodgson is the man who has control over every aspect of the England team. It is his job to ensure his players are ready and prepared for each game. It is his job to ensure he has plans ready for different in-game scenarios. Ultimately, it is his job to select the right players.

Hodgson’s managerial background, in particular in the last 10 years, should have told us that England would at best be mediocre. A man used to fighting relegation battles was England’s manager at a major tournament. Not once, not twice but three times. Let that sink in.

Tactically, Hodgson has proven himself to be inept. We all expected Iceland to sit behind the ball and absorb pressure. They surprised us. Iceland chose to employ a high press, left 2 strikers up front so England’s defenders were unable to attack as much as they would want to. Hodgson seemed flummoxed by this tactical surprise.

Throughout the tournament, England had no tactical plan and that is the fault of the manager. He did not know his best team. He did not know his best formation. Having played so many matches since the last world cup, Hodgson did not know a thing.

He selected players who were unfit, tired and simply not in good enough condition to play for England at a major tournament. Raheem Sterling warmed the bench for Manchester City in the 2nd half of the season. Why was he selected ahead of an in form Andros Townsend? Even worse, he started in the knockout game against Iceland despite being below average in the opening two games of the tournament.

Why was Jack Wilshere selected? Why was Jordan Henderson selected? Both players coming back from injury were quite clearly unfit. Wilshere was deemed bad enough to be subbed after 50 minutes against Slovakia yet was tasked with creating an England revival in the 2nd half against Iceland. Henderson looked off the pace against Slovakia and did not do much to catch the eye.

Why take James Milner? He played 3 minutes. Why take Ross Barkley and John Stones if they are not going to play?

The Slovakia game told us much about Hodgson and his ability (or rather inability) to read his players. Wayne Rooney was England’s star man in the opening 2 games of the tournament. There is a common thought around football that when Rooney is fit and firing, he should be playing every game to keep his momentum and should not be ‘rested’. Inevitably, Hodgson chose to ‘rest’ him and he only played just over 30 minutes.

That is by no means an excuse for Rooney. It was his worst performance during his reign as captain. He let the team down and displayed very little leadership in a time the young players needed leaders.

Worse than the Rooney decision, Hodgson changed the make up of a team that had some momentum from the lucky last minute victory over Wales. The buzzword is momentum. Why break up momentum of a winning team? You can change 1 or 2 players, but you need to have a settled lineup, especially if like England, there was no clear plan before the tournament. When you stumble upon a formula, you must stick to it.

The entire country could see Harry Kane was exhausted. Even at the back end of the season, he was not the same as a few months ago. Yet Hodgson chose to play him in all of the friendly games. Surely in training, Kane could not have been showing the usual levels of energy. So why did Hodgson persist with him? He went on reputation not form.

Dele Alli did not perform in any of the games he played in, in the group stages. So why did Hodgson persist with him? Why did he not try a different player or a different system? The answer lies in the next part of the article, namely the manager failed in planning and preparation.

Planning and preparation is the most important role a manager has. Everything in the team links to the manager’s planning and preparation. Hodgson had no plan. The evidence of this is in the confused nature of the players throughout the tournament. Having a plan helps the mentality of a player and takes the pressure away.

England players should have been aware of different gameplans for different situations. The best coaches at major tournaments can relay information to their players about what will happen in each game and will give them a solution.

Looking at the Netherlands in the 2014 World Cup, the Dutch players repeatedly said that Louis van Gaal would inform them about a gameplan for different phases of the game and that gameplan would work. In turn, the players confidence in the manager increased. Van Gaal had a plan involving the water break in the game against Mexico. Did Hodgson have any type of strategy or was he just desperate?

Playing in a tournament has its own pressures. Had Hodgson been able to conjure any type of gameplan, the players would have been able to stay calm under the pressure of potential defeat, instead of having dizzy minds.

Instead, we saw a complete meltdown of the England players. Misplacing 5 yard passes, loose 1st touches, ball rolling under the feet and running as if boots were full of lead. These were the hallmarks of England’s attempted fightback, in the face of tournament elimination.

Even in the group matches, you could not discern how England wanted to play. There was no evidence of patterns of play being worked on in training.

What was the Plan B? I said in my preview of the game that England needed to be radical if things went wrong. They had to do something different. Hodgson ended up bringing Marcus Rashford on which was smart. Of course it would have helped had he brought him on with more than 4 minutes left.

Rashford was England’s best player having only been on the pitch for 4 minutes. Imagine if he had been on for 15 minutes more.  Proactive management? Never for Hodgson. He froze.

Tournament after tournament, England managers do not have a clear gameplan. That translates to the players. Players who already feel the strain of the England shirt, cannot rely on the manager to help them.

Preparing for a job interview or exam, those who have prepared well always feel more confident and under less pressure, than those who have not prepared as well. The same theory applies to England in football.

Alas, it is that pressure which creates so much fear. Fear which inhibits the players and makes them play as though they are playing Sunday League. They were not playing the situation. They were not playing the game. They were playing as if they had the future negative headlines in the mind.

Joe Hart is the most visible example of an England player playing with fear. Of all the players, he has the biggest insecurities and self-doubts. All the bravado and shouting in the tunnel whilst jumping up and down, getting ‘pumped up’ is just that – bravado. Trying to act the leader and show the world he is the man. In reality, he is an overrated goalkeeper and mentally soft.

An example of under-preparation can be seen in Iceland’s opening goal. Everybody knew about Iceland’s long distance throw. We all knew they had tall players. Why then was Wayne Rooney marking a player over 6ft? Why did Kyle Walker forget to track his man? Surely having seen Rory Delap at Stoke for so many years, coaches and players understood that the 2nd ball in the area is always the most important.

Nobody would say Iceland have better players than England. Yet Iceland had a clear gameplan. They knew what to do and when to do it. They pressed high, they attacked, they left 2 strikers forward for most of the game. It was only the last 20 minutes did they decide to defend deep. The players trusted in the gameplan. They emerged as deserving winners.

Whilst Hodgson rightfully shoulders a lot of the blame, it is important to not absolve the players.

Ultimately it is the players out there on the pitch. Some of those players have had stellar club seasons but could not produce under pressure. These players are mentally weak. They are the 3G generation of academy players. They are not street smart in life so why do we expect them to be able to handle the pressures of tournament football.

Nowadays, everything is done for the players. They have agents and assistants and cleaners and drivers and so on. The players nowadays do not actually have to do anything which shapes them as characters. Everything is manufactured, from image to press conferences. The inability to do anything for themselves and think for themselves in life, eventually translates onto the pitch.

Young kids aged 11/12/13 are being offered agents and large sums of money. Clubs are offering £50,000 to families just to enter into negotiations to get a player to join the academy. Can we really expect players growing up in this environment to be street smart?

The manager cannot tell you when to commit a cynical foul, waste time or kick long. It is about decision making under pressure, something only the individual player can do. England players need to toughen up in life and then they can learn to play like men.

The children growing up nowadays, will have a warped idea of football. For them, it will only be what they see on Sky Sports & BT Sports. They will play on 3G pitches, perfect surfaces and have the best equipment. That is not a true love for the game. This, as Jamie Carragher says, will lead to us producing babies not grown up men.

In different countries across Europe and especially South America, children grow up playing football on the street. There are no signs saying “no ball games allowed”. Children play on grass which has more mud than grass. They use jumpers as goalposts. There is seemingly an organic love for the game.

In our country now, children do not go out and play football on the street. They do not spend hours kicking the ball against a wall like Dennis Bergkamp did. Instead they turn on the XBOX and PlayStation and are addicted to video games.

These seem like petty and insignificant at a time when England have been knocked out of a major tournament, but these things all matter for the coming generations.

So where do England go from here?

They need to find the right manager. A manager with the right mix of tactics and psychology. A manager not afraid to make the big decisions. Preferably, a manager who already has tournament experience.

There are no English candidates who fit the bill.

Approaches should be made to Slaven Bilic. Laurent Blanc is another who should be a contender. Jurgen Klinsmann has the right attributes.

They need someone who can change the mindset of England players. By whatever means.

As it stands however, the England job looks very much like a poisoned chalice.

 

England vs Iceland: Preview

Can England finally perform? … all rights are reserved for this image ©

By Manish Pandey.

England’s result against Slovakia has left them in a precarious position.

Now on the hard side of the draw, with teams such as Spain, Italy and Germany, England’s Euro 2016 hopes have taken a huge hit. However, before they even think about those teams, they must first overcome Iceland. They must not underestimate this very clever team. Nor should they feel inhibited.

Roy Hodgson made 6 changes from the starting XI against Wales. 4 changes from the team that finished the 2nd half very strongly against Wales. Those changes backfired. There was no need to change a team that was on a high. It disrupts rhythm and player momentum.

The disruption was evident with England’s failure to score a goal and create several clear cut chances. As Germany showed against Northern Ireland, the best way to play against a packed defence is for quick passing and transition in the final part of the pitch. England were slow and laboured. How many clear cut chances did they create?

By in large, we know the team that Roy Hodgson will play against Iceland. The two fullbacks, Kyle Walker and Danny Rose will return. The midfield will be a 3 of Eric Dier, Wayne Rooney and Dele Alli. Harry Kane will most likely be recalled as the main forward. Adam Lallana will start on the left and Daniel Sturridge will replace Raheem Sterling and start on the right.

Jamie Vardy will most likely have to settle for a place on the bench, and he will be hoping to make an impact like he did against Wales.

Iceland will look to play a 4-4-2, aiming to counter-attack. They will be happy to play on the back foot, absorb the pressure and then break whenever England give the ball away. They will be on a high after the 94th minute winner to send them through to the Last 16 stage.

There will be a big battle in midfield. Rooney will have to shake off pressure from Aron Gunnarson, a hard working, tenacious and always running midfielder. He is used to playing in the Championship so will be fierce in his contest against Rooney, trying to stop Rooney from dictating the tempo.

Eric Dier will have to cope with the clever movement and passing of Gylfi Sigurdsson. Sigurdsson has terrific movement, and a wonderful technique. England will have to make sure he is unable to control things for Iceland.

If as expected Iceland play with a packed defence, opting for a conservative approach, the onus will be on England’s attacking midfielders to open up the gaps with short, sharp passing.

They need overlapping runs from Walker and Rose. They need to start fiercely attacking the Iceland goal. They need to try and take more shots from outside the area. England so far have been trying to be too clever and pass the ball into the net.

They need to become assassins. Ruthless and cold in front of goal.

England should learn from the way Germany played against Slovakia. There was a quick tempo, clever movement and space created for the attackers. In knockout games, England often play with pressure and with a complex. They need to learn from Germany.

Germany play with confidence bordering on arrogance. They believe they are better than the opposition. They want to teach the opposition a footballing lesson – as they did against Slovakia.

England, whilst respecting the strengths of Iceland, should adopt a similar mentality. They have the better players. They have the better bench strength. So they need to believe they can go out on Monday evening and obliterate the Iceland team.

All too often we see England players shrink under pressure. The lack of goals in this tournament so far suggests England are suffering from a mental block once again. They are nervous in front of goal and unable to perform. Against Iceland, we need to see a clinical performance from all players.

It is not just about the strikers scoring. Every player whether it be a defender or midfielder, has to believe they can score goals if they get the chances.

If things are not going well, Hodgson needs to be radical in his subs. Ross Barkley has not been used so far and he is someone who is- as Slaven Bilic says – a ‘joker’ in the pack. He can provide something different and a moment of magic.

Hodgson should be afraid to experiment with a Plan B in the game, by bringing on John Stones to play up front if England are chasing the game.

Hodgson should be bold and pick Marcus Rashford if he feels he can offer something different. England should look to dominate. This does not mean being reckless by throwing 10 players forward at every set piece.

It means the midfielders being clever and picking the right moments to flood the box. It means good, quality balls into the box from the fullbacks. The best way to play against a 4-4-2 is to get in behind by stretching the play and moving the Iceland fullbacks out of position.

For England to have any hope of winning this competition, they cannot just be satisfied with a victory over Iceland, they need to send a message that England have arrived at Euro 2016.

This is tournament football.  All too often England have not achieved what they should have. They have been weak and stumbled through even against the smaller teams. This England team needs to put it right.

There is enough technical quality. Do England have the mental stability to perform as well as they should?