First of all, credit where credit is due: England were outclassed by Germany, and no amount of finger-pointing over Frank Lampard’s disallowed goal will change that. The more deserving side won the day.
Now, having gotten that off my chest:
Would somebody please tell me how exactly this wasn’t a goal? The refereeing at this World Cup has been shockingly inadequate, and FIFA’s continued resistance to introducing goal-line technology or at least goalside assistant referees is little more than idiocy. Too many legitimate goals have been disallowed, too many offside goals allowed to stand.
Having said that, I don’t think that this goal would have changed much. Chances are, England would have lost 4-2 instead of 4-1 had the goal been allowed, and (again) deservedly so.
One could argue that going into half-time having pulled level instead of trailing, the England team might have had better morale for the second half, but… the defense was torn apart for the third and fourth Germany goals, and in almost exactly the same way as for their first.
When a team makes a defensive blunder… well, it happens, you get over it. When the team makes essentially the same defensive blunder three times, perhaps some questions need to be asked, both of the players and the coach. England looked dangerous at times going forward (despite only scoring 3 goals in 4 games), but were a disaster at the back.
Part of the problem, I believe, is that the team was largely constructed around one individual – Wayne Rooney. Any time you build the team around one guy, you’re screwed if that one guy can’t produce the goods. Rooney was underwhelming at best in this World Cup.
Maybe if Robert Green hadn’t let in that goal against the Americans, maybe if Rooney had converted those chances against Algeria, maybe if Lampard’s goal had been properly awarded… maybe, maybe, maybe.
If you can’t perform well enough to overcome maybes, you don’t deserve to be there.
Totally agree. The British media seem to be circling around Capello, but while he has not been blameless, what about the players themselves? Is it really Capello’s fault they can’t defend against basic long balls, or over-commit bodies needlessly to attacks? These are basics that don’t need to be coached, surely?
The reality is this England team is not as good as the British press would have you believe despite all the hype about the Premier League being “the best league in the world”. And it is not a new phenomenon either. For 20 years since Italia 90, England have been hyped to the rafters and then delivered much less. As the analysis in the post below shows, when it comes out to the knockout phases where the top teams emerge, England have consistently shown themselves to be a good team, but never a great one.
http://thearmchairsportsfan.wordpress.com/2010/06/28/something-is-rotten-in-the-state-of-england/
@ Tim
I think there may well be a case to be made for the Premier League being at least one of the highest quality leagues in the world; after all, a great many of the world’s best players ply their trade there. However, I feel that there is not nearly enough emphasis placed on the development of homegrown players, to the detriment of the national team.
I won’t ever try to say that Rooney, Lampard, Gerrard et al. aren’t extremely talented footballers, but there is a shocking dearth of depth to the England side. In an ideal situation, every England player should be fighting for his place, knowing that there are four or five young guys just waiting for their chance to prove themselves. The selection dilemmas facing the coach should be things like which three of eight world-class goalkeepers to take to the Cup, not which ones are least likely to fumble a ball when it is most important.
Unfortunately, today’s big clubs would rather buy a proven performer from another country than invest in bringing a young Englishman up through the ranks and nurturing his talent. If only there were some kind of regulatory body with the authority to mandate that level of commitment to the domestic game… oh, wait, there is.