England can win despite the Rooney millstone

The role of the manager of national football squad is complex; it involves managing perceptions internal to the squad and external to the squad. The parallels and contrasts of England’s 2002 and current situations reveals Eriksson to be something of a master. The key difference this time around is that in 2002 Beckham really was needed for a legitimate shot at winning and Eriksson had to gamble on getting him match-sharp; this time Rooney is a sideshow, Beckham is still the real deal.

First, let us clarify the difference between “match-fit” and “match-sharp”. The former is physical criterion. Many players are “match-fit” with injuries that would have most of us hobbling around at home; pros get used to playing with sprains, bruises and pulls that reduce their effectiveness but not at that crucial point of maximum effort. When you’re not match-sharp, the flesh is willing and able but the mind-body connection is weak. At the level of play of a World Cup fractions of a second and inches count and these are lost to those not razor-sharp.

The England – Trinidad match illustrates these distinctions. Owen is clearly match-fit but not match-sharp; a match-sharp Owen would have had at least one goal, likely two. But he’s getting there. Rooney may be match-fit but is not close to match-sharp. He was a pale shadow of himself. He made one good pass and otherwise was dispossessed easily. A particularly good contrast was between the run he had down the left. The same fullback that match-sharp Downing was undressing had no difficulty stopping Rooney. Rooney’s technique for beating a tackler is all timing – a sudden acceleration – and it’s that precise timing that takes a few matches to get back.

Ericsson knows that Rooney isn’t sharp and so do the other players. Why did he keep Rooney in the squad and why did he play him against T&T? Partly to deflect the rabid English media and partly to serve the internal psychology of the squad. Rooney is popular within the squad and is a positive presence in training sessions. I think also that Ericsson knows that the Rooney obsession of the media and fans needles Owen and that Owen responds well to pressure. There’s also a chance that if England makes it to the final Rooney will be sharp and will pull a goal out of a hat. Until then, England is going to have to do it despite Rooney. I still think that they can.

A review of the T&T match tape reveals a far stronger England performance than the pundits would have us believe. More importantly, it augurs well for the much more difficult future. The biggest positive – Lampard and Gerrard are looking strong. Gerrard has got off the mark and Lampard is overdue; goals from them will be crucial in getting to and winning the Final. The defence looks good. Beckham has reminded us that he remains a true “World Class” player. Like Riquelme and, dare I say it, Ronaldinho, Beckham is going to create 3 or more really good chances a game. (Ronaldinho is in a class of his own at the moment because he can create his own goals out of nothing.) And I think that Sven will continue to manipulate the Owen-Rooney-Crouch situation to get the best out of all concerned.

Some miscellaneous thoughts. The new ball is definitely having its impact. Part of the reason I think Lampard & Gerrard will score is the ball – it’s obviously very light and/or hard (bouncy). You can see the coaches have told everyone to have a go from long distance. L&G just happen to be the best pair of ball strikers out of midfield that are available to any of the teams. More generally, the players are all having adjustment problems with the “feel” of the ball – numerous errors of control, far more than is normal for players of this caliber – and with the weight of their passes. This will all improve as the tournament progresses. I happen to think that the ball was part of the reason for the two most egregious misses so far – the Japanese player vs Croatia and Kewell vs Brazil.

France is still snake-bit. Their finishing remained lamentable (and a little unlucky), they were robbed of a goal and the Korean goal was an incredible fluke. (I’m also a bit worried – if France’s luck starts to turn, it could run over England.) It also illustrated the difference between Gallas and Terry (possibly between Terry and any other defender); Gallas just couldn’t react to the ball the way Terry did against T&T. Argentina do look great but they’re due for a let-down and I don’t see their midfield having so much possession against England’s midfield (if they meet). On the other hand, Brazil have yet to show their hand. Ronaldinho is overdue. I don’t know quite what to make of Ronaldo; I’ve never seen a great player look so ill at ease as he in the Croatia game. I don’t think it matters that much: I think Adriano is very dangerous and while I haven’t seen as much of Robinho, I’m sure he’ll replace Ronaldo well, if it comes to that. Yet, Brazil can be had – especially on the wings. I’ve always thought Roberto Carlos overrated (a prejudice I have about fullbacks – I think they should be able to defend) and now he’s old his defensive liabilities are magnified. Ditto but a bit less so, Cafu. If England play Brazil I relish the flank pace that Sven has at his disposal. I think Lennon can take Carlos, Cole or Downing can take Cafu.