Sad but true - a reflection of the England game

(One day after the uncomfortable win against Paraguay, England fan Raam Shanker is left pondering if his team has the fire to go all the way to win the World Cup.)

I am trying not to quote the rock band, Metallica when I say sad but true, but looking at the game yesterday, I am running out of analogies. What I saw in Old Trafford, Manchester precisely a week ago was an exhilarating experience. Comparing it with the crucial game against Paraguay, I must say that this was a mere shadow of the team that played in Manchester. The big game pressure has got to them again. England got a win, yes. But in a football-crazy nation where being a footballer is akin to a tightrope walk, it was a pathetic display. Very few chances created, the created ones wasted. It was certainly a rude wake up call for me, as I was mesmerized by their performance against Hungary and Jamaica in the friendlies. I took these performances for granted and assumed safely that England would not just win, but would win comprehensively. The bubble burst and the dream faded away into oblivion, leaving a trail of uncertainty behind. The good news going into the game for England was the fact that Gary Neville and Stevie Gerrard would start. On the flipside, Jamie Carragher would warm the bench. Peter Crouch, who a season ago was not even dreaming of an England start yet, was making his World Cup alongside Owen.

England began well and were rewarded, by Beckham’s opposite number in the third minute. A Beckham freekick graced by Gamarra’s head on its way in. England taking the lead, much to the delight to all of England supporters. It looked pretty hot and dictator (read referee), Marco Rodriguez, who controlled the game with an iron hand was not too keen on letting the English players have their sip of water every now and then. The match-ball, called Teamgeist by Adidas looked very light and was what one would call seamless, for it had no visible seam. If I were to be a little lenient, I would consider this as an excuse for Lampard, and Gerrard’s long-range efforts going wasted. Paraguay looked a little shaky in the first half, when the ball was in their half, but were not seriously threatened. Eriksson deployed the 4-4-2 and it saw Gary Neville take Carragher’s place (from the Old Trafford friendly). The Beckham-Neville combo created a few opportunities but up front we had a crisis. Owen was not up to match sharpness and let a few down the drain. To be honest, he is not the same old Owen, who made his World Cup debut, eight years ago in France. This could partly be attributed to his recent injury and subsequent recovery. Crouch, Owen’s strike partner overshadowed the defences with his sheer height but could not take full advantage of this. Also the lack of coordination between Owen and Crouch was very visible. Statistics and the commentators told us that England had not scored a second half goal in the World Cup since Owen’s goal against Romania in 1998. I must say though that England pushed and pushed in the first half but failed to double their lead.

Come second half, I thought they ran out of fuel. The game slowed down miserably and they started losing focus. On the other hand, Paraguay started to soak the pressure and Robinson got some work, but he discharged his duties very well. Lampard seemed to inject some life into the game later on but all he managed was to extract a corner from the Paraguayan replacement goalkeeper. Oh, by the way their first choice goalkeeper injured himself while bravely fending off an attempt by Michael Owen, some time very early in the first half. Sven replaced Owen with Downing and pushing Joe Cole up front, just behind Crouch, thus converting a 4-4-2 to a 4-4-1-1. Blunder again? But of course yes! Because Cole was not tested in this position, it was in fact Gerrard.

Also leaving Cole up there meant the inexperienced Downing had to man the left wing and worse, Crouch was left up there to fend for himself and Cole could not play the creative role that he is so used to playing. Sven could have explored the possibility of bringing Rooney on for the last 10-15 minutes and seeing how he performed. This is a two-fold advantage. The first one is the obvious, which is, Rooney is back to fitness and plays his natural game and everyone is happy. The second prospect is this - suppose Rooney’s performance is below par and his injury shows, he can be sent back to England for a full recovery and Sven can get on with Walcott as the substitute rather than waiting for the big games to arrive and risk playing Rooney in the later stages, which would lead to worse consequences, both for England and for Rooney’s career with Manchester United. Well this is just a thought, but I suppose Sven had other thoughts in mind.

Looking at the amount of set pieces England had, they needed to have won by a bigger margin. Looking at the way Trinidad & Tobago held Sweden to a goalless draw, I am forced to ask this in my set of questions at the end. End of ninety minutes and added time, England got their win and took three points back to Baden Baden, but they were not at all convincing. If the rest of their campaign is to be rated on the basis of this game, I can be very sure that they won’t go far, before returning home. But if they were to brave it out, take a few risks and create chances, they could go on. So much for wishful thinking!

Question time again:

• Will Carragher replace Gary Neville?
• Will Rooney play earlier than he is supposed to?
• Will the sensationally selected Walcott come in?
• Are they capable of going past Trinidad & Tobago and Sweden?

As ever, the answers lie out there, but they better be convincing.

(Raam Shanker is a diehard fan of football and Formula One.)