Thetownend.com

The truly remarkable thing about England's two defeats to Italy and Uruguay is that they took the nation by surprise. We are always taken by surprise, every time we are sent packing early; and we are sent packing early just about every time the World Cup is played outside England. In 1950, the first time we entered the competition, we were beaten 1-0 by the dishwashers, hearse drivers and English teachers of the USA, and failed to get out of the group. We didn't get out of the group stage in 1958, either; England won precisely three games in their first four tournaments. We failed even to qualify in 1974 and 1978, so the introspection took place long before the finals in these years; we missed out on USA '94, too.

Even those who try to maintain cynicism about the England national team's chances might be astonished by some of the facts thrown up by an examination of our World Cup record. We have won precisely five knockout games in any World Cup played outside our own country; the very first was a 3-0 win over Paraguay in 1986. Two of these wins came during Italia '90, a 1-0 win over Belgium and a 3-2 win (courtesy of two Gary Lineker penalties) over Cameroon. A 1-0 win over Ecuador in 2006 was our last victory outside the group stage.

Denmark, Belgium, Paraguay, Cameroon and Ecuador are not, with all due respect to those countries, the kind of conquests likely to impress rival superpowers -- over the same period, (West) Germany have won 25 games on foreign soil in the later stages of the tournament. We have never beaten Brazil, Italy or Spain at any stage of any World Cup, and though there was a decent 3-1 win over a very good France team in a 1982 group game, France were seeded third in the four-team group, just as Scotland and Northern Ireland were in their groups.

So the first point to make about the failure of the 2014 campaign is that progress into the last 16 would probably have necessitated one of England's most impressive World Cup results, a win over either Uruguay or Italy in the group stage, two teams they have never beaten in the finals of any tournament. And as nobody believed that we were going to Brazil with one of England's most impressive teams, it was baffling to listen to the "realists" predicting exit in the quarterfinals. How were we supposed to get even that far?

The other thing to note is that many of the reasons given for England's failure are built around the notion of long, sad, national decline. This is a myth: We have, with the glorious exception of 1966, always failed. The foreign players, all of whom arrived in the 1990s, can't help us with the desperate inadequacy of the 1970s; Mrs. Thatcher and wage inflation do not illuminate the hopelessness of the 1950s, when there were playing fields for everyone, and Stanley Matthews was paid peanuts. Dutch kids have access to video games and junk food, and yet that tiny, Northern European country, with a population two-thirds smaller than ours, consistently produces world-class players.

This much seems clear: Whatever is wrong with English football now has always been wrong, ever since we began playing the game at international level. Maybe we simply don't like the kind of football that usually wins international tournaments. (Most English fans find the canny, slow, tactical Italian game unwatchable, for example.) Maybe we prize the wrong sorts of footballers: It's difficult to imagine a place for big, rugged, passionate and slow centre-back heroes like John Terry, Tony Adams and Terry Butcher in many other national teams. (Lionel Messi is 5-foot-6, and you wonder whether he'd be on the bench at West Ham or Sunderland if he'd been born English, a "luxury player.")

If England are ever to play in a World Cup final again, you can bet that the team will not include anyone who is now playing professional football. We need to begin with our 8-year-olds, and we need to start telling them that technique and intelligence, not strength and the will to win, are the qualities they need most.

What are England's best World Cup performances? The 1966 final would be top of the list, of course, and the semifinal against Eusebio's Portugal would have to be at No. 2 -- games played within four days of each other, in London, nearly 50 years ago. You might include the slightly surprising 1-0 group-stage win over Argentina in the 2002 tournament, even though Argentina were poor and failed to reach the knockout stage that year. And the last-ditch 3-0 win over Poland in 1986 is remembered fondly for Lineker's goals, and his emergence as a world-class striker.

But anyone who can't remember anything about 1966 would make an argument for the famous night in Turin, in 1990, when England played West Germany, and fought heroically, and ... well, they drew, actually. And then lost on penalties. Arguably, England's best performance in the 13 World Cup tournaments to which they have travelled was a defeat.
Perhaps when we have stopped hating our players and our manager and ourselves, we should look at that plucky, slightly unlucky 2-1 loss to Italy last week again. It wasn't that bad. We may even have to find room for it in the top 10.

By Nick Hornby, nail hit directly on the head IMO.

You have to ask why such bit part players in the PL appear to blossom for their countries in the WC.

All 3 of the players you reference there are a) class and b) not "bit-part"

You have to ask why such bit part players in the PL appear to blossom for their countries in the WC.

If England are ever to play in a World Cup final again, you can bet that the team will not include anyone who is now playing professional football. We need to begin with our 8-year-olds, and we need to start telling them that technique and intelligence, not strength and the will to win, are the qualities they need most.

Team > Stars

So why do Spain, Italy, Germany etc excel at WCs and their leagues are just as competitive and important to the nations as the PL is to England.

Some people seem to think that the overwhelming of football in this country by the PL big boys is a small price to pay for a shite national team

So why do Spain, Italy, Germany etc excel at WCs and their leagues are just as competitive and important to the nations as the PL is to England.

Andrea Pirlo, wouldn't last 5 mins in the PL?

Reg mate, time for a lie down.

You have to ask why such bit part players in the PL appear to blossom for their countries in the WC.

Off the top of my head, and excuse the spelling, Medal (Cardiff), Asamoah Gyan ( can't remember who he plays/played for), Tim Cahill. There are plenty of others, too.

Apart from their own PL form they are, supposedly, playing with worse players in the WC as well.

There are certain to be some who will look world beaters, get snapped up by a PL club and are then absolute shite.

Hornby may well be right saying nothing much has changed over the years, but these last 2 WCs have been a total disaster for England - well below par as far as England are concerned

Good point - but not many German players play abroad either and they aren't too bad!

Of the usual starting eleven, Ozil, Khedira, Mertersacker play abroad, Jerome Boateng has played abroad, off the bench Podolski, Klose and Schurrle....whereas England have Fraser Forster of Celtic.

Yeah a point. We are going to win the euros

The main problem with this World Cup was the fact we had too many Liverpool players in the team/squad. In the three tournaments we have done reasonably well we have had no more than three Liverpool players in the squad & only one of those as a regular in the team  :D

The Premiership is arguably the most exciting league in the world to watch - and I hate to say it.

It is exciting because the general English supporter (me included) likes to see attacking, fast, end to end football, and the people who hold the purse strings (SKY) promote this as it gets more viewers.

Probably a bigger factor, the climate in England makes high tempo football possible.

Trouble is, if you play that way against the possession style football that is popular elsewhere, it doesn't seem to work.

It's Ok in the Winter, hence we generally qualify, but as the finals are always played in the summer, it's a big ask to try and run around around at high tempo, so the slower football always wins.

England struggle to play any other way, as all their players come from the Premier league, but other countries have only a few, if any, premiership players, so can easily play the slow paced game.

I'd forgotten quite what a football genius I am

The main problem with this World Cup was the fact we had too many Liverpool players in the team/squad. In the three tournaments we have done reasonably well we have had no more than three Liverpool players in the squad & only one of those as a regular in the team  :D

Didn't Belgium re haul the way they did it about 20 years ago by teaching 8 year olds how to play? Belgium for fuck sake!! If they can do it surely we can?

Yep can't remember the fellas name, but they essentially followed his blueprint for coaching development....but a lot of it was aimed particularly at putting artificial pitches and coaching into areas of social deprivation. In England we sell them off for housing development...

They were all crap. Crosses, corners and free kicks a total disaster, just not acceptable at that level.

Didn't appear to be a single routine practised in training. Just kick the ball and hope it lands somewhere decent.

Dead ball situations are something you can practise and then control in a game. We should do a lot better.

Gerrard in particular disappointed. His corners were so bad, just looped high into the box and easily cleared, very little cunning or creativity.

Not sure if anyone has mentioned this yet but how bad was the deliveries into the box (Glenn Johnson and Wayne Rooney's assists aside) in the World Cup? Gerrard in particular disappointed. His corners were so bad, just looped high into the box and easily cleared, very little cunning or creativity.

Glen johnsons wasn;t a pass - it was the result of a tackle and could have gone anywhere.

Given that we're building for the future and giving the youth a chance, in yesterday's dead rubber it was quite utterly ridiculous that we ended the game with a midfield pairing of Lampard and Gerrard.

That was just Hodgson giving them a final farewell for England.

In their prime Lampard and Gerrard were very good footballers. I don't hold much hope that Wilshere will be half as good as either. And who else can we play at CM, the future is quite bleak in my eyes.

Fans have a massive part to play in this though. All the other nations support their top players,in France Spain Portugal etc the top players for their countries are roundly cheered by opposition teams and you can hear the crowd get excited when their own top players get on the ball.

I have been to 8 england games in the last 3 years and have heard at least on 5 occasions our own players being booed when their names have been called out by our own fans. These players probably
Can’t be fucked to play for us if I am honest. Our main threat leading up to this was Rooney and we felt we had to crucify him before we even started it.

Other nations top players are fucking idolised where as we destroy ours as soon as we can, you only got to look at the reaction to Sterling having a great game one game then the next he was quiet

I think on the whole our football is fucked from Players,Coaching,press management and fans

I'd disagree insofar as I don't think too many people have been surprised by what's happened...one interesting thing to come out of this tournament though, is the notion that you can chuck decent higher end Prem players, like Jagielka, Johnson and Baines in and they will step up on effort alone.

It will be instructive to look at say the last 4 teams standing in Brazil and see how many Prem players are in them...I'll hazard a guess it wont be too many.

In 2014 the Premier League has seven players left at this stage (including used substitutes), with nine in 2010, nine in 2006, five in 2002 and 10 in 1998. This time around, based on last starting XIs plus returning suspendees, the 44 footballers who will contest the semi-finals are likely to be made up of 10 Bundesliga players, seven from the Premier League, six from La Liga, six from the Eredivisie, four from Serie A, four from Ligue 1, two from the Turkish league and one each from Russia, Brazil, Portugal, the US and Mexico.

Within this, Bayern Munich will provide the same number as the combined Premier League, while Real Madrid and Barcelona have six between them.