Whatever-ball

It is almost impossible to find fault in a coach who has just delivered three knock-out wins in a World Cup, taking his team to the semi-finals.

But I am up for the challenge. This is my Estadio Azteca.

Selection bias

Thomas Tuchel was right to criticise England’s performance in the quarter-final against Norway. But wrong not to recognise his own culpability in this regard.

The view that the players made ‘technical mistakes’ and failed to move the ball quickly enough is wholly correct. But this is a group of very technically gifted footballers, playing across Europe’s best leagues. And most of the individual performances were good in both matches. The problem is the strategy within which they are being expected to demonstrate their attributes.

Image credit: UKinUSA. License: CC BY-SA 4.0

England’s tactics have become rather brainless. Tuchel is insistent on playing only one way: inverted wingers, wide overloads, cross-field passes, give it to Kane. Few of our goals have actually been made this way. The same strategy was deployed against both Mexico and Norway — two very different opponents, with matches played in very different conditions.

It can be an effective approach, in the right circumstances. But there are a couple of issues for England at the moment.

First, everybody knows this is how we will play. It has been successfully nullified in several matches now, especially against Norway. That is how mistakes and sluggish play happen: being able to predict England’s movements has given opponents a spare half-second to disrupt them.

Second, and most importantly, Tuchel’s tactical obstinacy has led him to select players for his system even if they aren’t really good enough. Another half-second surrendered. There is, of course, always a balance to be struck between the methods and the maestros. Isn’t that what head coaches are for?

Carry on

This problem is most acute on England’s right. Bukayo Saka isn’t fit enough, but Noni Madueke isn’t good enough. The latter has been selected as an approximation. Reece James isn’t fit enough, but none of the replacement right-backs are close to his level. They have been selected because they, like James, aren’t Trent Alexander-Arnold, and it obviously takes quite a few near-elite professionals to add up to a single non-Trent.

There is a similar situation in midfield. Declan Rice wasn’t well enough, but he played anyway, because Tuchel’s system is utterly dependent on having two — but only two — exceptional midfielders who can rotate between six and eight. Maybe Jordan Henderson would have played ahead of Rice, if the FA had a proper fall prevention policy. He was once a decent proto-Rice, two or three tournaments ago.

Kobbie Mainoo — a brilliant player, but probably only in a three — was never going to play. It is clear now he was only taken to the World Cup to reinforce Tuchel’s singular vision. Cole Palmer and Adam Wharton are both clearly good enough to play at the World Cup for England, but using either of them would require a tactical shift. It’s better, apparently, to carry a player who demands no such reflection, because everybody knows Mainoo is only making up the numbers.

Understudy

By the end against Norway, England were a shambles.

Reece James was all over the place, our only right-back playing anywhere but. The left-back, Nico O’Reilly, was effectively playing as a second striker because Kane had stopped running. It is difficult to understand why both — indeed either — Ivan Toney and Ollie Watkins are in the squad, when Tuchel is content to throw full-backs at every problem.

And then there is Eberechi Eze, always Eze. And this time, also Morgan Rogers, playing as a sort of Eze-lite. Eze is Tuchel’s ideal player, insofar as he can play in several of the coach’s rigidly defined roles — he took up three of them after replacing Declan Rice at half-time. But he isn’t necessarily performing well in any of them. I don’t know why this doesn’t matter more.

It didn’t have to be this way. We simply do not have the players available to allow England to adapt when Plan A isn’t working. It is unforgivable to have filled up the squad with players to fit a certain system, only to realise deep into the tournament that, if the superior players in the starting eleven can’t make it work, then the understudies are unlikely fare any better.

Whatever-ball

England were indeed lucky to defeat Norway. Jude Bellingham’s magnificent response to Tuchel’s critique demonstrates that he has, thankfully, finally won the power struggle with his manager. Bellingham is free to do whatever he chooses. Luckily for us, he is choosing to win.

The idea that Tuchel has snake-charmed a series of epic performances from Bellingham is nonsense. Dropping him in favour of Rogers was a genuine, but failed, attempt to replace England’s superstar with a replica model. And the notion that Bellingham needed someone like Tuchel to pull his strings is an even more sinister way of thinking.

Bellingham is essentially ignoring Tuchel’s tactics at this stage, so it makes sense he would dismiss the criticism too. On the one hand, Bellingham has taken charge, and dragged England to the semi-finals by himself. On the other hand, the failure of Tuchel’s system has created the space for Bellingham to impose his more sophisticated style.

If only Southgate had failed this badly, we might have won something.

Chance

Maybe I am being harsh. Maybe this is just how it goes in tournament football. Injuries pile up, conditions take a toll, and systems malfunction. And international football isn’t populated by the world’s best coaches, but rather those who never quite made it at club level, like Tuchel.

Argentina are basically in the same place as England, with individual quality and an ability to win the key moments outweighing the confused tactics and an unbalanced selection.

Messi might yet be enough for Argentina. But if Tuchel stays out of Bellingham’s way, England have every chance.