Duetschland 2006: Erikkson, Pekerman Get It Wrong
July 3rd, 2006 by Emmett WilliamsThough his team finally showed signs of life in the quarterfinals, England coach Sven Goran Eriksson never quite figured out what to make of the players he had. Can Wayne Rooney play as a lone striker or should he have a partner? Does Peter Crouch’s presence cause the team to forget to play to the feet? How many and which strikers are/were necessary? How can Steven Gerrard and Frank Lampard replicate their club form while playing on the same team? Is a not quite healthy Gary Neville preferred to someone else at right back?
These questions and more haunted Erikkson throughout the tournament and he never seemed to answer any of them. Instead he threw the dice before each match, hoping it would all work out.
Wayne Rooney, after recovering from his metatarsal injury, proved he could play as a lone striker, but without anyone ever coming forward properly from the midfield he was often playing against two or three defenders. A partner upfront would have been helpful. Gerrard and Lampard were supposed to alternate playing in the attacking midfielder role, and score plenty of goals in that position for their country, but Lampard’s shooting was awful throughout the tournament and Gerrard seemed lost in his non-Liverpool role. It is certainly time for England to consider playing in a 3-5-2 formation.
Possibly the key pre-tournament decision was, in the end, the decision to bring Theo Walcott instead of a proven striker. Not once did the 17-year-old feature for England, but Erikkson even intimated that he wasn’t ready. After Michael Owen’s ligament damage, that left only two “ready” strikers and not a lot of options. Crouch played very well but never had anyone to pass to once he collected the long balls.
The key in-tournament decision was most certainly Jose Pekerman’s decision to take off Juan Riquelme with Argentina leading 1-0 against Germany. Not only did the South Americans lose their key playmaker and the man who’d had more touches than any other player during the tournament, but the substitution was a clear signal to everyone that the Argentinians would go into a defensive shell and never return. They never looked the same after, and 8 minutes later the Germans scored. Instead of having the shape and resolve to come back from this, Argentina never looked organized and were certain to not threaten again, which they didn’t.
Explore posts in the same categories: World Cup 2006
July 3rd, 2006 at 10:46 am
You are right to mention them in the same post because they both picked the wrong 23 and make costly mistakes in chosing the starting 11 and the subs.
Besides they both prefer a defensive approach to the matches despite having great offensive players and just that is enough to be happy for their departure
I wonder if the hyped reputation of Eriksson will be tarnished or if he will just blame his failures on bad luck. I heard that after the match he said that England deserved to advance but I hope for him that it’s just PR because he cannot be serious.
England has a very good team but you cannot just tell them to defend and hope every time that a free kick will save you.
If I can ask what do you think about Steve McClaren? Will he give England a less defensive mentality?
July 3rd, 2006 at 12:41 pm
I’ve not seen anything in Steve McClaren to suggest that he will be anything but an English Sven. True he got Middlesbrough to a UEFA Cup final, but in those crucial matches, he had a habit of picking the wrong first 11. It was only when his hand was forced that he made the player changes that brought about the late wins. Maybe that is a sign of better in-game decisions in England’s future….or a man acting out of desperation. And Middlesbrough have been mid-table for a long time under McClaren despite the money to turn things around. He’s bought a lot of big names for little results.
And does he really have the nerve to sit Beckham or Lampard? To play a 3-5-2 formation? To do what it takes to calm Rooney? To free up Gerrard, Lampard, Lennon and maybe even Walcott? He was Sven’s right hand man and seemed to be a part of all the major decisions, so i fear for England.
July 3rd, 2006 at 4:05 pm
I’ve never liked McClaren ever since he uttered the words “I’m suspicious of that word, ‘entertainment’” when his Middlesborough team were (rightly) criticised for playing dull, defensive football. This is a man who, on the first day of last season, encouraged his players to take to the ball to the corner flag to get a 0-0 draw in the last few minutes against Liverpool. Granted, Liverpool are a better team, but on the first day of a new season you ought to show some ambition, especially when your team is as expensively assembled as McClaren’s was. I can see the trend of negative football continuing with England. As Emmet rightly points out, he’s basically an English version of Sven (except he doesn’t even have the track-record at club level that Sven has)
July 4th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Then poor poor England. I would really like to see what England can do with all the players working at full stretch but it seems that the FA just made a lateral step instead of a step forward.
If it would be a club I would hope in a player revolution but at this level and with an english manager I just do not think it will happen.
July 5th, 2006 at 12:05 am
You’re right, angelo. England have the players and if they had a manager with a proven record at the top level (like Hiddink or Scolari) then they might have a chance of winning something. Both of those managers have no qualms about dropping big-name players if they need to and would that would certainly wake up players like Beckham and Lampard who knew they didn’t need to perform at their best to get a place in the side under Eriksson. I doubt McClaren will have the guts to drop the big guns if they’re underperforming, but we shall have to wait and see.