Scholes soothes England and repays the coach
"I never thought I'd go this long without scoring," Paul Scholes said on the eve of England's first match in Portugal. No one, least of all Scholes, will be in the least bothered about that now. His 14th international goal, coming more than three years after the 13th, could hardly have arrived at a more crucial moment, with his side in danger of elimination from Euro 2004. As his team mates rushed to mob him, all England shared their relief.
So, too, did Sven-Goran Eriksson. For all the soothing words of the FA's chief executive, Mark Palios, on his visit to the England camp this week, it is hard to believe that Eriksson's tenure with England could have survived the consequence of defeat last night. His critics, always ready to exploit even the slightest chance to impugn the integrity and ability of England's first foreign coach, would have been given the opportunity of their dreams.
Yet whatever the goal meant to Scholes, it also represented a vindication of Eriksson's tactical choices, which have been strictly governed by the nature of the resources available to him. Players of international quality are not so plentiful in England that he can afford to pick and choose. He has selected the best on offer, and devised a flexible formation best suited to the combination of their talents.
It has not been to everyone's taste, and he has been widely criticised for exploring various modifications to the basic line of four in midfield, principally the much-discussed "diamond". Eriksson himself appeared to put the debate to rest the other day when he pointed out that the difference between a diamond and a flat four can be merely a question of emphasis and can change from minute to minute during a match.
There are still those who resist his arguments, however, including a former professional who suggested in his newspaper column this week that English players become "confused and mystified" when asked to adapt to different systems. In suggesting that they cannot cope with such basic tactical requirements, the sceptics are underestimating the players' abilities. And to expect a coach not to rehearse variations is nonsensical, particularly when he is being paid £4m a year to think about such things. Karel Bruckner, the Czech Republic's coach, is almost certainly on a much smaller salary than Eriksson, but against Holland on Saturday, in the most thrilling match of the tournament so far, he switched from a starting 4-2-3-1 to 4-1-3-2, to 3-5-2, to 3-6-1, and even, for a while, to a familiar English-style 4-4-2, and watched his "tinkering" pay off magnificently.
Nevertheless for England to go into their final group match needing only a point to qualify for the quarter-finals presented them with the challenge that they were perhaps least equipped to face. Well aware of the danger, Eriksson promised that his team would think only of winning. But the players would not have been human had they taken the field without the thought that if they could hold on to what they already had, they would not be on the next plane home.
England are not set up to play that sort of game, either in terms of the personnel on the field when the match started or in the way Premiership teams function. And when Nicky Butt suffered a knee-ligament injury, they were deprived of the chance to use the sort of conservative formation that might have suited their overriding purpose last night. Once deprived of Butt, Eriksson appeared to decide that since David Beckham, Paul Scholes, Steven Gerrard and Frank Lampard were his best available midfield players, he would put them together in the starting line-up no matter what the formation.
When England came out as if they intended to score the early goals that would kill Croatia's hopes, pressing up in numbers and leaving themselves vulnerable to counter-attacks, nothing could have suited Otto Baric's side better. But if they played straight into their opponents' hands, at least Niko Kovac's early goal settled any doubts about the nature of the task.
The extent to which Scholes's header settled England's nerves was illustrated by the build-up to the second goal, which featured a calm exchange of passes between Owen and Scholes, who played the ball back and forth on the left of Croatia's penalty area before Scholes found Rooney with a perfectly timed square ball. The teenager's right foot did the rest.
With the monkey removed from Scholes' back, and Rooney back on target, the attention turned to Owen. Ten minutes into the second half Rooney set his fellow striker free on the left, only for Owen to send his chip on to the roof of the net. Five minutes later Beckham found him with the sweetest of diagonal balls, but instead of accepting the invitation to outstrip the defence, the Liverpool man turned back and recycled the ball into midfield. A problem deferred.
Once Rooney's brace had put England two goals ahead, however, Eriksson risked his critics' wrath by making substitutions that changed the shape of midfield. By removing Scholes and inserting Ledley King, he gambled on the young Tottenham defender's experience as a holding midfielder for his club this season. In the 20 minutes left, King showed plenty of initiative but did not look as comfortable as he had seemed in defence alongside Sol Campbell against France.
With seven minutes left, the coach shored up the central midfield further, sending Phil Neville on for Frank Lampard with instructions to sit alongside King. Now England had a formation reminiscent of Brazil's use of Mauro Silva and Carlos Dunga 10 years ago, or France's recent deployment of Patrick Vieira and Claude Makelele. With Croatia needing three more goals to stay in the competition, it did the job. And so, thus far, has Eriksson.
没有爱立信就没有英格兰的今天。4m一年的年薪FA付的物有所值
|
IP卡
狗仔卡
楼主
]
发表于 2004-6-22 12:52:00
][
发表于 2004-6-22 22:54:00
][