Visualized: England 1-2 Uruguay

As always, match data from Stats Zone and Squawka.


Toothless, overrated, tactically predictable side meets counter-attacking side happy to concede possession and defend, knowing full well they have one of the most ruthless strikers in the world. And it went pretty much how you'd expect it to.

There's a new addition to the match infographics: the passing network, ripped off from a few places, but I remember seeing Will from The Tomkins Times doing it first for Liverpool on his blog. I will *probably* keep this up for Liverpool next season, but fair warning, it takes about as long as the rest of the graphic, and Liverpool usually complete about 100 more passes than England did yesterday. Although it will be easier doing it for just one team rather than both.

Anyway. Hodgson's game plan is remarkably clear, and unsurprising. Center-backs pass to midfielders or fullbacks, midfielders pass to fullbacks, fullbacks pass to wingers, attack breaks down on the flanks. Only once did it work, with England attacking at pace, in transition, for Rooney's goal. Although with better finishing (*glares at the hairy mutant potato in the #10 kit*), it could have worked better. Still, look at all those Uruguay tackles and interceptions on the flanks. And look at Alvaro Pereira's average position compared to Caceres. Caceres is as much a center-back as fullback, Pereira's more known for getting forward, but it was the latter who sat deep yesterday, fully aware of Sterling's threat and determined to nullify it. 23.7% of England's completed passes came in the attacking third, compared to 34.5% for Uruguay.

Meanwhile, there's Uruguay's passing network. No mucking about. Get the ball to Suarez, or get the ball to Lodeiro or maybe Cavani, who'll get the ball to Suarez. Counter-attacking football, to the letter. Liverpool fans have seen this movie before, the better version of this movie. Worth noting: England completed more than twice as many passes than Uruguay, but Uruguay's two strikers completed twice as many passes to each other as Sturridge and Rooney did.

In matches where Liverpool have much more possession, Suarez and Sturridge exchange around 12 passes, sometimes more, sometimes slightly less. When they have less possession, focusing on the counter-attack, it's usually right around six. Sturridge and Rooney completed three yesterday. Three! And that's with the majority of possession! There's the "but they don't play together often!" excuse, but England's club teammates didn't fare much better. Rooney and Welbeck exchanged all of one pass, Sterling and Sturridge two passes, Gerrard and Henderson four passes. It's like they didn't even know each other. Of course, I blame Hodgson.

The midfielders were almost as egregious as the strikers. Four passes between the two central midfielders, four passes from either Henderson or Gerrard to Rooney, Rooney often passing it back out wide to the wingers or fullbacks. Incidentally, England completed four of 21 open play crosses, with three of four leading to a chance (all three from the left).

Against Italy, Sterling was England's most dangerous player, with the added bonus of a much more balanced midfield. Rooney accommodated centrally nullified both of those facets, to the detriment of both midfield and attack. But he scored, took the second-most shots, and created two chances! Yeah, and he should have finished at least two more shots and created more chances. Meanwhile, both wingers did next to nothing, Sterling because of Pereira's tight-marking, Welbeck because he's Welbeck.

After a reasonably heartening performance against Italy, if in a losing effort, we got the full Hodgson against Uruguay, without even the determined deep flat back four. Lots of possession, unable to do a damned thing with it. Uruguay knew exactly how to nullify it. And had Luis Suarez.

England at Euro 2012 (Statistics)

A handful of attacking statistics – combined totals after each's four matches – for the eight teams to qualify for the knock-out rounds seems an apt illustration of where England stands after the quarterfinals.



Congratulations, you're better than Greece and the Czech Republic! And a couple other countries in a couple of categories. Huzzah! It's no surprise to see Spain atop almost every category, except Germany have scored more goals (with far fewer shots) and Italy have taken more shots – which is explained by Italy's unfathomable 36 shots against England. Which is just four shots fewer than England took all tournament.

Unsurprisingly, England come off worst in possession, shots, and attacking third passes. And are above average in goals conceded. That's Roy Hodgson Football perfectly epitomized. And it's Hodgson Football when Hodgson Football works; Liverpool were assuredly below average in goals conceded, especially away from Anfield, during his reign.

Comparing England to their opponents in each match makes for even grimmer reading.



France and Italy were better in each of these categories in the two matches England drew – ignoring the fact England actually lost to Italy on spot kicks. England were statistically better than Sweden in all of these categories save possession; Sweden only scored twice because of two out-of-character defensive errors. And England were better than the Ukraine in just one category: goals scored.

Hodgson and his apologists would argue that doesn't really matter, that it's a results-based game, and England only lost one match because of the penalty lottery. Which has some validity. Had Young's spot kick not hit the crossbar, had one more Italian missed theirs, England could still be unbeaten. Whether they deserve to be is a different question, but you often don't get what you deserve in sport.

However, the question remains whether that, and the above statistics, is good enough for England's national team. At the moment, the sad truth may be that it is.

England 0-0 Italy aet

Italy wins 4-2 on penalties

Penalties
Italy: Balotelli, Montolivo, Pirlo, Nocerino, Diamanti
England: Gerrard, Rooney, Young, Cole

Sometimes there is justice in the universe. Also, don't name your male children "Ashley."

Negative football doesn't get punished often enough. And Italy, for all its possession and passing supremacy, were unable to punish England through 120 minutes. But, as usual, penalties punish England.

England made this Italy side – better than expected, decent but unimpressive – look like Spain. The first 15 minutes ended up an aberration, with England surprisingly attacking after De Rossi's early left-footed thunderbolt hit the post. Buffon somehow prevented Johnson from opening the scoring in the 5th minute, palming away the close-range effort after a nice move down England's right, Parker shot narrowly wide from the top of the box, and stellar defending from Barzagli and Abate prevented Welbeck and Rooney from getting off decent efforts. After that, it was pure HodgeBall.



Two deep lines of four coupled with a complete refusal to press the ball outside the final third. By half-time, Italy had 235 touches in the middle of the pitch to England's 79.

The most galling feature was how much license England gave Andrea Pirlo. Already one of the players of the tournament and, at age 33, a man whose abilities are well-documented, handed all the time in the world to create whatever he pleased.



Meanwhile, Gerrard couldn't make anywhere near the same impact for England, whether due to Hodgson's tactics or an inability to play four matches in 13 days. Or a combination of both.



I'm well aware he's the captain, and he'd have to be dragged from the pitch kicking and screaming, but it's criminal that Gerrard's played all 300 of England's minutes, including 120 today. To be fair, it's not as if England had many other options. And Hodgson had used all three substitutions by the 94th minute – even though Gerrard began showing signs of cramp in the 70th – first replacing Welbeck and Milner with Carroll and Walcott, then Henderson for Parker soon into extra-time, due to that player's long-standing injury. Carroll's entrance helped, more influential than the peripheral Welbeck, but removing Milner – whose stamina is his best attribute – was questionable at best.

So, how did England even stay in this match?



Last ditch defending. 13 blocks is the most from any side so far this tournament. Pack the penalty area, and make sure nothing comes cheap or easy. Which is Hodgson's trademark.



Last ditch defending and wasteful Italian shooting. Italy seemed satisfied to fire from long distance, unable to penetrate England's parked bus. Balotelli and Cassano's radars were off all match long, while England got reprieves as Balotelli (multiple times) and Montolivo missed clear cut chances. Diamanti hit the post in extra time, while Nocerino had the ball in the net in the 115th minute but was rightfully ruled offside.

Which meant that Hodgson's tactics "worked," with England making it to the penalty lottery. And it initially looked likely to pay dividends, as Gerrard and Rooney both tallied while Montolivo missed Italy's second. Then Pirlo stepped forward. His Panenka was a back-breaker, a psychological death knell, and a wonderful capstone for a wonderful player's wonderful match. Young and Cole missed England's next two penalties – the former off the crossbar, the latter easily smothered by Buffon. Nocerino, then Diamanti sealed qualification to the semi-final, yet another crushing penalty defeat for England – their seventh in the last eight attempts.

It's tempting to say "we told you so," but we told you so. This is Hodgson, for good and evil. It's ugly, it's dismal, it's overly defensive. But sometimes it works, and it also led to a better-than-expected result, a result England haven't bettered since the 1996 Euros on home soil.

Is it a long-term solution? Absolutely not. And it's indescribably painful when done without any improvement in results, as Liverpool learned. But sometimes you need your short-term medicine.

Still, I'd recommend it remain nothing more than short-term medicine.

England 1-0 Ukraine

Goals:
Rooney 48'

Controversy! Drama! Mostly crap football! Never change, England. Never change, UEFA.

Rooney returned, our savior, in place of Carroll as the only change from last match's XI. And Ukraine were dominant in the first half, with Hodgson's side unsurprisingly content to invite the opposition on and hope to keep it tight, play for the draw and maybe, hopefully, somehow score on the counter or from a set play. Nine shots from the hosts to just four from England, but all but one Ukraine shot off-target, most from distance. Rooney had England's lone decent opportunity, but headed a sitter wide midway through the frame, clearly coated in a thick layer of rust.

The hoped-for England's goal came soon after the restart, and from a set play. Gerrard's corner initially cleared, picked up by Glen Johnson and returned to the captain, clever footwork to beat the closing defender, a dangerous right-flank cross twice deflected then spilled by the keeper, easily tapped in by the returning conquering hero at the far post. Don't be surprised when Rooney gets all the credit for a goal any of us could have scored.

Let's get to the fun stuff. Namely, this:



Even with this grainy, television screen capture, you can see the ball's over the line. Ukraine stormed down the left after a long ball from Selin, with both Terry and Lescott caught behind the strikers they were marking. Milevskiy laid off for Dević, who danced around Terry then fired a shot which squirmed under Hart's save, somehow cleared out of the goal-mouth by England's Brave JT. But cleared after it crossed the line.

To be fair, the extra officials behind the goal have made a difference. There has been far less Greco-Roman wrestling by agricultural center-backs and better decisions on corners or goal kicks. On the whole, they've been a valuable addition; an extra set of eyes is usually helpful. This one just did his job terribly today. Now resumes the all-consuming chorus for goal technology. Well, probably not quite all-consuming. The furor after Lampard's World Cup "goal" against Germany was all-consuming. Furor tends to be less all-consuming when it benefits England.



The official behind the goal wasn't the only negligent official today, joined in idiocy by the linesman on that side of the pitch. Not only was Milevskiy offside in the build-up to the controversial no-goal, he was also offside a minute earlier when missing an easier header than Rooney missed. Neither saw the linesman raise his flag. Well done. Idiocy loves company.

After that second stomach punch, Ukraine were never likely to find the two goals they needed to qualify. Hart was tested just once more, wonderfully parrying Konoplyanka's whirling, weaving, diving 35-yard rocket in the 73rd minute, cleared out of the six-yard-box by Lescott. But the scrambling, everything-including-the-kitchen-sink ending suited England just fine. 12 of the Ukraine's 16 shots came from outside the box; only the aforementioned Konoplyanka effort was on target. Shevchenko, left out of the starting line-up due to injury, couldn't conjure a miracle as in the first match. Walcott, Carroll, and Oxlade-Chamberlain came on to give England fresh legs, and England saw out its lead like Hodgson's West Brom or Fulham, not Hodgson's Liverpool.

Once again, and not just because of my overwhelming Liverpool bias, I have to single out Steven Gerrard's performance.



Technically, StatsZone aren't crediting Gerrard with an assist – possibly because of the deflections, possibly because of the keeper's howler – but that goal was created by Gerrard. As were three other chances, more chances created than any other England player. Another supremely disciplined central midfield performance, and four more tackles than holding midfielder supreme and press corps favorite Scott Parker – tackles which came on both flanks, helping demonstrate the defensive effort he put in. He has been England's best player in all three matches, provided assists for three of England's five goals, and has either scored or assisted on five of England's last eight tournament goals. It has been a true captain's tournament, and I'm sure there's absolutely no coincidence that it's happened with Frank Lampard nowhere in sight.

The Hodgson Express steams on to Italy. France's complete failure against Sweden means England avoid Spain, at least for now. Once again, it wasn't pretty by any possible definition, but it worked. That counts for something, as much as I dislike crediting Hodgson for anything except disease, famine, and other assorted evils. But whether that will suffice against Italy, or any of the other sides left in the competition for that matter, remains a much tougher question.

England 3-2 Sweden

Goals:
Carroll 23'
Johnson (OG) 49'
Mellberg 59'
Walcott 64'
Welbeck 78'

That just happened.

A mostly sterile first half marked by a singular moment of excellence. A full-blooded, wholly frenetic second half where England looked to have thrown away its slight advantage with abhorrent individual mistakes only to come storming back through Hodgson's inspired substitution. Hodgson. Inspired. Oh, and that substitute was Theo Walcott.

Hodgson reverted to a standard 4-4-2 – Carroll and Welbeck took turns dropping off, Gerrard and Parker took turns going forward – while Sweden were more 4-4-1-1 with Ibrahimovic trying to link attack and defense.

England's Made in Liverpool opener was the only highlight in a fairly dull first 45 minutes. Midway through the half, Gerrard popped up on the right and delivered a sumptuous cross, met perfectly by Carroll's kangaroo jump, unstoppably headed past Isaksson. This picture, via @DanKennett, shows how well Carroll rose over Mellberg and Granqvist. More of that, please.



Otherwise, Parker had an early shot supremely saved by Isaksson – one of the few obviously good things the holding midfielder did today – while Young shot into the side-netting when put through late in the half. Meanwhile, Sweden were wholly limited to shots from distance, some on-target but few threatening, with England's deep back line plugging most of the holes.

That all went out the window in the second half, with England going from comfortably ahead – as comfortable as England can ever be with a one-goal lead – to behind before the hour mark. Both goals came on set plays, both attributable to individual scapegoats.

Unfortunately, Glen Johnson was the first – unduly harsh given his otherwise impressive performance. Ibrahimovic's free kick thundered harmlessly into the wall, but the iconoclastic striker kung-fu kicked back toward goal. Johnson not only played Mellberg onside, caught flat-footed after the initial block, but saw Hart's save from Mellberg's shot ricochet off him and was unable to prevent it from squirming over the line. To compound matters for Liverpool fans, the free kick was sloppily conceded by Carroll, trying too hard to impress in defense with a clichéd center forward's tackle.

Unsurprisingly, the equalizer gave Sweden the momentum, and – dominating possession for the next ten minutes – England's frequent nemesis went ahead from another free kick. This time, the other full-back was mainly at fault, again with fingers also pointed in Johnson's direction. Larsson crossed from the left flank and Ashley Cole bafflingly froze, leaving Glen Johnson marking three Swedes. If England were marking zonally, it was for the first time. And, mostly likely, the last. It was little surprise to see Mellberg (yep, him again) leap highest.

Unlike so often during his Liverpool tenure, Hodgson responded immediately, replacing Milner – who conceded the free kick for the second goal and was otherwise typically Milnerrific – with Walcott. Three minutes after his introduction, England were level.

Terry nearly scored seconds earlier, his bullet header from Johnson's cross somehow saved by Isaksson. The resulting corner was initially cleared, but cleared straight to Walcott. Isaksson had to have been unsighted on the subsequent shot, straight down the center of the goal with the keeper stumbling, waving, and nowhere close to the strike.

Which set us up for a rollicking, straight-out-of-the-Premiership, end-to-end frenzy. Källström blazed over after an incisive slalom from Martin Olsson. Hart saved Ibrahimovic's swerving missile from the top of the box. Then came Danny Welbeck, with another sterling cameo from Walcott. A quick transition from attack to defense, shifting gears with Gerrard's pass to Johnson in space on the flanks. A lay-off to the Arsenal forward, a blistering run to the byline between Larsson and Jonas Olsson and a cross behind Welbeck, who somehow spun onto the ball, back-heeling a flick around Isaksson nestling into the far corner. Clever, impudent, audacious; choose your effusive adjective. I rarely link goals here, but this one's unavoidable.



From there, it was a matter of holding on – always a tougher challenge than it should be for England and for Hodgson's sides – but England had the best chance of the final minutes, with Gerrard unlucky not to get a goal of his own, denied by Isaksson on the break, sweetly hitting a volley but selfishly hitting that volley in front of a better-placed Oxlade-Chamberlain. No matter.

As FourFourTwo wrote after the game, England and Sweden were very similar in passes and shots. 50-50% possession, each with 13 shots, only eight fewer passes attempted by the Swedes.

The difference was in the finishing and the crucial substitution. And, for once, in England's mentality.

England had never beaten Sweden in a competitive fixture; a handful of friendly wins between 1923 and 1968, and the 1-0 Wembley win last November, but five draws and two losses when it actually mattered. And England are rarely known for storming comebacks, or tepid comebacks or comebacks in general. But here we are.

Walcott deserves man of the match and every one of the plaudits he'll receive – the difference-maker for England for the first time since his Croatia hat-trick almost four years ago. On the pitch for just over 30 minutes, in possession for just 17 seconds, five out of five passes successful, two out of two crosses successful, a goal and assist, and nearly a second assist on Gerrard's late chance. But I'd be remiss if I didn't also single out the captain, who put in a wonderfully diligent, disciplined display.



I've often questioned Gerrard's ability to play as an out-and-out central midfield in a 4-4-2 pairing. He's obviously done it before, and done it well, but he's failed to do it enough of the time during Liverpool's frequent struggles over the last few seasons to the point where it's become a contentious issue. It was not a contentious issue today, keeping his position and possession, limiting the maligned Hollywood passes, and making an impact on the few occasions where he bombed forward, which he did with increasing frequency as the game went on. And that was all while carrying Scott Parker on his back for 90 minutes.

Level on points with France, one behind on goal difference, England now just need a draw to advance to the knock-out rounds. But with second place in Group D likely to face Spain in the quarterfinals, I doubt England will play for the draw, even considering this team's strengths and this team's manager. Meanwhile, the French face the already-eliminated Swedes. And Ukraine, just one point behind England, assuredly won't go gentle into that good night.

I'm duty-bound to warn we've been burned in the past. Optimism is always, forever a dangerous thing for England fans to have.

England 1-1 France

Goals:
Lescott 30'
Nasri 39'

Welcome to the Roy Hodgson Era. A defensive set-up, limited ambition, a set play goal, and two solid lines of four retreating deeper and deeper as the match went on. England's full-backs mostly stayed in their own half, England's wide players rarely got ahead of the two out-and-out attackers, and Gerrard charged forward from deep to join the attack maybe twice. England were out-passed, out-shot, out-possessed, and out-thought, but earned a famous draw because the defense bent and broke just once.

To be fair, playing for the draw in the first match, against the toughest opponents in the group, makes sense. Mostly defensive football with the players England have, especially with the numerous injuries and Rooney's suspension, makes sense. And I'm admittedly prejudiced by Hodgson's insipid Liverpool tenure. International football, even more than club football and especially in major tournaments, is defined by the smallest margins. But France weren't especially impressive either, with little to make them look like a team that's now gone 22 matches without a loss.

England probably should have been two goals ahead by the time France clicked into gear. 15 minutes in, Milner was clear on goal, played between a wide-apart Rami and Mexes by Young's throughball, but took the ball too wide after rounding Lloris and shot wildly into the side-netting. 15 minutes later, England were ahead, typically from a free kick – a soft foul on the right flank, perfect out-swinging delivery from Gerrard, and Lescott out-jumping Diarra, guiding his header past a starfish Lloris.

But the goal woke France up. Diarra nearly made amends with his own set play chance, with Hart brilliantly stopping his fierce header, followed up by a second attempt put wide. England's reprieve didn't last long as two full minutes of French possession (aside from one hoofed Milner clearance) ended with Nasri's blistering goal from distance. It was an excellent shot, powerful enough to beat Hart at his near post with little blame for the keeper, but the manner of concession was incredibly demoralizing. Nasri (and Cabaye) had acres of space at the top of the box as both Gerrard and Parker followed Ribery into the penalty area. Neither center-back marked any French player. England had nine players in the penalty box while France had three. Seriously, can anyone explain this picture?



Thankfully, that was the only clear failure, able to be written off as a singular moment of madness. But from there, it was even more typical Hodgson and typical England. A slight improvement after the interval, with increased possession lacking in threat followed by French domination after the hour mark. Only one side looked capable of winning the match, only one side looked bothered to win the match. But other than that moment of total madness in the 39th minute, England defended well, in open play and from set plays, especially Glen Johnson, who's often (wrongly) maligned for supposed defensive deficiencies. England blocked the shots they needed to block, Lescott and Terry won the aerial duels they needed to win, and Hart made the saves he needed to make when called upon. Job done? Well, it depends on your job description.

The statistics make for terrifying reading, and will prove to the French that they should have taken more from this. 65% French possession. 21 shots to England's five. 11 corners to 4. Most frighteningly notable was the discrepancy in passes.




The total number of passes is frightening, as is the respective completion percentages (92% to 83%), but the difference in quantity and quality of attacking third passes sticks out like a sore thumb. Compare how many French attacking third passes started in their own half to those from England. It's not pretty, not as a chalkboard and not as a spectacle. But England never promised or threatened pretty football. In fact, they promised the diametric opposite.

Again, and not to keep banging the same, tired drum, but we shouldn't have expected much more, not in this match and not from this team or manager. England should assuredly attack more and better in its next two matches, against Sweden then co-hosts Ukraine. If they done, then the howls of condemnation will follow. This draw decides little, which seemed partly the goal. The success or failure of this campaign will be determined by how England play in matches where they're the clear favorite.

Liverpool FC and the English National Team

• England have qualified for 21 of the 30 World Cups (13 of 16) and European Championships (8 of 14) held since 1950. Liverpool had at least once player in 19 of the 21 England squads. On average, Liverpool have had 1.92 players involved in an England World Cup squad and 3.5 in a Euros squad.

• One of those two tournaments where Liverpool had no players in the England squad was the 1954 World Cup, which took place just after the last time Liverpool were relegated. The other was the 1986 World Cup. In contrast to 1954, Liverpool won the league prior to that tournament. To be fair, Steve McMahon (first cap in 1988), Sammy Lee (last cap in 1984), and Paul Walsh (last cap in 1984) were the only English internationals at the club then (both Alan Kennedy and Phil Neal left Liverpool during the '85-86 season).

• I can't help but think Hodgson's taking so many Liverpool players as a form of punishment. With Kelly added to the England squad on Sunday due to Cahill's fractured jaw, the 2012 Euros squad equals the record for most Liverpool players in an England squad, set in the 1980 European Championships. Just as in 1980, no club has more in the English squad. Granted, Liverpool won the 1979-80 league championship while finishing 8th this season, so that probably doesn't bode well for the Three Lions. If you're wondering, England finished third in its group in the eight-team 1980 Euros, behind Belgium and Italy (but ahead of Spain!). All six Liverpool players featured in the first match, a 1-1 draw against Belgium, but only Phil Thompson played in all three matches.

• Liverpool have been the best-represented club six times: joint-top four times (2006 with Chelsea, 2000 with Manchester United, 1982 with Ipswich and Manchester United, and 1966 with West Ham and Manchester United), and with the outright most England players in the 1980 and 2012 Euros.

• Technically, England's 1982 World Cup campaign ended at the Second Group Stage, with 12 sides remaining, rather than the quarterfinals, finishing second in their three-team group behind West Germany. But I really didn't want to create a "Second Group Stage" category for just that tournament.


(ht Inter Leaning for the photo, from the 1966 World Cup Final)

England 1-4 Germany

James
Johnson Terry Upson ACole
Milner Lampard Barry Gerrard
Defoe Rooney

Neuer
Lahm Friedrich Mertesacker Boateng
Khedira Schweinsteiger
Müller Özil Podolski
Klose

Goals:
Klose 20'
Podloski 33'
Upson 37'
Müller 67' 70'

Isn't football fun?

Thanks to those two second half goals on the break with England over-committed, Germany are deserved winners, but let's still get 1966 out of the way now. 1966's "Wembley-tor" was a decision by inches. Today's strike was a yard over the line. 2-2 at half-time could have completely changed the game, but yes, that's football. Let's thank Sepp Blatter for keeping our game pure as driven snow by refusing video replay or Hawkeye technology.

And yes, were Terry and Upson able to defend in the first third of the game, it might be moot. "Schoolboy defending" is offensive to schoolboys everywhere. Upson looked shell-shocked to be there (and redeemed himself with his very good header), while Terry was stupidly caught up-field on both goals, evidently under the impression he was a midfielder. Until England pulled one back, they all looked every bit the tactically inept, overpaid wankers everyone loves to portray them as.

But then Upson scored from Gerrard's cross on a short corner, and England should have been level seconds later when Lampard's chipped shot hit the crossbar and bounced three feet over the line. But with the linesman 30 yards up-field and the referee with his head up his ass, Neuer was able to collect as if nothing happened. England righteously huffed and puffed for the rest of the half, but were unable to recreate the heroics which should have seen them level as the Germans admirably regrouped.

And in the second half, after Lampard again thumped the crossbar in the 52nd minute, Germany punished them like unruly teenagers who stole the family minivan when England sent men forward in an attempt to equalize. Within a span of three minutes, it went from 2-1 to 4-1 after Müller scored twice. First, Schweinsteiger found the Munich striker open on the right after Barry was undressed just outside the German penalty box, thundering a near post shot that James couldn't keep out. Then, after a long punt forward, Özil ran at, then past, Barry – the only defender in the England half until Ashley Cole attempted to sprint back – before centering for an easy tap-in. Game well and truly over. The final 20 minutes were a mere formality; the only question whether Germany could mirror the 5-1 scoreline from World Cup qualifying in 2001. When your response to a three-goal deficit is to replace Defoe with Heskey, you shouldn't even bother.

There's little point discussing tactics in a match like this, but it was further proof that England's 4-4-2 does not work on the big stage. Gerrard on the flank left massive gaps exploited in the first two goals. England were flat, unable to pick up Özil, and easily beaten in defense. Rooney looked lost whether partnering Defoe or Heskey. Gerrard should have been behind Rooney as a lone striker, Joe Cole should have been in the team from the beginning. But I may be biased having sounded that note for weeks now.

The question is where England goes from here. The majority of this generation – Gerrard, Lampard, Barry, Terry, James, Joe Cole, Heskey and potentially Ashley Cole, among others – will probably be too old for the 2014 tournament. A few won't even make the next Euro squad. I'm tempted to suggest Capello's gone as well, but that's probably more in the hope England hires Hodgson so Liverpool doesn't.

Needless to say, there will be questions asked, both of England and of FIFA, and deservedly so.

Ze Germans. It's always ze Germans.

England v Germany 06.27.10

Live in the US on ESPN at 10am ET

Guess at the line-ups:
James
Johnson Upson Terry ACole
Milner Lampard Barry Gerrard
Defoe Rooney

Neuer
Lahm Friedrich Mertesacker Badstuber
Khedira Schweinsteiger
Müller Özil Podolski
Klose

Ze Germans. It's always ze Germans. Yes, 1966, but Germany's knocked England out of the World Cup in 1970 and 1990, and had a hand in their elimination at the second group stage in 1982. Then there was Euro 1996, which England hosted. It's always ze Germans and it almost always ends with penalties and tears.

It's hard to see anything other than the same England XI as last time out. Rarely do teams change a winning formula in the middle of World Cup, and there have been few other players who've made a case for starting. As I wrote in the comments of my England/Slovenia match review, I'd rather see 4-2-3-1, especially given Germany's probable line-up, but I've also wanted that formation from the beginning.

With the amount of possession Germany usually has (compared to England so far, at least) and with how dangerous Özil's been, it seems more likely than against Slovenia or Algeria, where – in theory – England looked to take the game to their opponents. England will have to counter-attack much more than in any group game, and will need Barry to shadow the likes of Özil and probably Kroos between the lines. Still, I doubt Capello's going to change his stripes now, and individual roles will be more important than the ostensible formation.

What England really needs is for the big names to play to their potential. First and foremost, Rooney and Lampard need to finally show up. Neither has scored since the 5-1 win over Croatia last September, and both have been anonymous at best so far. An improvement in Gerrard's form similar to his step-up between the Algeria and Slovenia matches, replicating his first half against the US, would also be nice. In addition, I hope Upson, impressive against Slovenia, remains in the line-up even with Carragher returning from suspension and news that Ledley King's supposedly fit.

Germany hasn't impressed since demolishing Australia in the first match, losing to Serbia after a harsh red card before narrowly beating Ghana, but I find it hard to believe anyone could consider England favorites after their three group matches (although I'm sure the tabloids, which I haven't read, are chock full of 'we'll bomb their asses' jingoism). And that should work in England's favor.

Schweinsteiger's injury could be crucial, although I still expect him to start. Surely Germany wouldn't exaggerate his injury just to play mind games. Either of his potential replacements – Toni Kroos or Piotr Trochowski – is a more attacking option, which will put more pressure on Khedira. It could also be Jerome Boateng, a utility defender, if he recovers from a calf strain, but I expect Löw to go with the more attacking option. Typical Germans. And if Löw really wanted to throw caution to the wind, he could start Gomez, converting to a diamond-like 4-4-2, but I've almost always seen this version of Germany play 4-2-3-1. Regardless, if Bastian can go, he will.

This is a intriguing match-up regardless of the history between the sides or the massively out-of-date war metaphors. Two historic European "powerhouses" (okay, I know that's pushing it in England's case); two of the names always most discussed when the World Cup comes around. That's what this tournament's all about.

England 1-0 Slovenia

James
Johnson Terry Upson ACole
Barry
Milner Lampard Gerrard
Rooney Defoe

Handanovic
Brecko Suler Cesar Jokic
Birsa Radosavljevic Koren Kirm
Ljbunijankic
Novakovic

Goals:
Defoe 23'

Thank whatever God you believe in.

It's hard to focus on England, despite my priorities, after seeing the US snatch a very deserved winner in injury time, but let's soldier on.

For 70 minutes, it was arguably the best England performance since beating Croatia, even though a narrow 1-0 lead is rightfully terrifying no matter how comfortable England looked, especially with how this side's reacted to pressure. But Capello's revamped 4-4-2, with Defoe in place of Heskey and Milner for Lennon bore early fruit.

Having Milner stuck to the right touchline, with Defoe's pace far more of a threat than either Heskey or Rooney, is what led to the 23rd minute strike, with Milner's inch-perfect cross shinned past Handanovic. That England failed to get a second when clearly in the ascendancy – Lampard ballooned over, Handanovic saved Gerrard's low, placed shot – obviously fostered fears. But Upson and Terry were heroic in defense, throwing themselves across the pitch and keeping Ljubijankic and Novakovic mainly under wraps, with almost all of the Slovenian threats coming from right-winger Birsa, who took advantage of Gerrard's propensity to cut in and Ashley Cole's repeated charges up-field.

The pattern repeated after the interval. Defoe had a second chalked off when Rooney was ruled offside on Lampard's through before setting up a wide-open Defoe in the 49th. Soon after, Rooney and Gerrard – England's two biggest disappointments – fouled up an excellent chance when over-intricate just outside the box, followed by Handanovic making enormous stops on Terry's header and Rooney's shot – the fingertips save tipping Rooney's shot onto the post when he was narrowly ruled onside and one-on-one with the keeper most impressive.

But from there, the pressure clearly set in. Slovenia could have been level in the 68th when Barry gave the ball away and Birsa countered. Kirm found Dedic, flicking on to Novakovic, but first Terry then Johnson were there to make preposterous blocks. Rooney, who couldn't find the net for love or money, was replaced by Joe Cole in the 72nd, which coincidentally was also when Slovenia began to truly frighten.

No matter how poorly Rooney was playing (and it was pretty poorly), neither Defoe nor Cole – who played behind the striker with Gerrard remaining out left – can hold up play like the United striker, neither provide his willing, non-stop running, and the opposition increasingly saw more of the ball, undoubtedly aided by England shrinking back to defend with the tension indescribably intense.

Heskey's entrance for Defoe with five minutes to play helped England's ability to keep the ball, with Slovenia's lone late chance again blocked by a diving Englishman, this time Upson on Dedic. Milner and Joe Cole did well to keep the ball at the Slovenian corner flag for the totality of stoppage time, and England, thankfully, were through, despite only looking like a coherent side for approximately 75 of 270 minutes so far.

Credit to Capello for making those questioned changes, and Milner, Defoe, Upson, and Terry were England's men of the match. I was admittedly surprised by both the line-up and the continuing use of 4-4-2, but it worked, and England are through. That's why Capello makes the big bucks. This will almost assuredly be the England XI going forward.

Still, no matter how surprisingly decent Slovenia were – and going home is truly harsh on them, but that's the World Cup – there are still clear problems with this team. The "big names" again haven't found their feet. Gerrard, under the weight of the captaincy and relegated to a left-sided berth, has been largely anonymous since his 4th minute goal against the US oh so many moons ago, although he was more influential (if still out of position) today. Rooney still contrives to miss chances he'd score for the Mancs with his eyes closed. Lampard took one shot today, and I'm surprised the ball stayed in the stadium. This team will struggle to progress, especially if they face Germany in the next round, with those three misfiring.

Despite my various allegiances, I'm glad the US finished first in the group with Donovan's 91st-minute goal. It's deserved after how resilient that team's been and the dubious refereeing decisions that the media can finally let go of. But I'm even happier than England's through despite their constant struggles. Insert standard line about 'winning ugly,' but more important is how it'll be a release valve for all the frustration built up over the past couple of weeks. And that the lone goal conceded in group play came from a fluky mistake is a massive positive as well.

No matter how it happened, they're through. Phew.

England v Slovenia 06.23.10

Live in the US on espn2 at 10am ET

Guess at the line-ups:
James
Johnson Upson Terry ACole
Lennon Lampard Barry Gerrard
Defoe Rooney

Handanovic
Brecko Mavric Cesar Jokic
Birsa Radosavljevic Koren Kirm
Ljubijankic
Novakovic

Group C	Points	Goal Diff	Goals Scored
Slovenia	4	+1	3
United States	2	0	3
England	2	0	1
Algeria	1	-1	0

So, good World Cup so far, huh? England certainly know how to keep it interesting, and I clearly don't mean on the field.

First, there's John Terry, under the impression he's still captain. Capello cut that nonsense off in the bud. But the Chelsea player made a few surprisingly coherent points amidst his grunting, impromptu coup, most importantly about the need to bring his ex-teammate Joe Cole back into the squad – a drum I've been beating since the opening game.

My guess is it comes down to Joe Cole versus Jermain Defoe. 4-4-2 or 4-4-1-1/4-2-3-1. Either way, Heskey looks to be the player dropped, having been unable to get his strike partner into either match. But I'd be surprised if Capello went with Joe Cole after surprisingly ignoring him for the first two matches and now with Terry's ill-advised demand. Capello's not one for changing his mind or letting the inmates run the asylum. And there have been murmurs about Defoe's participation since the run-up to Algeria.

It's worth noting that Defoe scored – off the bench, mind you – against Slovenia in a friendly last September, with the other goal coming from Lampard's first-half spot kick. That day, Slovenia started the same XI which beat Algeria, while England were 4-2-3-1 with Rooney, Gerrard, and Wright-Phillips behind Heskey. And like tomorrow, Upson and Terry were the central defensive partnership, which will be the case now that England's on their fourth central defender following King's injury and Carragher's suspension.

If I had my way, it'd be Lampard making way for Joe Cole, with Defoe in place of Heskey, in the 4-4-2 Capello's seemingly preferred so far. Lampard's done little but get in Gerrard's way, adding nothing to either defense or attack. But Fat Frank's undroppable, and Capello will find a way to shoehorn both him and Gerrard into yet another formation.

Slovenia, meanwhile, will look a lot like they did against the US. Central defender Suler picked up a rib injury, likely to be replaced by Matej Mavric, but otherwise, I expect they'll stick with the 4-4-1-1 formation that saw them put two past the Americans in the first half.

The debate over tactics, however entertaining, is largely a red herring. England's current problem is England's usual problem. The team falls apart in the World Cup, unable to replicate the best moments from qualification with the pressure ramped up to 11. Rooney's been symptomatic of this: invisible for England, a shadow of the player that scored 34 goals for United this season, culminating with his TV camera tirade against the fans as he trudged off the Cape Town pitch last Friday. That, more than the line-up or tactics, is what needs fixing, and where Capello needs to prove worthy of his £6m yearly salary.

So much for an easy group, despite what that red-topped toilet paper announced oh so many months ago. Yet it's still easy enough that England can qualify for the knockout round with a win even though they've played maybe ten minutes of decent football during 180 minutes of World Cup action. Win, and all will be forgiven and forgotten. Win, and there's still a chance of completing heroics last seen more than 40 years ago.

'Just get through the group stage' is the mantra during every World Cup for a reason. It's a whole new tournament once we're down to 16 teams.

England 0-0 Algeria

James
Johnson Carragher Terry ACole
Lennon Lampard Barry Gerrard
Heskey Rooney

Mbolhi
Bougherra Halliche Yahia
Kadir Lacen Yebda Belhadj
Boudebouz Ziani
Matmour

NEWSFLASH (Dateline: Cape Town, South Africa) – England crumble under weight of World Cup pressure. Meanwhile, sky is still blue. Updates to follow.

Well, the mostly harmless England we saw against the US wasn’t an aberration. This is simply a disjointed side devoid of ideas and scared of the consequences.

Algeria’s unbalanced, defensive formation – 3-4-2-1, 5-4-1, whatever – baffled England. Rooney remained invisible. Gerrard seemed unaware he was deployed on the left, leaving poor Ashley Cole to try and man the entire flank. Heskey, the outlet on punts forward, couldn’t hold up the ball. England had little but innocuous shots from distance in the first half, and not many of them, despite an untested Mbolhi taking the place of Chaouchi.

In fact, after Gerrard’s cheeky chip almost caught Mbolhi unaware in the 4th (spooky!), Algeria were arguably the stronger side for 20 or so minutes. Belhadj and Ziani pushed back the attacking Johnson and Lennon. Neither keeper had much to do outside of Mbolhi’s nice save on Lampard’s 33rd minute shot, after the Chelsea man collected a cleared Lennon cross. It was as sterile and uninspiring as France/Uruguay, Slovenia/Algeria, or any other “standout” from this World Cup.

They could have played another 90 minutes and it’d still probably end 0-0. Yeah, England had better chances in the second half, and were improved by the Wright-Phillips and Defoe substitutions. Confidence was clearly lacking in Gerrard and Heskey’s chances in the 55th and 70th minutes: put through on the right in similar positions, both centered instead of taking the shot. Unsurprisingly, both "passes" were cut out by Algerian defenders. Gerrard and Lampard also combined nicely (once) through the middle to nearly put Defoe through in the 75th, only to see Bougherra and Belhadj get back, but that was it. Despite Crouch’s introduction for Barry in the 84th, impotence reigned in the final minutes.

There were zero positives as far as personnel go. Every single player disappointed, aside from maybe James, who had little to do, and Carragher, who did little wrong outside of the yellow that sees him banned for England's next match. I don’t know what to criticize tactically, because I don’t think Capello's lacking in that area. The players just look terrible. No inspiration, no belief, and terrified of making a mistake similar to the one that saw Green dropped for this game. You wouldn’t have thought that’d be a problem from the England we saw in qualification, but once again, the World Cup completely changes this country. Getting Gerrard behind Rooney might be a start, but I seriously worry how he’s coping with the captaincy – something I never thought I’d write. I’d also like to know what Joe Cole did to Capello to induce his exile.

All you can say is at least England aren’t eliminated. If they win, they’re through, and the same goes for their opponents as well as the US. Pity that looks like a tough task based on today’s (or last Saturday’s) form. Slovenia – England’s opponents – on four points, and the US, tied with England on two, have been the “best” sides in the group so far.

Now, the pressure will be even more intense. Either catalyze as a team or suffer the deserved slings and arrows of an outraged press.

England v Algeria 06.18.10

Live on espn2 at 2:30pm ET

Guess at the line-ups:
Hart
Johnson Carragher Terry ACole
Lampard Barry
Lennon Gerrard JCole
Rooney

Chaouchi
Bougherra Halliche Yahia Belhadj
Boudebouz Yebda Matmour Lacen Ziani
Djebbour

Group C	Points	Goal Diff
Slovenia	3	+1
England	1	0
United States	1	0
Algeria	0	-1

The two keepers have been the most newsworthy after each's respective howlers, (although Chaouchi might now be ruled out after picking up a "knee injury" in training yesterday), but there are multiple storylines for both sides. Both look likely to make changes in defense, midfield, and attack. England will fervently expect a win after Saturday's disappointment, while Algeria will probably be content simply to improve on their last showing.

Despite last Saturday's "heroics" (and my repeated clamoring for Joe Hart), I'd be stunned if Capello dropped Green. James doesn't appear to be fully fit, while it's become clear Hart's not trusted because of his age. And if you leave out Green, you might as well send him home now, for the same reason he wasn't substituted at halftime. That'd be his confidence shot, no matter how often he says he's experienced enough forget it and move on. The human brain does not work that way, even for goalkeepers with numerous loose synapses.

Regardless, having Gareth Barry back is the biggest improvement England can make. They desperately need a midfielder to focus on ball-winning and retention, a cool head to sit in front of the defense allowing Gerrard and Lampard to do what they do best. Gerrard didn't play badly against the US (Lampard on the other hand, as usual for England...), but he's still better when playing closer to the striker and free to focus on attack, rather than the rampaging box-to-box midfielder he really wants to be. See: his best moments with Torres when both were fit and Liverpool weren't sucking for other reasons.

The question is how he'll be accommodated. In place of Milner/Wright-Phillips, with Gerrard taking up his free role from the left (as often happened in qualifying), or in place of Heskey, shifting to a 4-2-3-1/4-1-3-1-1 with Gerrard off the striker (like at Liverpool), with Joe Cole replacing Milner/Wright-Phillips (just because it should happen)? Your guess is as good as mine. It needs to be one of those two systems, though.

King will also have to be replaced in defense, with Carragher, Upson, and Dawson to choose from. There are concerns about all three. Altidore repeatedly beat Carra like he was a surly stepchild. Upson's left-footed, as is John Terry, which can make for an awkward pairing. And Dawson's yet to earn his senior cap. That Carra was first off the bench on Saturday means he's most likely, but with Algeria likely to be pinned back, I'd be tempted to start Dawson, the most readymade replacement for King. If you're afraid to use him against the likes of Algeria, there's no point in his inclusion.

The other change Capello's mooted is Defoe for Heskey. Algeria will look to congest their own half, making it hard for England to find gaps, which could be an argument for Defoe. Still, outside of his usual inability to convert the one decent chance offered him, Heskey did what was asked against the US: throw himself about and win flick-on headers. Others failed to capitalize.

Algeria often played 3-5-2 in qualifying, but appeared to use more of a four-man backline against Slovenia. And despite the defeat, the switch "worked." It was Ghezzal's insane dismissal less than 15 minutes after coming off the bench and Chaouchi's subsequent Green-esque gaffe that caused the loss. However, you can't rule out Algeria reverting to three center backs with England likely to pose more questions than Slovenia (hopefully!). Young star Boudebouz should start on the right, as the Times suggests Algeria will revamp their attack after its previous dismal outing. The Guardian suggests that Algeria's formation will be closer to 4-6-0 with Djebbour miles off the pace, Ghezzal suspended, and substitute striker Saifi 35 years old.

Whatever tactics Algeria employ, it'll be England on the front foot, and England under the most scrutiny. Neither is a new phenomenon, but the response with the group up in the air will define this team.

England 1-1 United States

Green
Johnson King Terry ACole
Lennon Gerrard Lampard Milner
Heskey Rooney

Howard
Cherundolo DeMerit Onyewu Bocanegra
Donovan Bradley Clark Dempsey
Findley Altidore

Goals:
Gerrard 4’
Dempsey 40’

It’s a historic day. The United States national team is all grown up. Pity it’ll be remembered for England’s suicidal goalkeeping instead of the US’ team effort.

Capello got it wrong. Bob Bradley got it right. Let that sink in for a few seconds. Nonetheless, it's still a draw, and both teams are still on pace to qualify. I expect both nations to overreact in different directions, but this result doesn't necessarily mean the US is now super awesome or that England's preternaturally doomed.

It was two 4-4-2s ramming against each other, and neither really gave way. There was little style to go along with the substance, lots of long balls and set plays, and some crucial mistakes. The US did it better, made fewer mistakes, and deserved to come away with a draw. Yes, had Green not decided to commit hara-kiri, it could have been 1-0, but it also could have been 1-2 if Altidore had taken his chance after skating past Carragher.

But the game will be defined by the errors, and errors led to both goals. England’s was obviously more catastrophic. Gerrard’s early strike, easily ghosting behind Clark to slot in Heskey’s throughball, seemed the perfect start for England, but it also aided the US. England started sitting deeper, trying to manage the game. What was more important was controlling possession, and England didn’t, allowing the US to slowly grow into the game. Still, the equalizer was nothing if not fortunate.

Five minutes before halftime, after much huffing and puffing but little output, Dempsey spun Gerrard 25 yards from goal before lining up a low, simple shot. But Green, not fully behind the ball, somehow fumbled the tame effort into his own net. Paul Robinson who? Green’s now synonymous with English howlers. Congrats.

Unsurprisingly, a mistake like that knocked England off its stride, and needing to make two changes before the second half started didn’t help. First, Milner came off for Wright-Phillips barely half an hour in. Then King, looking gimpy as usual, went off for Carragher during the interval. Aside from a 52nd minute chance from Heskey, put through by Lennon but shooting straight at Howard, England offered little until Altidore sent hearts in mouth in the 65th – torching an already-booked Carragher only to see Green push his shot onto the post.

England somewhat responded, finally getting the previously anonymous Rooney – well-marked by DeMerit – more involved. But Rooney couldn’t find the net, Wright-Phillips shot too close to Howard when given an opening, and Heskey couldn’t keep his headers down. The last throw of the dice with Crouch, with 10 minutes to play, was pretty much throwing good money after bad, and it was the US that deservedly finished stronger.

Milner and Green were the questionable starters and they were the goats. Fat lot of good it does now, but I’d again like to reiterate my belief that Joe Cole and Joe Hart should be in the team. I feel for Green – this is his legacy now – and it’s Milner that’s the more unconscionable inclusion. He’s an unlikely starter in the best of circumstances; if he’s ill, he shouldn’t have been anywhere near the first XI. Not a good day for Don Fabio.

For all of the hype, rightfully deserved in a lot of ways, Capello has a bit of explaining to do. This England looked little different than previous World Cup failures. Tactically, it was still old-school 4-4-2, with the same problems because of the Gerrard/Lampard midfield. The uncertainty over the goalkeeper, no matter what Capello says, seemed to sap both Green and the rest of the rearguard’s confidence, and King’s injury only made matters worse as Carragher was clearly exposed by Altidore’s pace. Yes, Capello was hamstrung by injuries, but he bound his own hands substitutions-wise with the team he chose. Other than Johnson getting forward and Gerrard’s early goal, there was little to be pleased about from England’s perspective.

Regardless, the USA looked more of a team than England throughout. Cherundolo was truly awesome, as were Howard and the rest of the defense. Talent-wise, it’s not close, no matter what Alexi Lalas says. But talent is rarely the biggest factor in team sports. England had little to no fluidity after the fourth minute, and it only got worse as the game intensified. That bodes poorly for the rest of England’s tournament, even if this team still looks capable of beating both Slovenia and Algeria.

Today’s is a bigger result than the much-referenced 1-0 from 1950, and everyone involved should be justifiably proud. Despite Green’s humiliation, this didn't seem a fluke. Teams, not individuals, win competitions, especially knockout competitions.

But grown-ups have to prove it again and again. Now the pressure’s on the US – we’re going to hear that this team’s obviously good enough to beat the no-marks that fill out this group and are certain to qualify along with England. It’s the exact opposite of the Confederations Cup.

At least this result ensures the group will remain interesting until the last day.

England v United States 06.12.10

Live on ABC at 2:30 ET

Predicted line-ups:
England:
Hart
Johnson King Terry ACole
Lennon Lampard Gerrard JCole
Heskey Rooney

USA:
Howard
Cherundolo Onyewu DeMerit Bocanegra
Dempsey Bradley Clark Donovan
Altidore Buddle

Key questions:
England:
• 4-4-2 with Barry out, which is what we've seen in the friendlies, or Gerrard back in a free role behind Rooney?
• Can Lampard and Gerrard play together?
• Who starts in goal?

USA:
• Who partners Altidore?
• How healthy is Gooch?
• Can the fullbacks keep up?

It's the match I'm dying to see and yet fairly unhappy about. The country I root for versus the country of my birth. And it'll take place on day two of the tournament. I guess it's always better to jump in feet first...

Most importantly, both teams are better than the sides sent to Germany four years ago.

The difference in England comes down to two factors: Fabio Capello and Rooney's development. Otherwise, it's basically the 2006 team but four years older. Which is evident from the key questions above. We're still debating whether or not Lampard and Gerrard can play together in central midfield, we're still wondering if David James is really England's best goalkeeper, and England's still reliant on Wayne Rooney.

Tactically, the main debate is Heskey v Crouch v Gerrard in a free role. Barry's absence, from this game at the least, means Gerrard will almost assuredly play as a holding midfielder – albeit one that bombs forward at opportune moments. Neither Carrick nor Milner made the most of chances given during the past month. And that means that Rooney will play with another striker up top. We can rule out a little-little partnership with Defoe, but whether Heskey or Crouch gets the nod still seems up in the air.

Heskey's been preferred in the past; as with Owen, managers love how he creates space and draws defenders to the benefit of his strike partner. But he's been unable to buy a goal for club or country, while Crouch has an excellent scoring record for England (21 in 39), even if most have come against the minnows. My guess is Capello goes with the devil he knows best, and we got a hint with seeing Rooney and Heskey paired in the second half on Monday, but I say that with little certainty. No matter which starts, either will be crucial with crosses coming in from the flanks and Oneywu suspect after an extended injury, and that would lead me to pick Crouch.

Meanwhile, the US has continually improved since 2006, something Bob Bradley doesn't get nearly enough credit for. Beating Spain in last summer's Confederations Cup was the high-water mark, but recent low-water marks include eking through World Cup qualification and the earlier rounds of the Confed Cup. And the hero of qualification, Conor Casey – with his two goals against Honduras – didn't even make the squad. But there was no surprise in that.

Despite form, World Cup qualification – like the win over Spain – still demonstrated the US' best attribute. They win games by outworking opponents. The 'never say die' attitude is cliché, especially in reference to an American team, but it's true. And there are assuredly worse qualities to have. Yet England are routinely renowned for the same quality – tactically questionable on the big stage but full of blood and guts.

As go Dempsey and Donovan, so goes America. The US needs both on their game – as they were against Spain a year ago – to succeed. Shocking, right? The team plays well when the two best players play well. But Deuce and Landycakes are head and shoulders above others in the squad. Dempsey's become a big player in the Premiership, which is of no small importance here, while you can be certain that Donovan's loan to Everton took place with this match in mind. Deuce, Howard, DeMerit, Spector, Guzan, Hahnemann and Holden ply their trade in England; Altidore and Donovan spent at least part of last season there on loan; Gooch, Boca, and Feilhaber have played there in the past; and Beasley and Edu are currently in Scotland. Check my math, but I'm pretty sure that's more than half of the squad. It might help.

At the same time, all eyes are on the US' defense. The possibility of Spector and Bornstein at fullback should strike fear into the hearts of any American, especially with the likes of Joe Cole, Aaron Lennon, Ashley Cole, and Glen Johnson on England's flanks. I'd wager any amount of money that's the main point of attack, and we'll see how the Americans cope, especially with Oneywu still recovering from that knee injury. He played sparingly during the friendlies, but if he's anywhere near fit, he'll start, consequences be damned. And it's hard to argue with that decision.

It's also hard to put much stock in friendly results, but there were signs of optimism from both sides. Three wins from three for England, although Mexico and Japan gave them problems and the Platinum Stars barely counted. Meanwhile, although the Czechs walloped the Americans, the USA came back strong against Turkey and Australia. Still, the rickety defense worried, especially conceding silly set piece goals against both the Czechs and Aussies, while Turan torched the US on one break where Spector was caught upfield. Worth noting given England's strength on free kicks and corners (scoring twice against Mexico) and its pace on the flanks.

These two teams are predicted to qualify from the group and rightfully so. But the US has never advanced after losing its first match. England's done it twice – 1962 and 1986. Make no mistake, this will have crucial implications for who progresses and both teams know it. Which leads me to believe the US will set up for and be satisfied with a draw. It'll be up to England to prove why they should be amongst the favorites.

England 3-1 Mexico

Green
G Johnson Ferdinand King Baines
Walcott Carrick Milner Gerrard
Crouch Rooney

Subs:
Carragher for Ferdinand 45’
Defoe for Crouch 45’
Hart for Green 45’
Huddlestone for Carrick 62’
Lennon for Walcott 77’
A Johnson for Milner 85’

Goals:
King 17’
Crouch 34’
Franco 45+3’
G Johnson 47’

After 45 minutes, pundits were sharpening their swords and searching for enough soil to cover England’s coffin despite the 2-1 advantage. But after 90 minutes, it’s a ho-hum, forgettable 3-1 victory, if one that’ll leave Capello with some things to complain about.

That England were two up with a third of the game gone can only be credited to Mexico’s laughably bad set play defense. England scored from their first corner – a training ground routine from Gerrard to Crouch to King – as well as the second – Crouch finishing (from an offside position) after Rooney’s header was well-saved – despite Mexico having almost complete control of the ball.

I was only somewhat joking when I tweeted that Wembley hadn’t seen any away side with so much possession since the Hungarians in 1953. Carrick and Milner couldn’t tackle their way out of a paper bag as Mexico’s 4-3-3 caused problems, limiting England to counter attacks. But like Barcelona proved in this year’s Champions League (and Liverpool somehow proves ten or so times a season), sometimes possession doesn’t mean all that much.

Amongst England’s first half goals, Green came up with two incredible saves, twice denying Vela on the break, while Salcido rattled the same post Chelsea repeatedly thumped nine days ago. On the stroke of halftime, England hospitably mimicked Mexico’s hopeless defending, allowing Franco to pull one back after Marquez headed a corner goalwards, cleared off the line by Baines directly to the striker’s feet.

I’m certain Capello peeled paint off the wall with his halftime talk. Thankfully, Glen Johnson’s blistering strike less than 90 seconds into the half rendered the next 45 minutes mostly moot. Combining well with Walcott to charge down the flank, Johnson cut inside and curled a brilliant lefty shot into the far corner.

What little momentum that might have carried over from Franco’s goal was dead, while England also did a better job pressing the opposition, helped by moving Gerrard inside and Milner out wide. Mexico continued to see more of the ball, but did a lot less with it. Although the final 20 minutes were mainly spent in England's end, with the substitute Barrera often torching Baines, Hart had little to do besides catch shots straight down his throat and take goal kicks.

All in all, a mixed bag from England, but that I feel secure in writing that about a 3-1 win shows the team’s progression under Capello as well as the expectations going into the World Cup. What needs to be fixed is identifiable; a central midfield of Lampard and Barry (or Lampard and Parker, or Lampard and Huddlestone, or even Lampard and Gerrard) won’t have as much trouble closing down a fluid side and Ashley Cole will reclaim his starting spot, among others.

Obviously, England were impressive on set plays. Walcott also used his pace to great effect (if the end product left something to be desired at times), while Johnson – good in both attack and defense – was my man of the match. Rooney, Crouch, and Gerrard also showed some signs of understanding, although Gerrard was far better when central in the second half.

No injuries, despite the much-maligned Wembley turf, a win, and Capello knows a good deal more about the 30 players in his squad. That’s all you can ask from a friendly.

Reading too much into Carragher’s call-up

I’m late to the party, but I wanted to wait until the England squad seemed certain before jumping the gun. Admittedly, it’s a bit surprising to see Jamie Carragher’s name back in an England line-up. And Carra’s return from the wilderness, accepting Capello’s invitation after repeatedly spurning McClaren, probably isn’t good news for Liverpool, at least on the face of it.

First, it’s yet another player who’ll sacrifice rest for a chance to represent his country, which we can’t begrudge. But it means less recovery time for an aging defender, and every Liverpool fan will spend June fearful of injuries – whether it’s Carragher, Torres, or whomever. In theory, Carra won’t be first choice at any position in South Africa, but chances are he’ll start at least one game. And regardless, he’ll be far more physically active than if he took the summer off.

But what’s total speculation on my part (yes, I’m a hypocrite) seems more significant, and far more worrying. Carragher retired from international football in 2007, basically saying that club came first. Even if it’s not true, that he’s willing to return implies Liverpool isn’t first and foremost anymore. So much for “Fuck it, it’s only England.” And that’s a frightening prospect after a season full of rumors and innuendo about dressing room discord.

Let me make it clear. I’m not condemning Carra’s choice one bit. Very few get to play in a World Cup; it’s a life’s ambition for every professional footballer. Carragher probably wouldn’t come out of retirement for the Euros and definitely wouldn’t for a friendly. The World Cup will always be different. Plus, playing for (and learning from) a manager of Capello’s caliber is an extra enticement.

And there’s an identifiable place for him in the squad, with a very good chance that Carra will actually play. England’s weak across the entire back four, and Jamie can handle all four positions. Johnson’s less than fit on the right, no center back has stood out this season, and Ashley Cole’s just returning from an extended injury while Bridge hasn’t looked the same since the scandal on the left. Wes Brown and Joleon Lescott will likely miss the tournament. As it often was under Houllier, Carragher’s Jack-of-all-Trades versatility will be his biggest asset. Jamie is a pair of safe, steady hands, and that's massive in a tournament of this importance.

I just hope I’m reading too much into this decision. No matter Carragher’s bad spells this season and the murmurs of dissension behind the scenes, he’s still a moral center at this club – just as important a talisman as a player. He has to be on board with Liverpool’s future.

England 5-1 Croatia

363 days ago, at the beginning of their World Cup qualifying campaign, I wrote that England’s 4-1 victory over Croatia in Zagreb was just as lucky as good, and we shouldn’t expect it every time out.

I was so cocky in my cynicism, I actually wrote, “But if I were a betting man, I’d put money on Croatia to win at Wembley in a year’s time. Ah, pessimism. I love following England.” Yikes.

Needless to say, I couldn’t have been more mistaken. One year later, England’s won eight of eight in qualifying, securing a trip to South Africa with two games to spare. So much for English mediocrity. And that’s the difference Fabio Capello makes. To slightly defend myself, I did write this when Capello was hired.

England beat Croatia like a drum from the opening whistle. The visitors never had a chance to establish themselves. A penalty claim within three minutes (yeah, ball to hand might have been harsh, but it’s Stevie), a penalty won by the outstanding Lennon within seven, and two goals to the good before 20 were off the clock. Croatia simply could not breathe for those 20 minutes.

I like Slaven Bilic (and Croatia definitely missed Modric), but Capello ran circles around him. Trying to exploit the right with both Pranjic and Pokrivac, Lennon and Johnson took them to the woodshed. Lennon’s pace was a constant threat, Johnson ably supported, Barry nullified most everything in the center (Kranjcar is no Modric, as Spurs will soon find out), and Gerrard was always a threat cutting infield (hence the two headed goals).

The second half saw three more from England, but an embarrassing consolation. Lampard and Gerrard both scored, with Gerrard starting the moves for both (while Johnson provided the typical run plus a clever cross for Lampard). Then Croatia pulled one back as Johnson let the cross in and the three other defenders stood and watched as Green strove to keep a clean sheet, only failing after two excellent saves (Eduardo with the goal, naturally). Rooney summed the night up after a Robinson-esque blunder from Croatia’s keeper, who kicked his clearance straight to the Manc standing 10 yards out. Never a smart idea.

England’s been fortunate with injuries as Joe Cole’s been the only long-term casualty, but I firmly believe this is all down to the manager. McClaren’s last game, the 2-3 loss to Croatia at Wembley in November 07, lacked Rooney and Terry and saw players like Richards, Carson, Campbell, and Wright-Phillips start, but it’s not as if the squad under Capello’s been radically different.

The difference is the inmates aren’t running the asylum. The difference is every player seems to know his role, and somehow, they’re all playing to their potential. And they’re playing hard from start to finish – not many sides still chase long balls at 4-1 with 15 minutes to play. I cannot emphasize how impressive that was; that is the definition of a well-coached team – when players are utterly frightened of giving the manager a reason to single them out.

Man management and tactics make all the difference. In hiring Capello, as opposed to the likes of Second Choice Steve and Svennis, the FA finally acknowledged it. Now, they’re reaping the benefits.

Still, it’s England. History's taught me to be pessimistic, and the next 8 months of “44 years, now England can win another World Cup” will probably make me more so.

England 4-1 Croatia

So, I’m expecting Capello to be knighted before the week is out. The English sure love their revenge.

If it’s too good to be true, chances are it is.

I’m hoping and praying the English media won’t get carried away with themselves, but I know without even looking that they will. I actually almost feel bad for Theo Walcott; scoring a hat-trick in Croatia in an amazing feat, but the hype he’ll get and pressure he’ll be under are going to be absurd.

Look, this is football. This game hinges on moments that could go either way. England should be very, very proud of their effort tonight, but it’d be a mistake to assume that Capello’s finally gotten through to the players and worked his wonders. Because I promise you we’ll see the same England that struggled against Andorra last Saturday sometime in the future.

But yes, this certainly was an improvement (uh duh, look at the scoreline). England finally didn’t look frightened stepping out on the Maksimir pitch. Aside from a dangerous 5-10 minutes early on, the away side matched the hosts step for step. And during England’s sketchy period, Heskey could have had a penalty and Walcott opened the scoring, in the 26th after a misplaced clearance fell to him on the right.

England looked likely to hold on for a win even before Robert Kovac’s straight red card for an elbow on Joe Cole seven minutes after the break. In real time, I was surprised Kovac saw red, but in replays (and with the amount of blood spurting from Cole’s head), Lubos Michel made the right decision.

After the red card, Croatia was boned. England scored twice in less than 15 minutes, at a ground where Croatia’s never lost. First, Walcott scored a second that was an absolute peach, with excellent buildup outside the box between Heskey and Rooney before Rooney's layoff to Walcott, who was in a similar position to where he scored the first. Not much later, Rooney finally returned to the scoresheet in an England shirt after Jenas got down the left and pulled it back for the striker.

The only reason Croatia tallied one was because Terry was clearly fouled in the buildup before Croatia nicely countered down the pitch, with the substitute Mandzukic slotting past James in the 78th. But four minutes after that, Walcott stunningly sealed a hat-trick as Rooney once again put the 19-year-old in on goal.

Despite my surprise, and my belief this performance isn’t going to become standard fare, I have to say that Capello got his tactics spot on. England was adventurous from the whistle, Heskey and Rooney was the right pairing up front, Walcott (obviously) was influential on the right, Joe Cole over Stuart Downing is a no-brainer, and Lampard and Barry were actually dominant in midfield. It takes a ballsy manager to start Walcott over Beckham in a place like Zagreb, and it sure paid off.

Despite Walcott’s feat, Rooney’s got a shout for man of the match, linking up play excellently, two assists, and scoring his first goal for England in almost a year. Even if he is a bloody Manc.

I can’t help but see the parallels between today and the 5-1 massacre in Munich in 2001, the first time England beat Germany in Germany. The only difference is an Arsenal player got the hat-trick instead of a Liverpudlian. But like that night, everything was perfect tonight, everything went England’s way. It’s lovely when that happens, but it doesn’t happen often.

It’s still exceptionally early in qualification, but this puts England in a stellar position. Not only with six points from six, not only because they beat their main rivals on the road, but also because of the damage this will do to Croatia’s goal difference (and the benefits to England’s).

But if I were a betting man, I’d put money on Croatia to win at Wembley in a year’s time. Ah, pessimism. I love following England.

England 2-2 Czech Republic

James
Brown Ferdinand Terry Cole
Beckham Lampard Barry Gerrard
Rooney
Defoe

Goals:
Baros 22’
Brown 45’
Jankulovski 48’
Joe Cole 90’

Yeah, it’s nice to see England eke out a draw even though they didn’t deserve it. It was an okay performance in the first half, less so in the second, but more than anything, it was a run-out against decent opposition. The biggest thing to take away is the fact that England drew level twice with late equalizers in both halves.

Even though it’s only a friendly, to be able to get goals at the death and to come back twice can be a massive confidence booster and a platform to build from. It’s been said innumerable times, but that doesn’t make it any less true: good teams get late goals to get something from a game even when its unwarranted.

England played most of the big guns, and ostensibly started in a 4-4-2, with Gerrard on the left of a midfield with Barry, Lampard and Beckham, and Rooney and Defoe up top. But Barry sat deeper than the rest, and Rooney often dropped into midfield, sometimes further than Gerrard, and also popped up out wide.

All in all, it was a mobile formation, with Gerrard, Barry, Lampard and Rooney shifting around as they saw fit. Sometimes it worked, but more often it didn’t. Gerrard isn’t a left-sided midfielder. If you can get him to stay over there, he can threaten by cutting in and shooting with his right foot, but he often floats trying to get more influence in proceedings, something he’s also prone to when on the right for Liverpool. And it mostly led to a disjointed midfield.

However, that’s the point of friendlies. It was a formation that allowed both Gerrard and Lampard on the pitch, which Capello seems to want, even though Lampard has repeatedly underperformed for England (not like he's the only one, but he's a main culprit).

Although under a new manager, the Czechs were as good as in Euro 2008. They defended well (until the late stages, like against Turkey) and looked to counter-attack whenever allowed, which they did to decent success early on. Barry picked up a yellow scything down a player on the break within 12 minutes, Baros forced James into a save in the 16th, and in the 22nd, the Czechs again got down the field quickly to open the scoring. Sirl found space on the left to receive a throughball, cut inside, and centered for Baros, who turned newly-minted captain John Terry and took a shot that deflected off Ashley Cole and past a sprawling James.

However, the home team started to see more possession, although there still wasn’t enough interplay between the midfield and strikers in the attacking third, and the couple of chances Defore worked out went straight at Cech. But in the 45th minute, Wes Brown’s excellent header from Beckham’s corner leveled matters. Once again, England needs Beckham’s set plays, although it was a very good run around the defender by Brown.

However, England was unable to build on it. They came out second-best after the break, were lucky not to lose a goal after Brown gave the ball away in his half within 90 seconds, and after Barry unnecessarily gave up a free kick on the edge of the box, went behind to Jankulovski’s flawless free kick in the 48th minute.

England made a number of changes in the second, bringing on Heskey, Joe Cole, Woodgate, Downing, Bentley and Jenas for Defoe, Gerrard, Ferdinand, Rooney, Beckham and Lampard, but the substitutions only served to make England more muddled. And no offense to Emile, but I’ve no idea why Capello used him as a lone striker, with Rooney deeper and out on the left even more in the second half before being substituted.

At least the Czechs played more conservatively and at a lower tempo in the second half, launching fewer counter-attacks (although a couple of Calamity James howlers involving Czech sub Sverkos almost gifted the visitors a third). But they still showed the same defensive resilience, which England was unable to break down.

However, in added time, Joe Cole spared England’s blushes at The Home of Football™, and made the scoreline look a lot better than the game actually was. A corner led to goalmouth scramble straight out of the lower leagues, which ended with Cole’s point blank shot going in off a Czech defender’s foot and face.

It may have been an ugly display for long stretches, but I’m not particularly upset with England’s performance. Well, any more so than usual. It’s a friendly, still early days in the Capello era, and the Czechs are perpetually above England in the FIFA ratings. This is England we're talking about. I’m not happy about the disorganized midfield, but that’s an area that’s plagued numerous England managers, and one that Capello’s still sorting out.

World Cup qualification begins in two and a half weeks in Andorra. Hopefully he’ll have more thoughts on the midfield by then.