I was about halfway through writing a glowing testimonial to Stuart Pearce's handling of his role as England caretaker manager Wednesday afternoon when I realised that were his side to lose to Holland, any such piece would instantaneously be rendered null and void. When Ashley Young equalised late on, I celebrated in the belief that my endeavours had not gone to waste. Arjen Robben had other ideas, however, destroying my carefully crafted words with his heavily deflected goal. So it goes.
Football is a results game, and if no-one was clamouring for Pearce to take over before Holland came to Wembley, the 3-2 defeat may well have damaged his case irreparably. Yet there were plenty of positives to be taken from the performance. Scott Parker excelled as captain, leading from the front rather than simply resorting to pointing often and shouting loudly, the template for many of those who followed before him. Daniel Sturridge had little over half the game to make his mark, and did so impressively, furthering not just his case for inclusion in the European Championship squad but as one of the first names on the teamsheet. None of the younger players looked overawed by the occasion. And a major plus point in favour of Pearce was the fact that the changes he made after England went two goals down had a positive enough effect that England were able to draw level, albeit briefly. Putting things into perspective, defeat against a Holland side that finished runners-up at the last World Cup is nothing to be ashamed of, and should not lead to panic.
Let's consider the man who is most likely to land the role. Harry Redknapp has naturally been the subject of a fair amount of discussion as far as his tactical nous - or lack thereof - is concerned, with some proclaiming him to be naive in that area whilst others insist that he only pretends to be. Whichever stance you take, his stock wasn't helped by Tottenham's 5-2 defeat at Arsenal. Ignoring the scoreline, it was the manner of the performance that was worrying, with his side somehow taking a 2-0 lead before capitulating, making the much maligned likes of Theo Walcott and Tomas Rosicky look like world beaters in the process. Redknapp's attempts to influence the game - such as his introduction of Sandro and van der Vaart at half-time - had a negative impact, and the defensive ineptness shown by Tottenham's back four (all regular starters) was more profound than any of England's failings on Wednesday night.
The success of tactically astute ex-players such as Josep Guardiola and Antonio Conte is evidence of a sea change in the priorities of coaches, of a shift to an approach that is less focused on motivating and more focused on tactics, and formations, and the ability to read the game well enough to make adjustments on the fly. No-one is claiming that Pearce is on the level of Guardiola or Conte, but he does have the advantage of being extremely familiar with England's younger players, having coached most of them at U21 level. The mistakes against Holland appeared to be the temporary aberrations of an unfamiliar and inexperienced back four playing together for the first time, rather than any kind of failing on Pearce's part; the type of errors one would assume a few weeks of training together would eliminate. It seems reasonable to assume that a man who has spent the last five years as part of the England set-up has a better chance of pulling things together at this late stage than a man parachuted into the position at the last minute.
Pearce's own suggestion that he could coach the national side at Euro 2012 but not beyond the tournament is patently ridiculous; either he's capable of doing the job or he's not. The Football Association have clearly been grooming him to eventually lead the senior side since he first joined the England set-up back in 2007, as evidenced by the increased responsibilities they have bestowed upon him. Much like this country's younger generation of players, he both needs and deserves his opportunity sooner rather than later.
Looking at it another way, were Pearce to bomb at the European Championships, would that really be a disaster? If we're honest, England are in the midst of a transitional phase, and cannot be considered serious contenders. Even in the short term, appointing someone new could do more damage than good. If, for example, Redknapp were to get the job, what happens if England fail to make it past the group stages? Could he really claim to be the right man to lead the side forward? If Pearce fails, on the other hand, then it would be reasonable to dismiss him from his duties as both caretaker and U21 manager - thus getting rid of the last person associated with the Fabio Cappello era - and the FA could search for the right man without the need to rush the decision. In other words, with Pearce in charge there would be positives to take from even the worst case scenario.
And the best case scenario? That Pearce fulfils the promise many people see in him, and coaches a young England side to at least the quarter-finals, delivering as much as any of his predecessors and marking the nation out as one that may well be capable of challenging for major honours come 2012. Sound fanciful? Perhaps. But we'll never have a better chance to find out where the truth lies than Poland and Ukraine this summer.
No comments:
Post a Comment