No Great Cause for Concern Despite Frustrating Results for England
So what have we learned from England’s inability to top a group that is mediocre at very best? Not a lot, really.
It’s a very England thing to do but that’s not to say that their performances, if not results, at this Championships have been particularly disheartening.
Before I really get started here, this isn’t a piece suggesting that Roy Hodgson’s men have been scintillating and merely unfortunate by any stretch, though they haven’t really had the opportunity to set pulses racing under the circumstances. It’s ironic that in the one match that the Three Lions won they arguably created the fewest chances to score and played at the slowest tempo, yet that, for some, will be viewed as their best performance.
It boils down to whether you see results and performances as one and the same or not. If you do, and nothing else matters, any sort of statistical analysis or debate on this England side is perhaps not for you.
There are so many circumstances at play, however, that surely need to be taken into account to truly assess performance, for those that want to at least. England’s group opponents were among the weakest at the tournament but that, along with the fact that teams know that a draw has a vastly superior incentive than in the past due to the expansion, was bound to dictate the pattern of their matches.
The fact that England couldn’t take their chances was their real failing but to suggest that they played poorly and didn’t create opportunities to score is wayward. It’s true that of England’s 64 shots - 14 more than any other team at this stage - a low proportion were clear cut, but when you’re facing sides that have no real intention to break out of their own half, pot shots are not only inevitable but necessary at times. Also, consider that The Three Lions have had the most shots from inside the six-yard box (5) where the likes of France, Germany, Portugal, Belgium and Italy have had one or fewer.
It is fair to say that England haven’t created a great deal of clear cut chances but it’s also fair to say that no side have faced the same level of refusal to commit men forward. Only 21% of their matches have been played in their own defensive third - the joint-lowest percentage thus far - and while Spain match that figure in their 3-0 romp over Turkey, Fatih Terim’s men did look to counter where England’s opponents simply haven’t. In truth Hodgson’s side haven’t really conceded any clear chances from open play across their three matches.
In their most recent outing with Slovakia, Jan Kozak shut up shop in the second half and recognised that England would likely score if they continued to forge chances through the excellent Nathaniel Clyne. He brought on a left-back to play in front of Tomas Hubocan (a centre-back playing on the left) before proceeding to bring on two more centre-backs in the form of Norbert Gyomber and Mlian Skriniar, with starting forward Ondrej Duda (an attacking midfielder) and Vladimir Weiss (a winger moved into the forward role) both replaced. Slovakia, then, ended the game with 5 centre-backs, 2 full-backs and a central midfielder leading the line.
Should England be able to find a way past such incredible tactical negativity? Perhaps, but that isn’t to say they didn’t create chances. Jamie Vardy, Adam Lallana, Daniel Sturridge, Dele Alli and Nathaniel Clyne all had opportunities to score. The issue, as it was in England’s other disappointing result against Russia, was that of their finishing and composure rather than an ability to break teams down, comparatively to the rest of the sides at the tournament at least.
At this stage England have played more key passes per game than any other team (17.3), important to note that not all shots are the result of a key pass so a number of ‘pot shots’ are discounted. While many will rightly point out that they should be top, or thereabouts, in that regard given the opposition they have faced, to say that they haven’t created chances, or indeed been able to break stubborn defences down, is incorrect.
A conversion rate below 5% is the real issue here. Only three teams have worse, and it’s somewhat ironic given the quality of England’s attacking options was seen as Hodgson’s greatest weapon ahead of the tournament. His side - like any - however, is quite certainly stronger when afforded some space to run into, which they simply haven’t had for much of their group campaign.
The truth is if England have serious designs on winning the tournament, the fact that they have finished second in the group has very little significance. Hodgson’s side still face a winnable round of 16 fixture against any of four opponents from Group F - the other along with their own tipped as the weakest this summer - and while a trickier quarter-final may lay in waiting should they progress, they’d have to beat the likes of France et al. to lift the trophy regardless.
That much certainly seems unlikely but nothing has really changed. Indeed, the only thing that we have really learned thus far is that the teams many suggested could go all the way aren’t living up to their billing. England would fall into that particular category in terms of not meeting expectations but more so than the majority of the tournament’s ‘top sides’? That much, clearly, is up for debate!
What have you made of England's performances thus far? Let us know in the comments below
