Everyone knew what was about to happen.
Before the Southampton goalkeeper had even put the ball on the ground we knew.
The defenders had split wide to receive. Their full backs pushed up higher, the holding midfielder pulled into a central pocket with the other two central midfielders offered support not more than 20 yards away.
The goalkeeper was going to play short and Southampton would play out from the back. As they had on the previous goal kick. And the one before. And the one before that.
Their opposition at the Super Cup Northern Ireland were not of an especially high standard but they had enough intelligence to eventually work out what was happening. The more times Southampton passed it short the more often they got picked off. Fortunately for them poor finishing meant that they were not punished.
The passing was tidy but predictable. The dedication to a particular style commendable. These were young players learning the game, it can not be perfect every time so as a spectator to expect it to be flowing and exciting was unrealistic. Yet Southampton could not break through until they changed their approach somewhat, becoming more direct with their play and delivering crosses, one of which yielded the only goal of the game.
In the book The Numbers Game a story is told of a behavioural economist and a political economist watching a Stoke City game. One is a football fan, the other is not. The non fan asks “Why do Stoke keep taking long throws?” The fan answers “Because it works for them.” The non fan asks “Then why doesn’t every one do it?” The series of questions continues in this manner until the fan has no reasons, beyond aesthetics, not to hurl every throw into the box.
Those who consider themselves educated within football and youth development in particular would come up with a plethora of reasons not to go long every time.
However, there is a reason not to play long every time that also applies to playing short every time. It is prescriptive and predictable.
Other teams at the Super Cup did not play short from the goalkeeper. The local Northern Irish sides certainly did not. The Mexican sides did on occasion but mostly they went long. The winners of the Junior Section, Right To Dream from Ghana mixed it up, sometimes going short sometimes long. In the Premier Section the winners were O’Higgins of Chile. Initially they looked to play short from goal kicks and when distributing from the goalkeeper’s hands but as the games moved on they were happy to change tactic, hitting long balls from the ground diagonally at full backs or launching the ball out of the goalkeeper’s hands then feeding off the scraps. The philosophy was to do whatever was required to score. If that meant play long then forget the aesthetic, there is nothing more aesthetic than a goal.
The Chileans were more English than the English.
English football is in another period of change. The latest development is the much publicised and much misunderstood England DNA. An outline of a unifying playing style that translates into player development.
In possession England teams look to dominate possession, as Southampton did. They will do this through intelligent passing, dribbling and support play.
Possession can not be for it’s own sake, it should be a means to an end. Therefore the possession has to be penetrative. The passing will therefore be between and beyond the opposition in order to create goalscoring opportunities.
The aim is to create a possession based, technically excellent style. A modern style of play. The misunderstanding tends to be between those who believe the focus is on possession and those who believe it to be focused on creative dribbling. Then there are those who ask what about the defenders?
Leaving that aside, there has been a deception.
Not a deliberate one but a deception nonetheless.
Deoxyribonucleic acid tells us who we all are. Where we came from. Not where we are going. It is our lineage and our heritage. Through examination of our DNA it is possible to trace back our lineage over the generations. The unique nature of our DNA makes it impossible to hide our identity. The England DNA document does not represent our history, it is a wish list. A programme of future evolution. To describe it as DNA is inaccurate. It is more akin to the selective breeding that has domesticated animals over centuries. Choosing the desirable attributes to improve the future population.
What is the DNA of English football? What attributes have passed through English football as the parents of the modern game?
- Strength/Power
- Stamina
- Energy
- Organisation
- Wide play/Wingers
- Crosses
- Heading
- Pragmatism
- Fast attacking
While it would be wrong to cling to these attributes and reject others it would be equally wrong to move them aside completely. This is our inheritance. Even during changing times it should not be forgotten.
Traditionally a strength of the English game has been our love for football. That we as a nation eat sleep and breathe it. Loving nothing more than playing hour after hour of football. Youngsters dribbling to school, not wanting to spend a moment away from their precious ball. That is what we like to believe.
The reality is somewhat different. Adult participation figures in football have been dropping for years. Then there is the often wistfully remembered era of street football. Where are the kids with their jumpers for goal posts? Apparently playing FIFA. The obsession with football in England has changed to one of consumption rather than participation. Everyone watches from their front room. Reads articles online. Comments and displays their expertise on social media (there is a certain irony in this sentence). That traditional strength has become diluted by time, technology and economy.
Chile are the new England.
Many of their strengths are comparable to the traditional strengths of English football. A highly energised playing style that requires reservoirs of stamina. The use of wide players to attack. A pragmatic mixture of short and long play.
Then there is the romance of the street footballer. Chile is home to some of the most enthusiastic street football in the world. A common trait shared with other South American nations. Young players play regular, honing their skills for hour upon hour at their own leisure. The majority of the time when English youngsters are playing takes place in a formal setting, under the strict eye of a coach. That source of strength a thing of the past.
Chile have managed to retain their characteristics and combine them with a modern playing style. They were fortunate to have a coach with the intelligence and vision of Marcelo Bielsa take over the national side. As he did with Athletic Bilbao he was able to take a physical, direct style of play and fuse it with modern football. Retaining the roots and bringing in new ideas. Unafraid to kick long in behind full backs or hit forwards quickly, as long as that was the best option. There in is the ultimate truth of every playing style, choosing the right option.
A system of play was found that allowed them to retain those characteristics while playing the modern game. The majority of Chilean football is played with a back three or with a back four and a deep lying midfielder who can switch into the defence when the full backs push on. They also recognised that their strength came with versatile forward players so maintained a presence in attacking positions. So as not to be outnumbered in midfield, a problem that long haunted England, they ensured that out of possession there would always be three in midfield. Chile found a system where they could maintain width, defensive strength, numbers in midfield and attacking presence. No small achievement.
England have moved towards a number of those tactical elements, but have sacrificed traditional strengths in order to do so. The long time strength of central defenders has been bypassed. When there has been a lack of good full backs and a surplus of central defenders the selection remained a back four. Three at the back being ignored or written off when it did not achieve victory. When the midfield became over run it was a striker who was removed, robbing teams of an area in which there have often been a large supply of high quality players. England have bounced from shape to shape, style to style. Many times seemingly following the trend rather than what they are suited to. For those who object to Sam Allardyce being appointed as England manager because his style does not fit with the England DNA, his style very much fits in with the truth of DNA.
The objective of the England DNA is admirable. Even necessary. No one would say that things did not need to change. The need to create players with technical expertise is an obvious truth. Yet England need to remember who they are and where they came from, not just focus on who they want to be. To fit technically excellent performers into England’s true DNA.
Super Cup NI – http://www.supercupni.com/
The Numbers Game – https://www.amazon.co.uk/Numbers-Game-Everything-About-Football/dp/0241963621
England DNA –https://community.thefa.com/england_dna/p/play