Group C: England v Slovenia, Cologne Stadium, Tuesday, 8.0 Irish time – Live RTÉ 2 and ITV
Wait. What if the ghost is ... trying to tell us something? If generic six-part TV dramas have taught us anything, it is that there will generally be a scene where someone says this. The answer is always yes. The old man is asking for help. That tapping on the wall really is morse code and the ghost, well, the ghost is definitely trying to say something.
This time around that message is text and subtext. Yes, England have, as Gary Lineker has suggested, been s**t. This is an objectively true comment on their performance levels to date, but there also may still be a way to fix it. That fix involves speeding off down a darkened road, jimmying a window, thumbing through a yellowing set of county records, blowing away a sheen of dust and finding the name G Lineker on a set of files illuminated by a timely lightning bolt. Whatever could it all mean?
It has been a fraught time for England as they gear up for their final group game against Slovenia in Cologne on Tuesday. You could argue they are only in crisis because of the noises around them, not because of actual scorelines. But the problems are clear enough, in patterns and flow, the internal architecture of the team. Poor managerial decisions have been made on shape and balance. Key players have looked lost. England have played like a team preparing to lose. Two more performances like that and they may just be the last games Gareth Southgate takes charge of.
At the same time England are in a salvable position. They have four points, good players and time to work this out. The crisis is about two things: a failure to communicate a simple, workable plan to the players and a sudden clamour of outside pressure. These are elements Southgate has previously set out to fix above all else. This is new. Which way will it fall?
Interesting times and yet the main thrust of the debate has been whether it’s okay for Gary Lineker to say “s**t” after England have been s**t. First response. Duh, yeah. It’s fine, if it comes also with explanation. Okay, but tell us why. They did to a large extent. The podcast is good.
Plus, if we take the longer view, saying s**t on a podcast is already the biggest effect Lineker has had on a European Championship, despite playing at two of them. Which is inspiring in its own way. Never give up.
There are English football heroes on the relevant podcast. Lineker made a generation of 12-year-olds punch the air in June 1986, peering into the black and white screen while Jimmy Hill shouted “Ha, ha, ha” and this brilliant young centre forward scored a hat-trick. Alan Shearer was a great player, in my opinion the best in the world in 1995.
But England were definitely worse than this in 1988, 1992, 2000, 2006 and 2010. They were less so in 1984, 1994 and 2008 but that was because they didn’t qualify. These are all tournaments Lineker and Shearer will remember, either directly or as part of English football’s wider cast. Perhaps we could all bear in mind that England are the biggest underachievers in international football, taking in teams all of these players struggled to help turn around. Let he who is without a poor tournament in his locker cast the first clickbait expletive.
Beyond this there are two good things to arise from the Lineker shemozzle. First, it brought the best out of Harry Kane, whose response was measured and fair and allowed him to show he’s a very good communicator when he needs to be. Kane could have said, well we do know how to reach a final, trust us, we have done this before, and left it hanging. He could have said success over an entire season in an overseas league is quite tiring. I can tell you about it. DM me. Instead, Kane de-escalated. He called for a little support and seemed to grow in stature as he spoke, which is no bad thing after fading on the pitch in the past two games.
And second, what if the old man is right? What if the ghost really is trying to tell us something? England: a warning from history. Because the funny thing is Lineker played in England teams this version would do well to learn from.
There are two things this England need in Cologne and beyond. First, Southgate is being asked to do something new, to turn a tournament around from a poor start. There were boos after the Scotland draw three years ago, but generally the in-tournament passage has been even. Two bad results here, plus the ambient hatred – genuine hatred or just feelings of boredom? – for England’s nice, hard-working, imperfect manager has changed this. A reboot on the hoof is required. Has any England team managed this before?
This is point two. The answer is easy, because the sample size of England doing well at tournaments is so small. In 1966, they were poor in their first game. The crowd demanded goals and against Mexico next up they got one, a beauty scored by Bobby Charlton. The same happened at Euro 96, where an opening draw with Switzerland was erased in the next game by a moment of illumination from Paul Gascoigne.
Beyond this are the two occasions where England have been properly in crisis and turned it around. They were poor at Mexico 86, losing to Portugal and drawing 0-0 with Morocco. They were poor against Ireland in 1990 and seemed in a mess. Lineker played in both. Both times changes were made. Both times these were the same changes that would benefit the current team.
In 1986, Bobby Robson switched from a loose 4-3-3 to 4-2-3-1. He brought in Trevor Steven, Steve Hodge, Peter Reid and Peter Beardsley, adding energy. In the process he liberated a centre forward who feared he was on the verge of being dropped. Lineker ended up with the Golden Boot. England met destiny in the quarter-finals, but it was a good tournament, based on finding the balance of art and artisan.
In 1990, England switched to five at the back, not because of the mythical player mutiny, but because Robson was terrified of being torn apart by Marco van Basten and Ruud Gullit again as England had been in Düsseldorf two years earlier. The defensive rebalancing created a base, from which England’s forward players thrived.
These instances reflect what England need, starting with Slovenia. As in 1986, they need to recalibrate the balance of talent versus energy. This involves playing a three-man midfield, not a double pivot, and making tough decisions with popular and talented players. Like 1990 they need to remember changing shape is logical not reckless if your current shape is taking you nowhere fast.
The 4-2-3-1 is a recent shift. Southgate has perhaps been confused by Jude Bellingham’s brilliance. It has been a muddled time for the manager. But he is ruthless enough to change and it turns out that disembodied voice inside the headphones really is trying to tell us something, speaking out of buried tactical memory. England are in a spot of bother, but the lesson is, it’s never too late to un-s**t yourself. – Guardian
- Sign up for push alerts and have the best news, analysis and comment delivered directly to your phone
- Join The Irish Times on WhatsApp and stay up to date
- Listen to our Inside Politics podcast for the best political chat and analysis
