England fans on their way to the Iceland match
Photo: Ed Pham
Richard Fleming is a veteran corresponding of the BBC having covered World Cups and European Championships. He now works for the Colorado Rapids in MLS as their play by play announcer.
Fleming on England: It’s not a shock. We’re not that good and never have been
by Richard Fleming
Humiliating? Yes.
Embarrassing? Certainly.
Humbling? Of course.
The biggest upset of the 2016 European Championship so far? Most likely.
The biggest loss in England’s history? Don’t talk rubbish!
Some commentators put Iceland’s 2-1 win over England in the same bracket as USA 1, England 0 at the 1950 FIFA World Cup. Utter nonsense.
Ian Darke, a well-respected and vastly experienced commentator, made mention of Algeria’s shock success over West Germany at the 1982 World Cup, Cameroon downing defending champions Argentina at the 1990 edition, and Senegal overcoming holders France in the opening game of the 2002 finals, all in the same breath as England’s demise at the hands of Iceland.
Again, wide of the mark with the comparison, and not affording Iceland the credit they deserve.
“England, and much of it is the doing of their own fans and media down the years, have allowed themselves to be wrongly placed among the top dogs, when the truth is that they are the pampered poodle that thinks far too highly of itself and spends an unnatural amount of time admiring its own reproductive organs.”
But let’s take that occasion in Brazil on June 29, 1950, when Joe Gaetjens scored one of the most memorable goals in US soccer history. This was a team of amateurs representing the USA, against a well-drilled England side many saw as World Cup winners.
The modern England are nowhere near world champion material, and they faced a side that, although with a number of part-timers among its ranks, also had those plying their trade in top European leagues.
And, to compare England’s shock loss to Iceland with those that upset West Germany, Argentina and France, is again a comparison with little thought or logic behind it. For a start, West Germany’s reversal to Algeria came just two years after they had lifted the European Championship – for a second time. Argentina and France, as previously mentioned, were World Cup champions when downed by Cameroon and Senegal respectively.
In other words, these were genuine teams of pedigree; teams which had proven their worth by actually winning international trophies within living memory of their momentary fall from grace.
England has a great history within the game, and its reach has influenced the game the world over. It also boasts one of the most attractive and exciting domestic leagues, which has made household names of players and clubs across the globe. Soccer fans around the world will likely have grown up watching English teams play. There is a connection and a respect but also, I think, a misguided view of England’s actual place in the international arena.
England claimed the World Cup in 1966, when the tournament was played on home soil. The closest they came to repeating that feat was in 1990, only for West Germany to defeat them on penalties at the semifinal stage in Italy. The Three Lions reached the same stage of the European Championship six years later, and again went out to Germany … and again on penalties.
One World Cup win and two near-misses out of 23 major tournaments. They failed to qualify for the World Cup of 1974, 1978 or 1994, and were absent from the 1972, 1976, 1984 and 2008 Euros. You can hardly put them in the same class as Argentina, Brazil, Germany, Italy or France.
Even Denmark and Greece have done what England have miserably failed to do, claiming the European Championship in 1992 and 2004.
England, and much of it is the doing of their own fans and media down the years, have allowed themselves to be wrongly placed among the top dogs, when the truth is that they are the pampered poodle that thinks far too highly of itself and spends an unnatural amount of time admiring its own reproductive organs rather than working out what to do with them.
Unfortunately, the rest of the world has been fed this over-bloated opinion of English football. And many have swallowed it. They watch the Premier League, and its obscenely-paid players, and immediately assume that the national side benefits as a result. Quite the opposite.
Don’t get me wrong, England has quality players, but the English Premier League’s undoubted success has come – in the main – courtesy of the fine foreign talent. German superstar Thomas Müller is among the better men than me to have pointed to the high number of foreign players as being good for the Premier League but awful for the national side.
Last season, more than 80 per cent of Manchester City’s squad were non-English. Watford (78.9%), Newcastle (78.8%), Arsenal (75.9%) and Chelsea (75.7%) followed. Only two clubs in the 2015-16 Premier League – Aston Villa (48.6%) and Bournemouth (46.2%) – had a squad where more than half were English.
It goes without saying that, as a consequence, the young English players find playing time squeezed at their top-flight clubs, or are maybe forced down the divisions to even get some minutes.
“Out of Europe on the Thursday, and out of the Euros on the Monday.”
The above was a phrase said to me more than once in the immediate aftermath of England’s latest premature exit from an international tournament.
In a perverse way, the Brexit may lend a helping hand to the national side, if not the Premier League. Already, with England (as part of Britain) set to break away from the European Union, there’s talk of it therefore being tougher for clubs to acquire foreign players. That may then allow English players to blossom, albeit in a watered-down version of the EPL.
The English domestic league is good.
The England national side is average, at best.
England would love the best of both worlds, but in their current state, one does not lend itself to the other.
As noted to this point, the idea of England being one of the game’s big noises is a fallacy. It’s more the fans clinging to some romantic moment in time, long since passed. It’s the many misty-eyed followers of the ‘beautiful game’ believing that the ‘great England’ is still a scalp of note. And it’s the media, whipping-up a pre-tournament storm in order to generate interest.
The idea of once-proud England putting the ‘minnows’ in their place is as out-dated as the British Empire, the Commonwealth and Britannia Rules the Waves.
Iceland’s victory was completely unexpected, and they should be rightly proud of their fantastic achievement. I truly hope they can go all the way. Their approach – and that of their fans – has been a breath of fresh air.
England got it horribly wrong, while Iceland got it wonderfully right. England played like boys, while Iceland fought like men. England will return home with the booing of their own fans still ringing in their sorry ears. Iceland, when they eventually head back to the Land of Fire and Ice, will do so as history-makers and heroes of their very proud nation, and rightly so.
In closing, England are not as good as people think, but they’re also not as bad as the performance against Iceland would have us believe. They’re somewhere in the middle, and that’s really where we should set our expectations from now on.
Editorial: Assessing the USMNT in an angry soccer culture
EURO2016
England
