Martin Samuel's Debate: Capello's central issue

To read all of Martin's column, click here

Steven Gerrard’s performance in Marseilles last week, coupled with the form of Frank Lampard, serves only to illustrate what nonsense it is to suggest that one must be excluded for England when world-class talent is in such short supply. As the two central midfield players of four, there may be a problem, but the argument seems to have expanded until it is regarded as heresy to suggest putting them on the same pitch.

Yet there is no reason why Gerrard and Lampard should not work together with Owen Hargreaves or a disciplined Gareth Barry in between, or with Gerrard starting wide and coming inside, as he has done to great effect for Liverpool. Great coaches are problem-solvers and if Fabio Capello is the best, he can address this without making one of England’s finest players redundant.

Debate: Can Lampard and Gerrard play together?

Comments

[gc]

"Why should anyone care?

England are a southern based team who from now on will only play their home fixtures at Wembley.

Posted by: Robert Balmain | September 22, 2008 at 11:03 AM"
That's right we should have built Wembley somewhere more central like ...Huddersfield. Seriously how long does it take to get to London? 3 hours? In three hours I can't even drive out of the state of New Mexico.

[gc]

Spain had no room for Fabregas in their starting XI and that seemed to work out.
Lampard and Gerrard cannot both play together and be as good as they are for Chelsea and Liverpool.
One of them will have to diminished in stature in the ideal case, but what usually happens is they both are. If we play one of them out of position then I believe there are other options from other players that are preferable.
Neither Lampard, Gerrard or Rooney performed in an England Shirt between 2006-08.
Lampard can perform in and England shirt, he did it 4 years ago at Euro 2004 and did it again against Croatia.
Start one. I personally prefer Lampard, but they are both brilliant.

[Gary]

I'd like to be able say yes, but they patently can't .... besides that isn't the issue... it's just an excuse covering the fact that maybe Lampard is a very good club player but not up to it at international level? The real issue is the Celerbrity Core of the England team:- Beckham, Rooney, Lampard, Gerrard, Terry, Ferdinand that get picked automatically and not on international or even sometimes club form but on their Celebrity. Australia punch above their weight in most team sports because they wouldn't suffer Olympic Ambassador Beckham being handed caps so he can pass Billy Wright's record and get his OBE and Rooney being given four years of starts without scoring (granted he managed to score against 10 men the other night). At any one time 5 or so of the England team could be (and often are) well out of form or not international standard but still walk into the team... some members of that group of what we mistakenly nowadays call LEGENDS at club level but have never proved themselves at international level despite many, many more opportunities than most players would dream of getting for England... they just have an endless stream of automatic starts and excuses. Meanwhile there is a revolving door policy for other 4 or 5 players outside the Celebrity Core .... no one should be above being dropped especially strikers who don't score. Form is everything... yeah sometimes you take the odd gamble on a proven and consistent international talent and throw him in despite his league form (Owen? poss Crouch) but not over half the team. Let's not forget we very nearly avoided missing out on Euro 08 when Lampard, Rooney and Beckham were injured in the qualifiers and Crouch and Heskey were brought in, unfortunately the CELEBS were fit for the crunch game against Croatia and waltzed back into the side.

[Andrew]

Rooney is the problem!!!! He is useless and now keeps dropping deep and making the same late runs into the box as Lampard!! If England had a great striker who was scoring all the goals there wouldn't be all this talk about Gerrard and Lampard.

[bill tyler]

Can they play together? Yes but not both in the centre. Push Gerrard wide and leave Lampard in the middle.Gerrard is probably the strongest individual but Lampard the best team player.Lampard fits in a team whereas Gerrard makes others play around him leaving him in a free role.With Rooney dropping and looking for space this does not work well.I think Mourhino would have handled the problem as will Capello.In the Croatia game nobody was doing anything remarkable in midfield but we had shape and looked like a team.

[Robert, Norway]

I think not. Lampard can't perform in an england shirt, as you said Kate.
Use Gerrard and Rooney on top!!

[Doug Bates]

"The whole is great than the sum of the parts" ie the team as a unit is stronger and more important than the individual components. The only reason why these two players should play together is if it makes for the best team - experience has shown that it doesn't.......

[kate]

Seeing as we have such a dir shortage of strikers who can actually score. And with Wayne Rooney playing deep, sometimes deeper then most of our midfield, what about Capello changing formation and going for something more creative. Maybe have Heskey/Crouch as the target striker, capable of holding up play, and then Gerrard and Rooney playing just behind. Ditch Lampard, he is lazy and fails to really eprform in an england shirt, and have a 3 man midfiled made up of Young, Cole and Hargreaves. Perfect

[Ian Rosario]

Wasn't Lampard erratic a few weeks back? And Barry too isn't really a defensive midfield player. So why did they look like world-class holding midfielders against Croatia. Its simple- Mr Capello ordered them to do so.

Gerrard's comments in the interview were mis-interpreted. All he ever said was that he prefered the attacking midfield role; which in his opinion would increase his contribution, thus benefitting England. But if Capello said so, he would gladly undertake the role of a fullback.

Its all about convincing players that the nation comes first. And Gerrard isn't any different from the rest.

That is if he doesn't already know it..!

[Piotr Fedurek]

Sure they can play together in...playstation.

[dan]

When you look at great sides - take at look at the subs bench. There are always great players either waiting to fill the gaps from injury or just tactical options.
Over 30 years of watching England I've always thought that the first 11 players were really as good as anyone (with a few exceptions) but when it came to the bench there was never a time when the manager had the option of exchanging quality for quality.
It has always struck me as a crucial failing that England could not produce a subs bench to match the first choices. Maybe for the first time now we can.
Imagine bringing on Gerrard with 20 minutes to play in a drawn game, or Beckham as part of a tactical change.
If your playing with 14 players ( ie 11 + 3) surely you have a shed load more options than just working with 11 and 3 replacements.
Seems to me that not enough people in English football have had the intelligence to work this out over the years, nor have the majority of fans got much nous either.
I reckon Capello knows a thing or two about using his squad that will come as something of a suprise to most.

[Olly]

There is no doubt both Gerrard and Lampard are top quality players as they prove week in week out in the premier league. This whole Gerrard Lampard can't play together started after/during the world cup and mainly because Lampard goals for England have dried up some what over the past 2 years. I didn't here many voices of discontent before than when we went of a 10+ game winning streak in 2005/06 (or around that number). Englands faults over the past two years come down to poor management and too much player power, I'm sure once Capello has worked with Gerrard and Lampard, Barry/Heargreves and Walcott for an extended period of time there lies a formidable midfield. I have every faith that Capello will find a role in the team for two of the most gifted players in Europe and if not players like Joe Cole, Ashley Young and Carrick will be iching to get in and prove themselves.

[J.P.]

Fabio Capello must be willing to make more than one of England’s finest players redundant. England cannot include all of it's talent on the pitch at any one time.

The problem is not limited to Lampard/Gerrard. Three talented individuals arguably play their best football for the national side in the same area of the pitch. Lampard and Gerrard arrive in the 'hole' that Rooney is already trying to carve out.

Lampard did step outside of his own comfort zone by playing a less adventurous role next to Barry against Croatia. Gerrard has also played capably alongside Barry. In all likelihood they could be asked to play together in that deep role of provider - but then we have sacrificed a talent in Barry.

Perhaps we could play Gerrard as an adventurous midfielder who comes inside from the flanks. But then who do we sacrifice - Joe Cole?

We have plenty of talent.
Some of it will be left sitting on the bench.

And some won't even get that far...

Martin,

I think the question should be: do Gerrard and Lampard HAVE TO play together? And do they both have to be paired centrally?

In situations like this, I always look to other teams abroad, both club sides and national, to see how similar players are weaved into their teams. Without wishing to get into facile arguments about relative quality, and who is better than who, I just ask you to look at the respective qualities of other players who are similar to the two Englishmen. I am sure other readers will be able to cite countless and better examples than mine. For Gerrard, take Maxi Rodriguez of Argentina and Atletico Madrid. For Lampard, read Maniche (on current form back to his fine displays when under Mourinho at Porto) or maybe Ruben Baraja at Valencia.

Ok, Maxi Rodriguez: dynamic, aggresive, indefatigueable spirit, good passer, good touch, rasping 25 yard shots when his team most need it. Such a good all-round player that he has 'done a job' and performed very well in different positions throughout his career. But he has never been played in a central midfield position. As a second-striker, occasionally, as a wing-back on a 3-5-2, yes, as a wide midfielder (both left and right) in a 4-4-2 or wide-ish in the 4-3-1-2 diamond mostly, to be sure. Terrific player, useful to have on your team. Now, I have never once heard an Argentine or Atleti fan decry the fact that he is not in the centre of the team. Why? Because they know that the centre of the pitch is such a critical area that you don't put your Roy of the Rovers charging and surging through the middle from the off. The centre is for controlling the ebb and flow of your team's game and for disrupting the scheming of your opponents. If indeed they do play with a central pair in a 4-4-2 or 4-2-3-1, Argentina tend to blend a disruptive player like Mascherano with an analytical and disciplined organiser like Gago, but both of them sit. In a diamond, or even in a 4-3-3, just one of this pair will do, depending on where your priorities lie. Now, ahead of this line you can fit in your Aimars, Riquelmes.. and, closer to home,Joe Cole ( the nearest thing we have to this model of extravagantly technical and visionary players). But the point is: no dynamic box-to-box player in the centre, maybe on the periphery.

For Lampard, read Maniche. Now this lad has played in a central '2' for both Porto and Portugal, and also as one of the slightly more advanced midfielders in a midfield '3'. Not a holding midfielder, and needs to have someone like a Costinha or a Makelele to shore things up beside him, but disciplined enough to fall back into line when required. Good passer, and often ghosts forward looking to latch on to the second ball, as Lampard does so well. Now, between Gerrard and Lampard, I think that Frank is the more inclined of the two to 'learn' more about his game, to develop it, and hone it to tactical instuctions, whereas Gerrard is pure instinct. There is no reason why in a 4-4-2, or even a midfield diamond why Gerrard cannot play a widish left midfield role, wandering inside except when England lose the ball. I would not make his inclusion to the expense of Joe Cole (Platini said he never understood the way English football undervalued and misused Hoddle). Bearing in mind that such an inventive player like Cole has adapted his game to play in wider attacking positions (he could even play as a second striker, a nine-and-a-half, although Rooney is the master of that position) either as an outside forward (ie, winger) or media punta (any one of the three inside-forward positions in the 4-2-3-1), is it not beyond Gerrard to do the same, or is he that deluded?

[john]

As long as barry or hargreaves or even both are behind them, they should be able to attack more freely and work together. Gerrard is so often played on the left or defensively and therefore cannot contribute attackingly as we all know he can. Whereas Lampard is so often non-existant and cannot defend at all.

Gerrard is obviously better than Lampard and for the good of the team, Lampard should be dropped in favour of heskey, who can pay alongside rooney or owen, with two wingers and a defensive midfielder, giving gerrard the capacity to attack.

[amber]

Only and idiot would be stupid enough to not use Gerrard.

Pure idiotic.That's all I say.

[Toff]

Gerrard has never played as well for England as he does for his club, Lampard has been even more nondescript in many internationals. Gareth Barry has been sublime in all of his appearances, cool, clever, skilled and with a beautiful array of accurate passes. A great team is made up of players that compliment each other and 'blend' players chosed to play in their most effective position and in a system that allows them to be at their best. Big names mean nothing, Martin O'Neill uses players to their upmost best in a system and in their positions. Its simple stuff and not once have I seen Gerrard and Lampard play a great game together and complement each other. How many more times does it have to be tried, they are oil and water. But still dense managers try it... doh

[Taymur]

I think the argument about plaving Gerard and Lampard together is only a serious problem in a 442 where both are playing CM and playing the exact same role. However in 4-5-1 / 4-2-3-1 / 4-3-2-1 Capello can play Stevie G in a number of positions without having him playing alongside lamps.

I am a huge Liverpool fan and believe Steven Gerard to be the greatest thing since sliced bread (if not greater). The things he has done for our club are UNBELIEVEABLE. But i truly believe to be able to get the best out of him you need to do either 1 of 2 things.

1. You drop him from the team for a bit and push him out of his comfort zone. Make him work his way back. This may sound sacrilegious for a RED to say this but this is tough love. I want the world to see the Gerard we know and love. Also to be honest when either lampard / gerard have played alone the team has been better with Lamps. He may not be at his VERY VERY best on the right wing but he is still VERY VERY good and i think if he had a choice of NOT being in the team or playing on the wings he will play on the wings happily. If the team are in trouble capello can always change things around.

2. This is just an idea and i know the issues with it but it is an option available to Senor Capello. You build a team around Gerard. He has shown repeatedly that he can push an ordinary bunch of players that much further then they can go if the team is built around him. So maybe thats an idea

Whatever happens i think Capello will change formations and players to avoid people falling into a comfort zone. Theo is a very talented player but part of his success in Croatia was because he was an unknown quantity. You will definitely see Don Fabio not making Theo play every match.

Whatever happens i would give anything to see one of those Stevie G classic performances in a 3 lions shirt.

[Chris Forte]

The trouble is that Gerrard doesn't look like he actually wants to play for England but is too afraid of the grief he'd get if he came out and said it. Hence his insipid performances when he's not in his Liverpool shirt.

[Ola]

It can (and initially did, under McClaren) work in a flat 4-4-2 with Lampard and Hargreaves or Barry in the centre and Gerrard starting from the right where his at times direct distribution would at least be more effective. What is key to this approach working though is a target man, someone that can win Gerrards crosses while at the same time being able to occupy defenders and create space for Lampard's elusive and highly effective forays into the opposition box( just look at his relationship with Drogba)

And even better way to use both would be in a 4-4-2 diamond formation with Hargreaves holding, Barry left of centre, Gerrard right of centre, and Lampard at the apex behind Rooney and Heskey. This would allow Gerrard to play more centrally and Lampard to play more offensively, with a natural ballwinner in Hargreaves behind him, while still providing the balance and width of two efficient crossers of the ball in Barry and Gerrard and quick athletic fullbacks in Ashley Cole and Micah Richards on the overlap in support when Barry and Gerrard tucked in.

I would actually not necessarily pick this team or formation as I feel it would be a shame to drop players of the individual skill and pace of Joe Cole and Walcott but this seems to me the best way to play if you are going to pick both Lampard and Gerrard without negating the natural characteristics that make them so effective for their clubs. Its worthy to note England won a World Cup playing this system as did Italy two summers ago so it cant be half bad!

[Ivan]

Didn't Steven Gerrard whine about not playing in central midfield to the papers? I think when he plays for club his role is less restricted which suits his abilities and his needs. However for the England team where there is a player of the similar sort in Lampard, that requires Gerrard to be tactically discipline to play a position given by the manager e.g. on the wing. As of yet no current England manager has been able to have the two work in tandem.

Personally i think Gerrard world class or not is too undisciplined to do a job for his team.
I also think England have enough talent to play players in their positions that they play for club.

Thus i think Young (who has done more than enough - certainly more than Walcott ever did) deserves a go in this team on the left hand side. I'd have Gerrard and Hargreaves in midfield, and Walcott on the right side.

When it's all said and done, Capello's judgment is what counts. The Croatia win was Capello doing his job nothing more nothing less. Croatia a good team coached by a very good manager. Capello will encounter more significant challenges like the one of the aforementioned Gerrard.

[Dave N]

Its surely about discipline. Gerrard, can be the player on the park in pretty much any position. The fact he has had a good moan about not getting to play where he wants is a sad reflection on him. Benitez plays him on the right cutting in because it suits the team - Alonso, Mascharano etc couldn't do it. Lampard, Barry, Hargreaves can only really in the one area. Gerrard doesn't seem to mind being the flexible on for Liverpool.
With this in mind, if England wanted to play 442, or 433 Gerrard is able to play anywhere in the front 6 dependent on whats required. Its a shame he doesn't have Phil Neville attitude to versatility. It guaranteed Phil a place in the squad for years when there were better players specifically in those positions.
I won't batter Gerrard because I think he's an incredible player, but maybe missing the 4-1 in Croatia is just what he needs to add a bit of detached reality to he role?
Are we doing another blog about fitting Gerrard, Barry, Lampard, Rooney, Heskey, Owen, J Cole and Theo into the front 6 positions? Gerrad at right back? JC at left back?

[Jim Regan]

Unfortunately, Chris, the best option is probably option d), one you failed to mention

[Nick]

Gerrard and Owen should both be used as impact subs. The players who won in Croatia deserve to keep their places and perhaps we could go down the route of using intelligent substitutions whereby they INFLUENCE the game rather than just replace better, tiring legs (i'm looking at you downing, bentley et al). I think if you play both Lampard and Gerrard (+ Rooney to be fair) they all want to control the tempo and dictate play. Rooney and Lampard seem to work well linking up whilst i believe as soon as Owen replaces Rooney around the hour mark Gerrard should replace Lampard and become the new catalyst. We may have a chance of building a settled, balanced side (with a plan b!) and can begin to blend the Youngs and Ashtons into the side.

[Barrie Collins]

I don't think Gerrard is an asset to any team, and I stress the word team. He is a disruptive force with both England and Liverpool because he lacks positional discipline. He wanders all over the pitch, and his teammates are continually having to adjust for his absence. Without Gerrard, England play flowing, intelligent football. With him they look disjointed.

Cases in point: Without him England cruised to a comprehensive victory over their bogey team, Croatia. Without him, Liverpool manhandled THEIR bogey team, Man U. I rest my case.

He has technical ability, no doubt, but until he learns to play the way his coaches NEED him to play, he should be relegated to the bench, and brought on only late in the game, and ONLY if if his goal scoring talent is needed. He would probably relish the role of "Super-Sub" with all the potential glory that goes with it.

Lampard is head and shoulders a better overall team player than Gerrard, and thoroughly deserves his position in central midfield for England.