Debate: Can England win the World Cup? Could Capello outwit Brazil in South Africa?

Click here to read Patrick Barclay's column in its entirety

Patrick Barclay, Chief Football Commentator

No wonder Fabio Capello, far from sharing the concern of most England followers, looked relieved at the Khalifa International Stadium late on Saturday night. One of the most devilish tasks facing the national team manager of a country of England’s scale is that of whittling his squad down to 23 for a World Cup — and Capello’s selection process had just been made a lot easier.

To the margins, on the stark evidence of his reserves’ merciful defeat by a Brazil near full strength, had been consigned Darren Bent, Joleon Lescott, Jermaine Jenas and Shaun Wright-Phillips; they ought to make contingency plans for holidays next June. As for the families and close friends of Matthew Upson and James Milner, the best advice would be to book something in South Africa, but avoid game-drives on match days.

Neither the result nor the performance in Doha will have bothered Capello unduly; the former was predictable, given the sides’ relative strengths, and the latter owed much to the heat of the Qatari capital.

England’s distaste for playing in very warm conditions, although largely psychosomatic — as if Brazilians or anyone else do not prefer the cool — does tend to affect the quality of their pressing and the speed of their counter-attacking.

The more possessive teams, such as Spain and Brazil, are less troubled. But Capello knows that heat will not be a problem in the World Cup, at which it will be a rare kick-off that takes place in a temperature exceeding 70F (21C). All remains set fair for Capello’s England and nothing that happened at the weekend shook my belief that they can return triumphant from South Africa.

Not, of course, with Saturday’s team. Their loss of shape was emphasised by Brazil’s discipline; Capello, in praising Dunga’s side, notably the physical qualities that, he implied, elevated them even above Spain, all but pointed to the deficiencies of his own.

As was the case when England lost 2-0 to Spain in a friendly match in Seville last season, however, they lacked most of Capello’s leading players. The manager knows his team and the nine who did not appear alongside Wayne Rooney and Gareth Barry against Brazil were David James, Glen Johnson, Rio Ferdinand, John Terry, Ashley Cole, Frank Lampard, David Beckham or Theo Walcott, Steven Gerrard and Emile Heskey.

The shadow team now appear to be along these lines: Robert Green or Ben Foster, with the loser also to travel as third goalkeeper; Owen Hargreaves (if fully restored after tendinitis), Wes Brown, Upson and Wayne Bridge; Michael Carrick, Beckham or Walcott, Joe Cole and Milner in midfield; and, up front, Peter Crouch.

Finished counting yet? Yes, the single place this leaves would be for Jermain Defoe, back to his least impressive in Doha, to defend against such a challenge as Michael Owen might muster or the prospect of Aaron Lennon’s pace being used with, rather than as an alternative to, that of Walcott.

The versatility of some players offers additional options. There are some who argue that Hargreaves is required, but as a sharp-tackling midfield player rather than a right back. The Manchester United absentee can do either job. Milner, too, may prove more than a filler of gaps.

So, when you look at it from where Capello must, the cupboard is far from as meagrely stacked as the full house at the Khalifa International Stadium might have imagined. There is lots for Capello still to do. He will keep monitoring the youngsters in case Kieran Gibbs, for instance, makes enough of the opportunity Gaël Clichy’s injury has given him at Arsenal to put pressure on Bridge.

He will keep an eye on Carlton Cole when the West Ham United centre forward returns, just in case he shapes up as a younger Heskey. Bent, tried with Rooney on Saturday, was presumed to be one of those whom Capello said had run out of time. The manager can see more clearly now. For him it was, believe it or not, another good day at the office.

Comments

[Karthik Prabhakar]

Patrick, you have been very harsh on Lescott in consigning him to the sidelines. On the evidence of the display, I thought Milner along with Lescott returned back having enhanced their credentials.

[Stefan]

"Nothing that happened in Doha shook my belief that England can return triumphant from South Africa."

It should have. The depth of the squad is worrying. You cannot reasonably assume that England will have it's 11 best injury-free, available and on top of their game come the summer. Even if you manage it at the beginning of the tournament, you will suffer injuries and/or suspensions/loss of form during the event. Sure, you may not need an entire shadow team that is able to win the Cup but historically a minimum of 16-18 are needed to lead you through. I don't see them.

[jonners]

They played and acted like reserves, not aspiring first team choices. I cannot see any positives from the match, i can't understand Capello taking certain untested players and not playing them and can only hope England keep their main players fit as this lot would struggle in the group games.

[harryb]

In a word: Yes. But England, like all international sides, need a little luck along the way if they're to win the WC>

Let us remember that we had 9 starters missing on Saturday, and then we also had Walcott and Joe Cole missing too, who wouldv'e filled the vacancies left by Gerrard and Lennon.

[It Would Be Nice]

The first word of the article says it all, "No"

[Marcello]

Realistically Brazil will get the World Cup and there's very little to dream of...

[Nicky D]

I personally think we won't be quite good enough but would dearly love England to win it. I am confident however,because of Capello's management, the team will do themselves justice provided the they go there with a full strength squad.
Can't disagree with Patrick Barclay's squad apart from his inclusion of Crouch. I'm not a fan of his and from what I've seen neither is Mr Capello. The fourth striker will need to make an impact from the bench using their pace or guile to score.Crouch has neither and would only invite a plethora of aimless,long balls booted up from the defenders and surely Owen,Bent or Cole would be the better option.

[Rudi]

England will do well to reach a semi final, let alone the final. My favourites are:

1. Brazil
2. Spain
3. Argentina (despite current form a southern hemisphere winter will suit them more than anyone)
4. Italy
5. Germany

followed by England, Netherlands, Portugal and other secondary European sides. The USA could also spring a surprise and reach a quarter or semi judging by their Confederations Cup run.

[Daryl Paskell]

Patrick you right, England can win the world cup, can being the operative word - but despite all my want for them to do so, I don't believe they will. I am not basing this view on the merits of a weakened England team's performance against a near full strength Brazil, but on the view that in comparison to the other contenders for the world crown, England fall short.

I believe we have an over reliance on certain players: Rooney, Gerrard, and more importantly on Ferdinand. Without a fit and in form Ferdinand, England will struggle to repel the top sides as he has a great ability to read the game along with composure and speed which no other England deputy possesses. I also feel that England, are profligate in possession, and this hinders our ability to be effective and often gives the other team the attacking impetus.

My hope for us winning the world cup hinges on the fitness of (including the above) Owen Hargreaves. He showed in the previous world cup and in his form for Manchester United before his injury, what an effective ubiquitous presence he can be. With him in place as the shield in front of the back four instead of Barry, I believe England stand a greater chance because he harries and closes space more effectively than Barry can; as shown with him (along with Jenas) allowing Brazil’s midfield too much time and space on the ball.

A fully fit England can win the world cup, but anything less than that and they won’t.

[KentuckyKKK]

Yes, England can win just like any other team. However, for the next year's 2010 world cup, England will not win because as said many times they are not good enough.

Forget about the defeat by Brazil on Saturday, there are still many better teams in the world than England. A quick look at the rankings just give you a rough guide of the task England faces to win the world cup next year. That is not even considering lower ranked teams which can also easily beat England on the day!!

[tony byrne]

Patrick,
I am Irish and a fan of English football - not as unusual as many might think! Your view of England's W.C.prospects strike me as fanciful. Losses to both Spain and Brazil (admittedly you had players missing)do not bode well for England when they meet teams of similar quality in RSA. If you lose key players during finals - almost a certainty - you seem to lack true strength in depth. But most of all the goalkeeping situation is perilous and unlikely to improve before next summer. No team can win a WC without real strength at the back and between the sticks. You may have the former but certainly not the latter. Tony

[Matt S]

No, England can't win it.

As another poster rightly said, England have an over reliance on certain players. Unfortunately

a) several other nations have individuals who are FAR more talented
b) many other nations are consistently able to play as a team

This leaves England with no chance of winning it. Be real everyone. It's not defeatism it's realism. Semi finals would be a great result.

[Kenny Boy]

England could be champs of the world if they get lucky...VERY LUCKY. There are almost always 4 or 5 countries (at least) which are better.

[malcolm ferguson]

I think that England have a great chance of winning the next World Cup with the proviso that no one else turns up. On a serious note I fancy an African team to win or France if they get past Ireland on wednesday.

[Kyle]

Can England win the 2010 World Cup? Sure. Will they? Probably not. Anyone else stating anything categorical at the moment is loony. England need to concentrate on getting to the quarterfinals and then, given the vagaries of the knockout stage, anything can happen.

[andrew scott]

England reached the quarter finals twice under Sven, but they look better organized this time. The climate should help.

I worry about the goalkeepers, none of them really inspires much confidence. I hope Hargreaves and Joe Cole return to full fitness. In midfield England should be strong. Upfront Heskey, Crouch, Rooney and Defoe look like good picks. It was difficult against Brazil because the only service came from poor crosses.

England have intelligent players like Lampard,Gerrard and Rooney who are able of create something out of nothing.

They are overdue some luck. They were lucky in 1966, but have been unlucky since then. They have a good chance if they don't choke in a penalty shoot out.

[Steve]

I admire your consistent, confident stance on England winning the greatest prize in world sport, Patrick. You hold quarters close in observing English schizophrenia in even saying "winning" in S. Africa. With that said, Brasil and Spain are the teams to beat, but not favourites beyond recognition of "no chance" for another team. Quite simply, as Capello regularly states, we need all of our top players fit and on form. As Saturday emphatically showed, our supporting cast feebly resembles international class--Fabregas was on the bench against Argentina on Saturday.

I've always thought that England will finally make that big-step when we beat Brasil in a competitive game at the World Cup--we still haven't done that.

Brazil's style is exactly that type which exacerbates English football inferiority--it's like a polaroid negative on the field of what we are not. It's non-constructive to predict the squad now, but come March, we can start to muse with more consistency.

My big prediction with England concerns Theo Walcott. If he's fit, he's going. Yes, he's a bit rough and inconsistent (and, alas, injury-prone), but I think Walcott is destined for greatness. How many players could do a run as he did at Anfield in the quarter final of the champions league in 2007? He holds the record for youngest hattrick in a competitive game for England, against, at the time, a team who hadn't lost in that stadium for over ten years...this is a narrative in progression of a great player, and I think Walcott could really be the difference in S. Africa, I really do.

[Kenny Boy]

I'll go out on a limb and pick Brazil. Or Spain as second pick. The Dutch for third choice, just on a hunch.

[Mike]

I agree with those who say England have very little chance. Your first choice 11 is probably as good as the second run of teams (Argentina, Italy, France, and Germany for me) but the depth is paper thin and a number of the players are injury prone.

To win the World Cup any team needs good fortune to beat the really great teams, but you need to be consistently excellent to get through four knockout rounds against not incompetent competition. I just don't see England being able to consistently field a strong enough side just to get to the late rounds, forget about winning it.

Oh, and this article conveniently ignored the goalkeeping issues. Without at least a competent, reliable goalkeeper you cannot hope to win two, three, or four straight games against top competition.

[peter charles]

There seems to be a recurring narrative. england rely on 3 players Rooney, Gerrad and Lamapard.

The facts do not back this up, all 3 played in the last world cup and all three were poor. When England play a good team, they are no better when all three play.

England have a significantly better record when Rooney does not play. Against Holland England were much better when Rooney was replaced by defoe who scored twice and saved the game.

The narrative never changes though,
if Rooney is unexceptional, he is the best of a bad bunch and it was not his fault.

I hope and suspect Capello is not blinded by the misguided hype surrounding some players.

If we to do well in the World cup I suspect it will not be usual suspects that do it for us.

He should not be afraid to substitute them

[AMAR PATEL]

Your article is based on lack og key players, a debatlable excuse for the lions win the World Cup in RSA. Seems to be a mental problem rather than playing the game, considering the results against top nations like Spain, Holand, having won the easiest group during the qualifiers. Yet to encounter teams Argentina, Italy, Portugal which will qualify, not to mention other contenders for the cup. Dont feel thst England will lift a mojor throphy in light years to come, this based on attitude and pressured from media. Do not forget Brasil never left the 11st gear, and the full squad and full gear will be disastrous, with the lusxury of missing a penalty...I would resuma as SAMBA LESSON with a touch of FOOTBALL

[Adam]

A lot of posters seem to be working under the impression that the most talented side win the World Cup. Italy weren't even the second most talented side in the previous World Cup and yet they won. Organisation and discipline (Capello's two most outstanding managerial traits) can dismantle a highly talented team. The German's have done that time and again to awesome effect. England have quality in their side. Powerful players and most importantly, a lot of pace. Personally I think Walcott sholud be taken as a winger and auxiliary central striker. Meaning 4 places up front. Rooney, Heskey, Defoe and Crouch. The variety is fantastic. There are only two sides DEFINITELY better than England; Spain and Brazil. Don't discount African sides like the Ivory Coast and Ghana from making a semi. You can't have 11 world class players. No team has that. England have 4 maybe 5. That is enough. The rest should be hard working and effective. England have a great chance.

[Ade Akula]

Yes, England can win the world cup.

England don't have the players who can win the world cup but they have the coach who can.

It is like Greece in Euro 2004, they didn't have the player but they had Otto.

England main problem being the lack of a creative player and a decent holding player.