England's XI: Consistently Inconsistent?

And so, despite a frantic Premier League season, which sees congested races for both the Champions League and to avoid relegation, our attention turns to the national team. Just for that few times a year when fans can stop acting like idiots to antagonise one another (for a good example of this, please refer to Aston Villa fans' outrageous and ridiculous pitch invasion in their FA Cup quarter final against West Brom), and act like idiots together (ok, not a great step forward, but every little helps!).

However, for fans of England, there has been very little to cheer in recent years. The team has gone progressively backwards (arguably since 1990), culminating is the abysmal showing at the 2014 World Cup. For those of you that don't remember, allow me to share the statistical highlights. Two goals. One point. The worst English World Cup campaign since 1958. Feeling suitably morbid? Then we'll continue.

Since the Brazil aberration, England have done what England do best - given their fans false hope of a recovery. Six straight wins since the World Cup, albeit against the likes of San Marino and Estonia, has inevitably lifted the spirits of England fans - who have to be some of the most overly optimistic supporters on the face of the planet.

But what is the reason behind England's recent decline? As much as club sides and the lack of 'home-grown talent' often take the blame, deservedly so in many cases, I believe I may have uncovered an additional reason. If we look at the last three long-term managers of the national side, we see a clear trend. As with Louis van Gaal's much maligned Manchester United side this season, constant chopping and changing of players and systems can have a disastrous impact on form and performance. Here, England have previous. In his 37 games in charge, Roy Hodgson has used a remarkable 60 players - in just three years! This averages out at introducing 1.62 new players every match, which cannot be good for securing a consistent team.

However, I mentioned that this is not a Hodgson-specific issue. Fabio Capello, Steve McClaren and Sven-Goran Eriksson also all regularly rotated their squads, selecting a disproportionate amount of players for the number of matches played. If we discard Steve McClaren, who selected 45 players in his 18 woeful games in charge of the national side, there is an ongoing trend. Sven selected 67 in his 72 games, at an average of 1.07 new players per game, while Capello's average is 1.5 new players per game, having used 63 men in his 42 game reign. If we add in Hodgson's current average, we see that since 2001, England have been introducing more players per game. It cannot simply be coincidence that Sven's two World Cup resulted in quarter-final appearances, Fabio Capello's one saw them escape the group, while Hodgson's, well we can't forget that! But naturally, instead of looking closer to home, we blame the foreigners!

So, getting back to the crux of the article, who would I select for the current England squad that may end the problems with consistency? And who would start the upcoming games against Lithuania and Italy?

Though I've bemoaned the constant chopping and changing of the previous England administrations, I will make a couple of additions to the list. However, I would expect that this side will be around for at least the next five years, taking us back to the 'Golden Generation' mentality that we had under Sven.

My England Squad:

Goalkeepers: Joe Hart (Manchester City), Fraser Forster (Southampton), Jack Butland (Stoke City)

Defenders: Luke Shaw (Manchester United), Ryan Bertrand (Southampton), Gary Cahill (Chelsea), Calum Chambers (Arsenal), Phil Jones (Manchester United), John Stones (Everton), Nathaniel Clyne (Southampton), Kieran Gibbs (Arsenal)

Midfielders: Raheem Sterling (Liverpool), Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain (Arsenal), Jordan Henderson (Liverpool), Jack Wilshere (Arsenal), Adam Lallana (Liverpool), Ross Barkley (Everton), Theo Walcott (Arsenal)

Forwards: Wayne Rooney (Manchester United), Daniel Sturridge (Liverpool), Danny Welbeck (Arsenal), Harry Kane (Tottenham Hotspur)

The most telling thing about this squad? In five years, just five of the above will be over 30 years old, and those include two goalkeepers, who can continue late into their thirties (just look at Brad Friedel and Mark Schwarzer!). As a result, barring injuries, this can certainly be the bedrock squad for the next few years, and while I wouldn't expect England to trouble the winner's enclosure, this is certainly a squad capable of escaping the group stages at any competition!

As for my first XI, here's who I would start if all were fit:

Hart, Bertrand, Cahill, Chambers, Clyne, Sterling, Henderson, Lallana, Walcott, Rooney, Sturridge

For me, Hart will remain England's number one for the next five years, while the form of both Saints wing-backs give me encouragement for both of their futures. For centre-back, while Gary Cahill adds steel, it was a toss-up between Chambers and Jones, with the Arsenal man's age and potential counting in his favour.

In midfield, there are not many surprises - the Liverpool connection between Sterling, Henderson and Lallana was Spain-esque, a technique that has been proven to work in the past, while Theo Walcott just edged out his club mate Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain.

Up front, common sense prevailed. There can be no doubt that Harry Kane is having a sparkling season, but he has not yet done enough to displace either of Rooney or Sturridge at present. However, with Rooney at 29 years old, have we found the successor? Only time will tell, but the signs are there that England may have found its next number 9 (or is that 10?).

England Series: What Does 'The State of the Game' Mean For The National Team?

                           In the build-up to Tuesday's do-or-die fixture at home to Poland, I will be running an England mini-series, looking at the talking points that have haunted the England side's preparations, and looking at their chances going forward. A few weeks ago, I gave my opinion on Greg Dyke's comments that England should be looking to reach the semi-finals of the Euro 2020 competition, and win the World Cup in 2022 in Qatar. This assumes that the groundwork is already in place for England to become a viable winner of trophies, as Spain's 'Golden Age' really began a decade or so previously, with the change of several rules regarding training of youngsters. Using the State of the Game report, as well as evidence from the current England squad and the lower leagues, I will examine just how much creedence can be given to Dyke's claims. I dismissed them a few weeks ago-was I wrong to?

                            28th February 1999. The last time any Premier League side fielded an entire XI of English players. The team: Aston Villa. The match: Coventry City vs Villa. The scoreline: 4-1. Which perhaps explains why it has never happened since. Nevertheless, it is slightly worrying when you consider that less than a third of the Premier League minutes played were by English players, after staggering decline of English players in the Premier League. This is the reality as described by the BBC State of the Game report last week. However, is it really any different around the continent? With the influx of players from Europe and, especially, South America, is it really that surprising that the leagues have been diluted? This post will compare the plight of the English game to other European leagues, before assessing why this has occurred, in order to see just how much of an English specific problem this is. Finally, by assessing the performance of the England team in the recent World Cup Qualifiers, we can further compare them as a footballing force to other European nations.

                             First, I think it would be useful to outline the core findings of this report. The BBC State of the Game report is taken once every 5 years, in order to get a basic lay of the land during the intermittent period. The 2013 report stated that the percentage of minutes played by English players in the Premier League has dipped below a third of the overall minutes played. The 32.26% that English players have played this season is a dip on the 2007/8 stat of 35.43%, and, as a result, is the lowest ever on record. This has prompted many in the game to make statements about how worrying this should be considered, almost blaming the Premier League for the lack of English talent. Personally, I believe that they have the cause and effect the wrong way around. Whilst the influx of foreign players inevitably affects the national squad, it is not the fault of other players if England as a nation are not the force they once were. If the league wants to compete with the other European leagues (e.g. Spain, Italy and Germany), they need to be providing the best talent. If that is not from England, as is the case at the minute, it is not the fault of the league.

                              One way of looking to see the influence of South American and African imports is to look at competing European leagues. Are imports really more prevalent in the Premier League than in the Bundesliga or La Liga? The State of the Game report indicates that perhaps there is an English-specific problem. La Liga, the league of the current World Cup holders, and winner of the last three major international tournaments available in Europe, Spain, shows that 59% of the minutes played were played by Spaniards. Meanwhile, in Germany, the Bundesliga's statistics are vastly similar to that of their Spanish counterparts, with Germans making up 50% of the minutes played. This clearly indicates that the Premier League relies far more on players from abroad than homegrown talents.

                              So why is there such a gap between the continental leagues and the Premier League? On the face of it, it doesn't make sense, as many of the big money transfers over the last few summers have been from Spanish or German clubs, not buying Spanish or German players. Looking purely at this season's transfers, whilst Real Madrid did sign two Spanish youngsters for large sums (Isco and Illaramendi), the majority of their transfer outlay were on foreign players (Bale, Casemiro and Carvajal). Barcelona's only signing was Brazilian Neymar, indicating that foreign players do still play a significant role when it comes to Spanish transfers. The same is true for the Bundesliga, where big name signings like Henrikh Mkhitaryan, Luis Gustavo, Thiago Alcantara and Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang were also brought in from abroad. However, whilst the big name transfers and the big teams are the ones more frequently focused on, the teams that really give the indication of the study are those further down the table. Looking at Spain, we can see that there are only two teams outside of the El Clasico pair that spent more than £20 Million on players. Similarly, in Germany, only three teams outside of the top two spent past that margin. Generally speaking, foreign players tend to be more expensive, so those that have spent large sums have generally brought in foreign talent. However, if we look at Premier League teams outside the Manchester clubs, eleven of the 18 clubs have spent beyond £20 Million in this recent transfer window. In England, there has been the school of thought that the better English players are rare and overpriced, and therefore too expensive for smaller clubs to buy, making foreign players a more affordable alternative. However, we can also see that the majority of big-name transfers have been foreign, with the likes of Willian, Lamela, Eriksen, Ozil and Osvaldo all coming in for large fees. This perhaps goes some way to explaining exactly why we have seen a decline in the percentage of minutes played by English players in the Premier League.

                              However, to what extent does this affect the England national team more than that of other nations? Do the players in the national squads get regular game time? Underneath I will lay out what I consider to be each of the nations' top squads (all 4-4-2 formation). This way we can see whether each of the sides' starting line-ups are playing regularly.

Spain: Casillas, Jordi Alba, Sergio Ramos, Pique, Arbeloa, Pedro, Xavi, Iniesta, Fabregas, Soldado, Negredo

Germany: Neuer, Lahm, Boateng, Hummels, Jansen, Muller, Ozil, Schweinsteiger, Kroos, Kiessling, Gomez

England: Hart, Walker, Cahill, Jagielka, Baines, Walcott, Gerrard, Lampard, Milner, Rooney, Sturridge

                                Looking at these XI's, we can see that in Spain's case, every single one of the names mentioned play week-in, week-out, with 9 of the 11 coming from the El Clasico pair. The other pair, both strikers, now play every match for their sides Tottenham and Manchester City respectively. This is a similar story for Germany. Every one of their XI plays on a weekly basis, with 7 of their players coming from Bayern Munich or Borussia Dortmund. For England, whilst the majority play every match, there are a few that have found they are in strong competition for their place at club level. Gary Cahill and Frank Lampard at Chelsea have both, at one time or another, found themselves ousted in favour of either David Luiz (in Cahill's case) or Ramires/Kevin De Bruyne (in Lampard's). James Milner has also found it difficult to break into the Manchester City midfield. Though he often starts the important matches, he is usually used as a bit-part player, covering for the likes of Jesus Navas and Fernandinho. Before the start of the season, even Wayne Rooney's place was not guaranteed at United, with the Englishman playing second fiddle to Robin van Persie for the majority of last season. His performances so far this season have won him his place back, but this shows that the influx of foreign players is affecting the national team. The differences are far more stark when we consider those that would be expecting to be on the bench. Spain's bench is an embarrasment of riches, with the likes of Valdes, Jesus Navas, David Silva, Juan Mata, Santi Cazorla all playing regular football. Germany's bench is much the same, with Adler, Khedira, Gotze, Mertesacker and Draxler in their first-team squads. Looking at those players pushing for the bench for England, Fraser Forster and Andros Townsend illustrate the rare exceptions to the rule. Players like Jack Wilshere, Danny Welbeck, Tom Cleverley, Phil Jones, Chris Smalling and Jermain Defoe all have a battle on their hands to retain their place, with many of them having to settle for benchwarmer for part of the season. This will have a disastrous effect on the strength in depth of the squad, as without match practice, the England team will be left far behind by their European rivals, as has been the case in recent years.

                               How does the English game rectify this? As I stated earlier, the Premier League prides itself on being (arguably) the best league in the world, and with that status comes a lot of money. The league can only work with what they are given, and if the problems with the English players begin at the very bottom, as I suspect, there is where we need to start. Enforcing 'minimum English' rules will only be to the detriment of the Premier League, as we will inevitably see the top talent elsewhere. What we have to do is train the English top talents properly here. By bettering our training techniques, teaching technical ability over 'win at all costs', we should see some of the better players rise to the top at junior level. By nurturing our players properly, and teaching them the skills they need to succeed, there is no reason why we cannot follow Spain's example and have a 'Golden Generation'. We just need to get the grassroots organised correctly first.