Expectations

This post is a look at expectations, both realistic and unrealistic. It's also a look at comparing teams on paper. I'll be looking at England in this respect, but the same thing applies to every team. For years I've never quite put my finger on the exact term for England until a German commentator called them "self proclaimed world champions". It's very apt.

The England media and fans always think of themselves as one of the favourites for every tournament, regardless of the reality but why? They've won the World Cup ONCE in 1966 on HOME SOIL. How many times have they been beaten finalists? None. Semi finalists? ONCE. They are a QUARTER FINAL team, who occasionally have a great tournament and punch above that, or have a bad tournament and get knocked out before the quarter finals. They average the quarter finals, yet somehow believe themselves to be one of the favourites to win it.

This would be like maybe Aston Villa being seen every season as having a realistic chance of winning the Premiership. It's not like it'll never happen, they are always capable of having a good tournament, just don't fool themselves into thinking they're one of the favourites.

If all it takes is winning it before, to make a team one of the favourites, why don't they include Uruguay? They've won it twice in the 1930's, that's one more than England. In both cases we're talking a few generations of a difference between than and now, so it's not relevant. Would anyone realistically put Uruguay into the list of modern day favourites?

We need to look at where the teams get to in other years. Germany have won the World Cup several  times, but how many times have they been beaten finalists? Beaten semi finalists? The same applies to Brazil, Argentina, Italy etc. England punched above their weight TWO times, once to go through and win it. Yet despite Germany, Brazil, Argentina and Italy being seen the world over as legitimate favourites, more often than not they downplay their chances, knowing it will be a hard tournament and they'll have to play well. They do NOT crown themselves world champions before a ball is kicked, no matter how good their team is.

Next we look at the teams on paper. You can tell a lot about the potential of a team by looking at the star players, which clubs they play for and how important they are to those clubs. The England squad have a who's who from the top clubs in England, players who are central for their clubs.

Frank Lampard, Ashley Cole and John Terry are vital to Chelsea, who are one of the top 4 teams in a VERY tough league, and happen to be reigning champions of England. Chelsea narrowly missed out on Champions League glory too. Wayne Rooney and Rio Ferdinand are vital to Manchester United, who have dominated England in recent years, and have had a fair amount of Champions League glory over the last few years. Steven Gerard is the linchpin of a fallen giant Liverpool. So often he's the hero of the hour saving the team from defeat.

Most of the England squad are household names to those who watch the Champions League and Europa League. Almost all of them play for the top eight teams in England. Not only that but they are key first team players for their clubs when they are fit.

Compare that to some of the smaller nations, where they have maybe two players who play for teams in the top leagues, perhaps in countries with weaker leagues, or are squad players who get a few games per year as substitutes. Plenty of the smaller teams have their players "having once played for Barnsley, for a few games" or "had a trial for Chievo", or "spent a season at Charlton Athletic". The difference is stark. On paper England are one of the favourites, but only on paper when you compare man for man.

All of the football powerhouses have a who's who of top players playing for the top teams around Europe, from Spain, Italy, Holland, Germany, Brazil, Argentina and England. Yet only England have an abysmal average record at the World Cup. Yes, Spain and Holland often get dumped out early too, but they often play well and run out of luck. England seem to huff and puff their way through, with the style of a pub team, and rely on bad decisions or penalty shootouts to progress.

Even if England do squeak through, the England fans and media will STILL see themselves as one of the favourites because "a win is a win". If that's not enough, they STILL feel the right to criticise other nations for not playing nice football, feeling that it's wrong for other nations to win a tournament by playing badly.

Worse still is the constant harping on about 1966, finding any excuse to bring it into the conversation, as if it's somehow relevant to the current game. If this arrogance was justified by the average actions on the pitch, then fine, but it's not. This, more than anything else is the reason why many people have an "anyone but England" attitude.