Day -614. WorldCup2018
They did it. Malta, version 2016, went one better than Malta 1971. One shot on goal, one save by Joe Hart, the England goalkeeper. Sure, England won, Malta lost but they got that one shot.
That could be it for my thoughts about Malta's adventure at Wembley. I could be happy that we "only" lost 2-0, that we did give Joe Hart something to do, albeit only once. And then I could talk about Azerbaijan beating Norway today.
But I have to stay with this a bit longer. Yes, on paper, 0-2 against England at Wembley is a fantastic result. And, furthermore, Malta were very well organised defensively and rarely panicked. For Malta to keep players of England's calibre to only 2 goals was not just down to goalkeeper Hogg's many saves. It was because all the players worked very hard to play to the system coach Ghedin had instructed them to play. You can just feel the "but" coming, can't you?
I have supported Maltese football for all of my living memory. I have seen the humiliating, the bad and the good performances by the National Team. Today’s first half was one of the worst. There was absolutely nothing happening inside England's half. I half-jokingly commented whether a ball kicked by a Maltese player over the halfway line could be generously considered a "shot on target".
"But Aidan," my voice of footballing reason says, "if Malta had attacked more, surely that would have opened up more opportunities for England and then we would have conceded a lot more goals. And wasn't the objective not to be embarrassed?"
There may be some truth to that, but here's my theory, open to criticism from anybody who plays or coaches football but not anybody who has played or coached any sport.
Any professional athlete, in any sport, goes into any contest believing that they have an equal opportunity to win as their opponent. If they don't go in with this mentality then they should play recreational sport or step aside and give their spot on the team to somebody who believes this to be true. This belief should not mask realism. The other player or team may have a much stronger history and/or skill set. However, the belief should exist that we, the weaker team, can find a way to counter our opponents' obvious strengths. And when the football match (as in this case) starts the score is equal. So we can either aim to maintain the equilibrium for as long as possible or we can try to do what we have to do to push the balance in our favour: score a goal.
Now, admittedly, realism kicks in. For Malta to attempt to score first against England may have been footballing suicide. But, it is also true, that a coach will inspire his players to take a few risks, to be a bit adventurous, while still keeping in mind that they are playing superior opposition. This is the belief that a coach will instill in his players, no matter who the opposition are.
"But Aidan, didn't Malta do well to keep the score at 0-0 for almost a half hour?"
Yes, they did. But the plan was, unsurprisingly to have 9, sometimes 10, players behind the ball to not leave any gaps for England. I do not dispute the need to do this. England moved the ball around well but Malta closed them down and were, to use that cliche word again, disciplined. They also resisted very often the urge to kick the ball as far away as they could from their own penalty area at any opportunity. They played pretty little passes deep in their own defensive areas. And there, was a problem. The Maltese midfielders were so deep, playing as defenders, that as the defenders played the ball to the midfielders, and because there was no successful quick passes and movement two things happened. All this passing ended up taking place well inside the Maltese half and, there was nobody to play the ball up ahead to. Therefore, Malta couldn't get very far into the English half and they did not give themselves any breathers from the English attacks.
Malta played with one all-out centre forward, Alfred Effiong with Andre Schembri supposedly playing behind him. Many teams, knowing they are going to be in a defensive battle, have used this tactic successfully. Get the ball through the midfield quickly, up to the man up front who will hold the ball up until the deeper lying attacking midfielder and wide players joined him. Then he could lay the ball off to them and look to create a goalscoring opportunity. The latter may not happen very often, but at the very least it takes some pressure of the defenders.
Malta never did this and this is why my excitement at watching them play at Wembley turned to anger and frustration. Maybe it was the occasion that got to them but once they got anywhere near the halfway line, Malta's players could not keep possession. I cannot put this down to simple lack of skill or pressure from England. Could it be the mindset of the players, going back to my argument of coach-inspired belief no matter who the opponent is?
Malta are always playing teams way better than them. I have watched them take some of those teams on, Italy being the most recent, with a lot more drive and adventurous spirit than they showed today.
The records will show that Malta lost 5-0 against England in 1971 and 2-0 in 2016. So there was progress, the critics will say. But what progress, really? I hope I am not the only Malta supporter who watched that today and was fed up of another ultra defensive display. There are more positive ways to play while still being wary of the stronger opponent.
Call me negative, unrealistic unpatriotic, whatever."Come on, Aidan, 2-0 at Wembley. We expected to lose by at least 5." I can take it. I can also hope that there will be improvement. If anybody criticises me for being so down on the team, I also hope that they don't carry on being comfortable with "only losing 2-0." With that attitude, with those low expectations, we will never get beyond being the bottom team in every World Cup or European Championship qualifying group.
If I met any of the players I would congratulate them on a well-disciplined performance. In the second half I admired how well they played at limiting England. To keep it up for 90 minutes took a huge effort. There is progress. Now we just need to move it forward, literally, a little bit. Let's hope that starts against Lithuania on Tuesday.
I loved hearing the Maltese supporters throughout the match today. They never stopped supporting the team. For every Maltese fan there it must have been a day to remember.
They did it. Malta, version 2016, went one better than Malta 1971. One shot on goal, one save by Joe Hart, the England goalkeeper. Sure, England won, Malta lost but they got that one shot.
That could be it for my thoughts about Malta's adventure at Wembley. I could be happy that we "only" lost 2-0, that we did give Joe Hart something to do, albeit only once. And then I could talk about Azerbaijan beating Norway today.
But I have to stay with this a bit longer. Yes, on paper, 0-2 against England at Wembley is a fantastic result. And, furthermore, Malta were very well organised defensively and rarely panicked. For Malta to keep players of England's calibre to only 2 goals was not just down to goalkeeper Hogg's many saves. It was because all the players worked very hard to play to the system coach Ghedin had instructed them to play. You can just feel the "but" coming, can't you?
I have supported Maltese football for all of my living memory. I have seen the humiliating, the bad and the good performances by the National Team. Today’s first half was one of the worst. There was absolutely nothing happening inside England's half. I half-jokingly commented whether a ball kicked by a Maltese player over the halfway line could be generously considered a "shot on target".
"But Aidan," my voice of footballing reason says, "if Malta had attacked more, surely that would have opened up more opportunities for England and then we would have conceded a lot more goals. And wasn't the objective not to be embarrassed?"
There may be some truth to that, but here's my theory, open to criticism from anybody who plays or coaches football but not anybody who has played or coached any sport.
Any professional athlete, in any sport, goes into any contest believing that they have an equal opportunity to win as their opponent. If they don't go in with this mentality then they should play recreational sport or step aside and give their spot on the team to somebody who believes this to be true. This belief should not mask realism. The other player or team may have a much stronger history and/or skill set. However, the belief should exist that we, the weaker team, can find a way to counter our opponents' obvious strengths. And when the football match (as in this case) starts the score is equal. So we can either aim to maintain the equilibrium for as long as possible or we can try to do what we have to do to push the balance in our favour: score a goal.
Now, admittedly, realism kicks in. For Malta to attempt to score first against England may have been footballing suicide. But, it is also true, that a coach will inspire his players to take a few risks, to be a bit adventurous, while still keeping in mind that they are playing superior opposition. This is the belief that a coach will instill in his players, no matter who the opposition are.
"But Aidan, didn't Malta do well to keep the score at 0-0 for almost a half hour?"
Yes, they did. But the plan was, unsurprisingly to have 9, sometimes 10, players behind the ball to not leave any gaps for England. I do not dispute the need to do this. England moved the ball around well but Malta closed them down and were, to use that cliche word again, disciplined. They also resisted very often the urge to kick the ball as far away as they could from their own penalty area at any opportunity. They played pretty little passes deep in their own defensive areas. And there, was a problem. The Maltese midfielders were so deep, playing as defenders, that as the defenders played the ball to the midfielders, and because there was no successful quick passes and movement two things happened. All this passing ended up taking place well inside the Maltese half and, there was nobody to play the ball up ahead to. Therefore, Malta couldn't get very far into the English half and they did not give themselves any breathers from the English attacks.
Malta played with one all-out centre forward, Alfred Effiong with Andre Schembri supposedly playing behind him. Many teams, knowing they are going to be in a defensive battle, have used this tactic successfully. Get the ball through the midfield quickly, up to the man up front who will hold the ball up until the deeper lying attacking midfielder and wide players joined him. Then he could lay the ball off to them and look to create a goalscoring opportunity. The latter may not happen very often, but at the very least it takes some pressure of the defenders.
Malta never did this and this is why my excitement at watching them play at Wembley turned to anger and frustration. Maybe it was the occasion that got to them but once they got anywhere near the halfway line, Malta's players could not keep possession. I cannot put this down to simple lack of skill or pressure from England. Could it be the mindset of the players, going back to my argument of coach-inspired belief no matter who the opponent is?
Malta are always playing teams way better than them. I have watched them take some of those teams on, Italy being the most recent, with a lot more drive and adventurous spirit than they showed today.
The records will show that Malta lost 5-0 against England in 1971 and 2-0 in 2016. So there was progress, the critics will say. But what progress, really? I hope I am not the only Malta supporter who watched that today and was fed up of another ultra defensive display. There are more positive ways to play while still being wary of the stronger opponent.
Call me negative, unrealistic unpatriotic, whatever."Come on, Aidan, 2-0 at Wembley. We expected to lose by at least 5." I can take it. I can also hope that there will be improvement. If anybody criticises me for being so down on the team, I also hope that they don't carry on being comfortable with "only losing 2-0." With that attitude, with those low expectations, we will never get beyond being the bottom team in every World Cup or European Championship qualifying group.
If I met any of the players I would congratulate them on a well-disciplined performance. In the second half I admired how well they played at limiting England. To keep it up for 90 minutes took a huge effort. There is progress. Now we just need to move it forward, literally, a little bit. Let's hope that starts against Lithuania on Tuesday.
I loved hearing the Maltese supporters throughout the match today. They never stopped supporting the team. For every Maltese fan there it must have been a day to remember.
No comments:
Post a Comment