Sometimes sports coaches get lucky. Quite possibly Steve McClaren has had his lucky moment against Israel with a successful team performance and a worthy 3-0 win. The score could have been higher against a team that is reknowned for its dour defensive performances. So what changed from those insipid, dire England performances that characterised much of the transitional period from the Sven-Goran Eriksson period?

To begin with, consider the missing players: Gary Neville, Wayne Rooney, Frank Lampard, Peter Crouch, Owen Hargreaves, Michael Carrick and of course David Beckham. Media commentators and indeed the McClaren/Terry Venables management team might well have selected a good number of these players if they were not injured or banned from this particular match. So McLaren had to make changes and it is possible to argue that he did so unwillingly. Only he will know if this was the case.

Nevertheless, to his credit, he did recall Emile Heskey to lead the line and rekindle his striking partnership with Michael Owen. The return of Heskey was critical to the team tactics revealed in the game. He led the line with confidence and was a significant target man for much of the match. His overwhelming physical presence is lacking in his current England striking rivals, the only exception being the height advantage offered by Crouch.

'The return of Heskey was critical to the team tactics revealed in the game. He led the line with confidence and was a significant target man for much of the match'


The small centre forward or the deep lying striker has been the prototype around which recent England performances have been structured and to some extent Heskey represents a return to traditional English football.

But if the game has moved on from a previous concentration on a physical central striker, then those changes were apparent on the flanks where the team finally fielded a balanced wing attack. Joe Cole and Shaun Wright-Phillips made significant contributions in speed and craft and kept the defensive full-backs in their own space. Both players were very well supported by the forages of Ashley Cole and Micah Richards. This is a quartet of players that ought to form the core of future England teams.

The days of Gary Neville and Beckham, and the concentration upon a single winger should now be over. For all the outburst from the media to the contrary, Beckham offers too much concentration of play around his own limited space whilst his pace and his dubious defensive qualities are all negatives. The new quartet offered pace and variety as the ball was played from wing to wing.

The execution of the first England goal was an excellent example of this movement and interplay. In contrast, the set peices offered by Beckham were not missed as Gareth Barry and Steven Gerrard offered variety and  consistent penetration if their own execution of the set pieces.

The other significant aspect of this team performance was the speed and interchangeability of the midfield. Gerrard and Barry swtiched positions and occupied deeper attacking positions that linked well with the wing play. This allowed the back four to also move forward and pin down Israel. Only when Phil Neville appeared as a substitute for Gerrard did the team revert to the style of the more prosaic Frank Lampard, who exhibits the irritating habit of slowing the game down and occupying minimal midfield space which allows a defence to regroup.

It would be a mistake but there will be a temptation to return to the old ways against Russia, the world's 24th-ranked nation, next Wednesday. Phil Neville gave a reminder of the type of slower, sideways, mistake-ridden game that England play with a slowly advancing midfield. Barry should retain his position and only Hargreaves, for his willingness to cover a great deal of the pitch, or Carrick, who can cover the ground quickly with his incisive passing, ought to be considered as possible replacements.

McClaren's greatest problem now is to decide if England need the strong physical line leader or if  the midfield is quick and clever enough to persevere and create chances without such a player. Against Israel, Heskey was always the out ball that would not be available if a less physical forward was used. Andy Johnson gave due notice of this problem with his brief cameo appearance in the line-leader role. However, McClaren can take heart that against Israel, Terry and Ashley Cole did not yet look sharp, that Gerrard was carrying an injury and that Owen is just beginning to regain his form.

If the days of Beckham and the Neville brothers as first-team choices are now over, then McClaren should also bench Lampard. It is time to do so. He must also decide if Wayne Rooney can feature, too. Above all, the experiment of fitting together the best club players can be scrapped.

The game against Israel delivered a team fulfilling clearly-defined positional roles that were often interchangeable and exciting. If, for example, Rooney could not lead the line in the Heskey way, where would he be selected to play? The choice seems quite basic: Owen or Rooney - not both.

The team selection against Russia will tell the nation how good a coach McClaren can be. He may have got lucky and made pragmatic injury changes to the team but in doing so he has gained a quicker, more physical side that shows the possibilities of performing on a higher stage.

He now needs to demonstrate the courage to stick with it and not fall back on the old ways.

Have England turned the corner or was this merely a one-off performance? Post your comments below or submit an article to Sportingo.