Threats await England but it is not arrogant to dream now
Future is wildly unpredictable but romance and realism can coexist
English football used to come to tournaments thinking it owned them. The next 1966 was a matter of when, not if. Now, England’s supporters watch this World Cup open up and feel guilty about looking too far ahead. But excitement burns as well.
This conflicted state is unavoidable. History is always on England’s shoulder, telling them to calm down. Gareth Southgate’s side have beaten Tunisia and Panama and lost to Belgium B. Tunisia are ranked 21 in the world and succumbed only in added time, to a Harry Kane header.
Panama, ranked 55, mistook the World Cup for Greco-roman wrestling and were thrashed 6-1.
Belgium’s shadow side were superior to England’s. Colombia are dangerous.
And yet, opportunity is knocking for Southgate’s men. There is no law that prohibits romance and realism coexisting, no harm in dreaming of Samara and St Petersburg and even the Luzhniki Stadium at journey’s end. It would be a joyless build-up to the Colombia game in Moscow’s Spartak Stadium if all peering into the future were banned.
That future is wildly unpredictable, as Russia 2018 has amply demonstrated. Italy and Holland were stopped at the qualification stage. The world champions, Germany, were halted at the group phase, with defeats by Mexico and South Korea. Portugal, champions of Europe, were sent packing by Uruguay. Spain, the 2010 World Cup winners, were knocked out by Russia on penalties, despite posting 1,100 passes. Argentina and Lionel Messi have disappeared too.
This purge on Russian soil left only four previous World Cup winners left in the tournament. The others are Brazil, who beat Mexico to reach the quarter-finals; France, the world’s best 20 years ago; and England and Uruguay, both from the mists of time. More particularly, the bottom half of the draw is less intimidating, because it guarantees a place in the final for one of Colombia, Sweden, Switzerland, Croatia, Russia – or England.
The forbidden pleasure of thinking about England’s golden opportunity this way will feel even less permissible when the teams are walking out at the Spartak Stadium, when the future will have strict parameters: 90 minutes.
Colombia are enough to be dealing with. Ultimately England are not just facing the bottom half of the draw. Heavyweight opposition is rumbling through the top half as well.
There were two certainties here 24 hours before kick-off. One was that Southgate would be asked about the opportunity opening up for England. The other was that he would refuse to discuss anything beyond Colombia. To do so would be heresy. Southgate hinted that presumption had been part of the problem with the team who lost to Iceland in Nice two years ago. Assuming Iceland would melt, Roy Hodgson’s players scored, fell behind, then lacked the mental discipline to turn the tables back round.
Southgate’s England are on virgin territory in Russia. Fatigue has been eliminated both as factor and as an excuse should Colombia win. England’s first team have had a break of eight days since the Panama win because Southgate rested so many of them against Belgium. In a World Cup, eight days is virtually a sabbatical. The small gamble taken by Southgate is that his first XI will find the jump from Panama to Colombia a bit sharp after more than a week without a game.
And of course, with a win in Kaliningrad, England would have faced Japan instead in the secondround, a route that now leads to a quarter-final against Brazil. The less daunting assignment for the winner of Colombia against England is a quarter-final against Sweden or Switzerland, with Russia or Croatia in the semi-finals.
Southgate says: “Maybe the teams who aren’t here weren’t as strong this time. That means the ones left have hit a level of performance that’s very high. If teams knock out Germany and Spain, they have to be respected. We feel we’re one of those countries with players coming through, but we haven’t discussed anything beyond tomorrow.”
Southgate’s point about the strength of sides capable of chopping down the great powers is a good one. If Russia can eliminate Spain, they could see off England. If Croatia can smash Argentina 3-0, they would be no semi-final pushover. Sweden and Switzerland are also strong in spine and spirit. The absence of superpowers in England’s half of the draw does not constitute a golden ticket to the final.
Against all that, the thought police are not in charge, and daydreaming is not arrogance. As Southgate said at the Spartak Stadium: “You always have to have aims and ambitions, dreams and goals. That’s important. At a World Cup, we’re in the business of bringing hope and excitement to a whole nation.”
At World Cups, teams are measured by what they do but also what happens around them: the twists and turns of history, of which Spain losing to Russia was a big one. For now, England are a side who have won two and lost one and need three victories to reach the final. But the imagination is surely right to glow with possibilities. Why else are we here?
The imagination is surely right to glow with possibilities. Why else are we here?