"Every beginning contains the seed of its own ending. Enjoy the things that are, when they are. Do not regret them, when they are not."
GW
The World Cup will be over before we know it, it will go by in a flash. We must try to give it our full attention while it lasts, try to sup every possible drop of joy out of it.
Given the squad we now have, the formation and 'best lineup' seem fairly obvious, incontrovertible: the side picks itself. Pretty much everyone is expecting England to look something like the team above during this World Cup.
But... Tuchel likes 'surprises'; and I think - I fear - he may have a few in store for us.
This wouldn't be a bad team, by any means. If it works, it should be well capable of progressing far into the tournament, maybe even winning it. It has good balance, good pace, and a fair amount of experience - despite the low average age.
Reece James can readily invert into a holding role in the middle, as he so often has for Chelsea this year (although Tuchel, in the past, has scoffed at the idea of him being a 'midfielder'; I hope he's been convinced otherwise now), which would allow Declan Rice to move further forward to support the attack. Harry Kane is likely to drop back into the '10' space, or even a bit deeper (though I doubt if he'll retreat all the way back to his defensive line, in the manner of the later Toni Kroos, as we've often seen from him at Bayern this year), allowing Jude Bellingham to play a little ahead of him as a 'false 9', or to roam freely wherever he will to pick up the ball and encouraging Rashford or Saka to drift into the central space. In theory, I think that could work very nicely.
However, Morgan Rogers is such a 'golden boy' of Tuchel's that I think he will be shoehorned into the starting eleven somehow. Letting him come in off the left-wing, in place of Rashford, would perhaps make the most sense, as that is how he's mostly played at Villa this season. But I think Tuchel may fancy him in the No. 10 slot, and keep Bellingham in reserve as a 'super-sub' (and I'm not sure how well Jude will take that; he does have a bit of an ego on him!). There is also a possibility that John Stones may be favoured over Ezri Konsa, for his experience. Again, I think that's non-ideal. Konsa has played well enough to have earned a regular start, and I feel we ought to be concentrating on building up his partnership with Guehi (they have played remarkably little together as yet). And I suppose there's an outside chance that Gordon might be preferred to Rashford on the left, though this seems very unlikely to me; Rashford's recent form should guarantee him the start (while Gordon's club form this year frankly makes his inclusion in the squad at all highly questionable).
There is one further possible variation, which I'd approve of, but which I fear Tuchel may consider 'too risky'. That would be to designate Kane openly as the 'No. 10' and play Ollie Watkins ahead of him as the central striker. I think that might work even better; although I'd be loathe to sacrifice Bellingham to facilitate this.
This is pretty much the formation and approach I would have favoured. I have been saying for a decade now that Harry Kane is really more of a 'No. 10' than he is a 'No. 9' (we are spoiled that he's so good in both roles), and that we need to play him deeper to get the most out of his exquisite passing. And I really like the idea of playing another forward ahead of him, to give him more freedom to wander around the pitch. And I'd like to try playing Bellingham deeper also, alongside the pivot (I'd happily sacrifice Declan Rice for that; great though he is for Arsenal, I think he's entirely expendable for England). Bellingham is a capo carismatico, an inspirational figure who lifts all those around him; and he has that magical ability to come up with a game-changing moment out of nothing. We need him on the pitch.
I would have fancied playing narrower wide attackers: Eze and Palmer flanking Bellingham or Kane. The amount of rotation and creative passing you could have got from that combination of front players might have been breathtaking.
But I can see that this is a team built for Harry Kane. And the one asset our Harry has always lacked is pace; so, he needs to be supported by very quick wide players who can break down the flanks to try to produce crosses or cutbacks for him, or run through the middle on to the long through-balls he can play from deeper in the midfield.
[Just before the tournament started, Conor McAinsh of Football Meta, one of the best analysis channels on Youtube, dropped this video that goes into a bit more detail about how Tuchel wants England to operate - but essentially affirms my outline above.]
This, I fear, may be the set-up's most dangerous weakness as well as its main strength. This system could work so well with Harry Kane; but I'm not sure how it will function without him. And we really need Harry at his best to get the most out of this. And there is a danger that, after such a long season with Bayern, he may be a bit rundown physically and mentally - a bit knackered. Harry, alas, has never really 'turned up' for us in a major tournament yet. (Yes, he's banged in a decent number of goals against very soft group opponents. But he's looked increasingly anonymous as the tournaments have progressed - often leading to calls in the press for him to be dropped. And this time.... we don't have a soft group.) If that happens again, if he's operating substantially below his peak - or he picks up an injury and isn't available at all - I don't know who else can step up and lead this team. I rather fear things might all unravel rather quickly if Big H isn't on top of his game. So,.... let's hope that he is.
Come on, England!
When Thomas Tuchel selected his first England squad 14 months ago, I observed that the England manager's job is a thankless task, and that invariably every fan will have his own perfect selection in mind and will carp at every variation from that Platonic ideal, however trivial.
However, the just-announced World Cup squad has a few oddities in it that are so egregious, it has got the majority of England fans not just mildly irked, but seriously dismayed, even outraged.
I don't take issue with as many of the choices as some (the compiler of the 'Rejects XI' above cannot seriously have supposed that all of them were going to get a call-up??), but I fear there are a few really big errors in it - which may cost us dearly in the tournament.
So, I'll quickly run through my take on the good, the bad, and the ugly of Thomas Tuchel's picks...
Expected, justified omissions
Not even Nick Pope's mum thinks he's one of the best three goalkeepers in England any more; and his club manager no longer seems sure if he's even better than Aaron Ramsdale - so, there's absolutely no surprise that he didn't make the cut (especially after a season disrupted by injury). The goalkeeping line-up is surely the one part of the squad where there's really no controversy at all.
Trent Alexander-Arnold, rightly or wrongly, was already being sidelined at England under Southgate; and Tuchel immediately made it clear that he has no interest in using him. I think - somewhat controversially - that this is the correct decision. For me, Trent is player whose excellences occupy a very narrow spectrum, and who thus needs to have a team built around him if he is to flourish (he needs hard-working midfielders who will cover for him when he's caught out of position defensively, and very quick forward players who can exploit his long balls over the top). Klopp was able to do that at Liverpool; but I don't think an England manager can.
Harry Maguire, I've said on here before, is 'yesterday's man'. He's given excellent service to England over the years, and he's still a fine player. But he's obviously not our first-choice starter any more; and I fear he's too big an ego to accept merely a back-up role in the squad. Likewise, Luke Shaw, although he has - surprisingly - been an ever-present for Manchester United this season, has clearly declined a bit in fitness from his peak a few years ago, and no longer looks like an obvious prospect for us at left-back... even though that is, currently, the position in which we have perhaps the thinnest cover.
Phil Foden is a bit of an unfortunate omission, but not an unexpected one. He doesn't seem to be securely in Pep's favour, and has played less than 2,000 Premier League minutes this season. I fear that his confidence has been broken by his manager's lack of trust in him (and/or that there may be reasons, unknown to the public, why that lack of trust is justified...). And alas, he's never really managed to make his mark with England, and he had a particularly ineffectual tournament in the Euros two summers ago. In an area of the pitch where we are rather spoiled with an over-abundance of talent to choose from, it really is not surprising that he didn't quite make the cut.
Unfortunate omissions
I was a little bit of a sceptic about Levi Colwill a couple of years or so ago, but he impressed me enormously last season, and I think he could become a mainstay of the England team. For that reason, I would have been tempted to make a place for him in this squad, even though he's unlikely to start, and is probably going to be a little ring-rusty after his long injury absence. I also think we need a specialist left-back as cover for Nico O'Reilly, and that slot really ought to have gone to Lewis Hall; he might not have the adaptability of Spence or Livramento, but he is more consistent, and offers much more of an attacking threat.
Jarrad Branthwaite and Myles Lewis-Skelly (and perhaps also Rico Lewis) will no doubt enjoy an England career at some point, but unfortunately they just haven't had enough first-team minutes this year to be in contention for this squad.
Adam Wharton and Alex Scott are perhaps too young and inexperienced to be relied upon yet as regular starters, but they are outstanding prospects for the future, and I would have liked to see space being made for at least one of them in this squad. I think that space could have been easily created by taking one or two fewer defenders.
Harvey Barnes, many people would say, has done enough this season to be considered for a call-up. It is unfortunate that Eddie Howe never seems to view him as an automatic starter, even when he's in hot goalscoring form, but he really has looked a much better prospect this year than his teammate Anthony Gordon; and, given that he's only likely to be called upon as a late substitute when we're chasing a game, his pace and finishing could surely be very valuable to us.
Questionable, but possibly justified inclusions
Tino Livramento undoubtedly has a lot of promise, but he has had too many injury problems this season (and is injured now - so might get replaced in the squad), and just hasn't had the opportunity to establish any settled form. His clubmate Lewis Hall looked a far stronger candidate to me; one suspects Livramento has only got the nod because of his ability to operate on either flank. This was presumably the decisive factor in Djed Spence's favour too. I have been impressed with Spence's development over the past couple of seasons, but I worry about his mental state after the appalling season Spurs have suffered; 'failure' can be contagious, and I would be very wary of bringing in players from relegated clubs (or clubs that have been floundering in that mire; I'm writing this the day before the season finale, so don't know if Spurs managed to escape the drop). I've said before that I like Dan Burn for his adaptability and his attitude; but he hasn't been a regular starter with Newcastle this season, and when he has played, it's been most often as a centre-back; when he has had a start at left-back, he's looked much less composed than he did a couple of seasons back when he was playing the role regularly, and has often been found out for pace. I can see taking Burn as a makeweight, because he'll be an inspiring presence off the pitch, and can provide emergency cover anywhere across the back-four (and possibly even in central midfield); but he does look perhaps the weakest of the defensive picks, and if you feel - as I do - that we're taking too many defenders, he's probably the one that should be cut. Though I really don't think we need both Livramento and Spence - so long as there are no lingering question-marks over Reece James's fitness.
John Stones is presumably included for his experience, and his adaptability (able to fill in at right-back, in an emergency, or even as a holding midfielder). And it's interesting that Tuchel apparently cites 'training data' as reassuring him in this choice: presumably his fitness levels appear to be strong, even though he's almost inevitably going to be short of full sharpness after playing so few competitive minutes this year. Though it seems a rather risky call, I can see the need for including someone with significant tournament experience in what is, mostly, a very young squad. The worry, I think, is that Tuchel likes him so much, he might actually be thinking of starting him. For me, Guehi and Konsa have established themselves as deserved first-choice starters, and we should be concentrating on building their partnership - one which could become the backbone of the team for the decade ahead.
Anthony Gordon has pace, aggression, adaptability; at his best, he's certainly an asset to the squad, and so I can see why Tuchel has stood by him. But he has had a very ropey season at Newcastle, rarely anywhere near his best; his club form does not justify his inclusion at the moment.
Bizarre inclusions
Jordan Henderson is now slow and injury-prone, and has only featured for Brentford half the time this past season. He surely can't be considered for anything more than the occasional token 10-minute run-out in internationals. And if he's been included simply for his dressing-room leadership.... surely we could have brought him along as a 'coach', rather than wasting a squad place??
Ivan Toney has been scoring for fun in the Saudi Pro League - but does that really count for anything? The overall competitive standard in that league is so low that your gran could probably score goals there. He surely can't have been included just for his penalty-taking prowess,... can he? Dominic Calvert-Lewin and Danny Welbeck must be scratching their heads in dismay: they've both had outstanding domestic seasons and notched some good goals against proper defences. There might be reasonable question-marks over their consistency and resistance to injury, but on recent form they should certainly have been in consideration. I think the last forward slot should have gone to the outstanding Jarrod Bowen. The only possible logic I can see for this choice is that Tuchel may be considering using Kane in a deeper position and starting Watkins ahead of him as the central striker; and, if so, you can see why he'd want another forward of closely similar profile to Watkins as a back-up for him. (Though in that case, I would still have gone for Calvert-Lewin.) We shall see.
The really culpable errors
James Garner has had an outstanding season, and is clearly now our second-best holding midfield option; therefore, he was, I think, an absolutely essential pick as back-up for Elliot Anderson - and if Anderson should get injured, his omission might become one of our biggest regrets.
Morgan Gibbs-White has looked our most versatile and consistent central midfielder for the last few seasons; and I would have taken him to America ahead of Declan Rice (yes, I know what a great season he's had - but I stand by that: Rice is a jack-of-all-trades player, remarkably good at almost all aspects of the game.... but not quite the obvious first-choice for any one role or position) or Morgan Rogers, and certainly ahead of Jordan bloody Henderson.
Jarrod Bowen, I think, deserves a place for his workrate and his attitude, as well as for the fact that he offers a rather different profile to anyone else we have up front. I think that difference of style could prove valuable in games where we're still chasing a late goal. And in games (hopefully the majority!) where we're just sitting on a lead for the last 20 minutes, we can rely on his tenacious pressing to hinder an opponent from coming back at us. If he were being passed over for an obviously superior player, a player with an outstanding goalscoring record this season, then the decision would be less baffling; but to take Ivan Toney instead...?? That is a WTF?!
And of course, the really super-colossal blunder is leaving behind Cole Palmer - who is, quite simply, our best player,... and probably, in fact, the best playmaker in Europe. Tuchel's only proffered explanation seems to have been that "we don't need five No. 10s". No, indeed; but we probably do need to take at least three of them. And Palmer is by far the best of the candidates. Moreover, it is perfectly possible to play two '10s' (or 'false 9s') alongside each other. And most of our players who fit this role, like Palmer himself, are also able to operate a bit wider, coming in off the flanks; or, in the case of Bellingham and Gibbs-White, to play a bit deeper in central midfield. And ironically, two of the nominal No. 10s Tuchel has chosen... aren't really No. 10s at all: Bellingham is a sui generis play-anywhere-and-everywhere player, who's probably at his best breaking from deeper positions as an occasional late box-crasher; and Rogers, for Villa, generally starts out wide, and drifts into the half-space to attack the box, rather than dictating play from central areas. So, that 'too many to choose from' argument just doesn't hold water for me; there must be some other reason why our gaffer doesn't like him. But whatever it is, I think he's wrong; and this is the one selection decision that might cost us our chance of winning the tournament.
And finally.... my TWO unpopular exclusion suggestions!
Morgan Rogers and Declan Rice. Yes, I know, they're outstanding players, and I'm sure they'll do a decent job for us. It is looking rather as if Rogers, in fact, may be so favoured by Tuchel that he might be the preferred starter in the No. 10 role - even at the expense of Bellingham! But for me, he's just not quite good enough: he's had long spells at Villa - not just long passages in a game, but long runs of games - where he's been very ineffectual. He's not as good as Palmer or Eze at threading balls through into the box, he's not as good as Mainoo or Gibbs-White at carrying the ball forward through the midfield, he's not as good as Saka or Rashford at coming in off the wing to shoot at goal. And I wrote at some length about Rice the other day: I admire his qualities, but for me he's better as an attacking midfielder (and he just isn't going to get in contention there, because we have such a wealth of other talent - to the point where we can consider omitting the likes of Palmer and Foden and Bellingham!!); he has his shortcomings as a holding player, and for our central midfield positions, I'd much prefer Anderson and Garner, Mainoo and Wharton, Gibbs-White and even Bellingham.
It's not a terrible squad. And it's not that unexpected (apart from the omission of Palmer, and perhaps of Bowen). Let us cross our fingers and hope for the best!!!
More than 18 months ago, I did a lengthy piece here on the blog about why I was unconvinced that Trent Alexander-Arnold could usefully fit into the England set-up. Now, I'm going to risk even greater derision and disparagement by attempting to make a similar case about Declan Rice. (In fact, I recall that I already did so, in outline, in a post from last Spring about my thoughts on the likely development of the England squad under the first few years of Thomas Tuchel's stewardship.)
And as with Trent, it's largely about him not being a style of player who fits any need I can see in the England team. He is undoubtedly a very, very good player; and he's found a very particular niche in the current Arsenal team - where he has come to seem essential to their success. But that does not mean that he would also be essential - or even necessary or useful - to England's success at this summer's World Cup.
I said in that earlier post, actually, that I could see Rice retaining a place in the squad for his value as a utility player and his off-field leadership. But I've shifted my view on that now. And again, it's not for any reason to do with his attributes; I still rate him very highly for those qualities. But I am increasingly convinced that - in an ideal world - he wouldn't any longer be a starter for us. And I fret that he might be too big a personality to accept merely a bit-part role in the squad, to play the dressing-room cheerleader as selflessly as someone like Conor Coady did. Even if he would, there's a greater fear that his presence would nevertheless have a disruptive influence by acting as a focus for any public and media discontent with our performances; I can foresee that if Rice were with the squad - after the season he's just had for Arsenal - there would be constant lobbying from others to reinstate him in the starting line-up.
I mentioned in that earlier post that I worried that, like Harry Kane, Declan Rice had been unfortunately pigeonholed by his physique. For me, he's always looked much more effective as a progressive midfielder, pushing up into the final third and trying to make things happen around the edge of the opposing box. But because he's so physically imposing, he's almost always been lumbered with a more defensive role in central midfeld. And yet the funny thing is that, despite his excellent reading of the game and his sometimes incisive tackling,... he's just not actually all that good at a pure holding role in the middle - at least not on his own. He was fine supporting Soucek at West Ham, or Partey, and now Zubimendi at Arsenal; but when he has to try to control that central space on his own - as he was during Partey's long absences a couple of years ago - he often gets found out.
And I'm afraid that the decisive emergence of Elliot Anderson and James Garner this season should effectively punt him to the sidelines of England selection. They are simply much better at the nitty-gritty of the holding midfield role than Rice is. I think their progressive passing is rather better too. (Arteta, with his obsession with 'control' in games, has not given Rice much leeway to develop the more creative aspects of his game. Much of the time, he wants to draw more on his defensive qualities, even when he's pressing forward. But even more of the time, he just wants him to sit a bit deeper and maintain possession by playing the ball sideways all the time.... It is not developing his vision for the more probing ball forward.)
There are other weaknesses in his game too. He's not great on the turn, not strong when receiving the ball under pressure, facing his own goal, not great at spinning away from a harrying opponent to open up the chance to start carrying the ball upfield. Kobbie Mainoo's way better than him in those aspects of the game. And if we're looking for someone who can put in an effective shift in deeper midfield, but still offer more creative potential through their range of passing, then... I think we have to try to start making use of Adam Wharton,... or Morgan Gibbs-White, or maybe Alex Scott.
For me, Declan Rice is a bit of a jack-of-all-trades type: he's very, very good at almost everything - but he isn't quite the best at any one thing. (Well, perhaps at set-piece delivery. But I don't think someone gets into the England team just for that. And we do have other excellent options there: Palmer, Saka, Foden, Gibbs-White...)
Also, I feel that his greatest strengths are probably in the attacking third - but he hasn't been given full opportunity to develop this dimension to his game in a very conservative Arsenal playing style where he's more often expected to be the gatekeeper than a lock-picker. And again, good as he is, is he really going to get in contention for one of our more advanced midfield roles - in competition with Palmer, Bellingham, Saka, Eze, Rashford, etc.?? Sorry, but I just can't see it.
It is particularly difficult to write this after Rice has had such an outstanding season - a season where he might in fact lift the two biggest trophies in club football. (I wrote this a few days ago, before we'd seen if the Gameweek 37 matches might settle the Premier League title race, or if Arsenal might somehow be letting that trophy slip from their fingers...) I fully acknowledge that he's a great, great player, and that he's been playing sensational football this year. But he can be this great and still not quite be starting material for England: he's not our best holding midfielder (not even top three, I don't think), he's not our best option for a more creative central midfielder, and he's really not going to be considered among our top half dozen or so attacking midfield options.
So, absent an injury to Anderson or Garner or Mainoo or Wharton,... I wouldn't be taking Declan Rice to America this summer.
I'm pretty sure Tuchel will, and that he will probably start him alongside Anderson in a double-pivot. And I imagine that will work out OK; if... when we under-perform and crash out, it will probably be because Palmer or Bellingham or Kane or Saka, or one of the defenders, or even Jordan Pickford had a poor tournament, rather than some failing on Rice's part we could pin it on. But I still feel it would be a non-optimal selection, that our squad ought to be just that bit better without him.
Don't hate me, Arsenal fans. It's just an opinion.
I had thought that the England squad in the run-up to this summer's World Cup couldn't hold many - any?! - surprises. Thomas Tuchel and I seemed to be on pretty much exactly the same page in relation to the general approach and the particular selections. Heck, it had started to seem that, for once, maybe the whole country was on pretty much the same page: it looked as though the squad was essentially going to pick itself.
But where would be the fun in being the manager of England if you couldn't mess with people's heads just a little bit, stir up a bit of a kerfuffle among the punditry with a few.... surprising (baffling, irritating) choices of player?? And he's certainly done that with the current squad for the two warm-up friendlies against Uruguay and Japan over the next few days - effectively a 'long list' of 35 players, which will be whittled down into the 26 to go forward to the USA this summer. A few big names have been mercilessly spurned; while a few others have been given a slightly unexpected lifeline.
Nothing really too earth-shattering, but deserving of some brief comment, nevertheless.
And this is somewhat of a specialist topic of mine. Spurning, that is. Last month, atter being turned out of my current home with barely two-and-a-half weeks' notice by a bonkers landlady, I was left desperately scrabbling to find a new roof over my head in a matter of days. And the first four places I set my heart on... all spurned me. The nicest of them, in fact, initially accepted me; only 24 hours later was I sheepishly informed that the husband of the lady I'd spoken with had supposedly let the place to someone else behind her back on the same morning I'd gone for my viewing... With employment, it's become even worse: I have been turned down for every single job I've applied for in the last five years - must be several dozens of them now. At the end of last year, I somehow managed to get turned down for a trio of jobs in Myanmar; and, you know, it can't be easy to find folks who are willing to work in Myanmar at the moment, let alone who are able to relocate there at a moment's notice from a neighbouring country. (In fact, it's even worse than that: four quickfire spurnings for Myanmar jobs!! One of those employers actually invited me to reapply, and then blew me off again...) And, my oh my, I've lost count of the number of women over the years who've told me something like, "Oh, I wish you'd asked me out sooner - but I've just started seeing someone else."
So,.... the spurned and I have... an affinity.
Here, then, a quick review of Herr Tuchel's latest spurnings (and non-spurnings)....
Goalkeepers
Unexpected inclusions: Aaron Ramsdale, Jason Steele
Obviously the three for the actual World Cup squad does 'pick itself' in this position: Jordan Pickford is an unassailable first choice, Dean Henderson is by some margin the 'best of the rest', and Jamie Trafford is the promising young pretender. I have no gripe with these additional two per se. In fact, I'm really pleased to see Steele getting some recognition at last (there is talk that he's being lined up to go to America as a member of the coaching staff or practice partner on the goalkeeping team, rather than a member of the playing squad); he's a player I've long admired; but, you know, he hasn't really been a regular first team starter in a dozen years or so! And Ramsdale, for me, is a nearly-not-quite kind of player: many excellent qualities, but somehow seems to lack the 'star power' to make that final step up in rank; and, given that he has only very recently - and perhaps temporarily - displaced Nick Pope as the starter at Newcastle, he's not bringing a lot of top-flight experience with him. I would have preferred to give a vote of confidence to Pope, or to give a first taste of senior squad involvement to one of the young up-and-comers like Matthew Young or James Beadle.
Unexpected spurnings: Nich Pope
He has had a number of injury problems over the past few years. And he had made a few bad mistakes in recent games. But I suspect there's some other issue going on behind the scenes at St James's, some deeper injury issue or perhaps some kind of personal problem, because his performance level really didn't seem problematic enough to warrant dropping him - on the eve of a penultimate World Cup training camp. And Tuchel has included plenty of other players who are not current starters; so, that can't be the only reason poor Pepe didn't make the cut here. On ability and past experience, I feel Pepe deserved to remain a part of our squad - if only as a fringe selection who's never likely to get near a start (nor, with the rise of Trafford, even to make the final squad, in all probability); I fear there must be some other factor behind his exclusion.
Defenders
Unexpected inclusions: Harry Maguire, John Stones, Fikayo Tomori, Jarrell Quansah,... and Ben White!
I wouldn't dispute Maguire's inclusion on simple merit: he has been a giant of the England team for several years now; and he finally seems to be rediscovering something like his best form with Carrick's suddenly rejuvenated Manchester United. However,... I feel his time with England is past. Guehi and Konsa are now clearly, rightly, our default starting pair in central defence. And, after so many years of being the 'main man', I can't see Harry adapting to a peripheral 'cheerleader' role in the dressing room, in the manner of the extraordinarily selfless Conor Coady. Maybe it can be useful to have him involved at this training and preparation stage; and maybe it's a smart idea to keep him sweet, to keep him onboard, just in case we might need him as a starter in America because of injuries elsewhere. But I really can't see taking Maguire to the World Cup....
Similar qualms might apply to John Stones. But I'd be happier taking him along in the summer, because of his versatility as an all-around 'utility player', able to fill in at full-back or even as a holding midfield player, if we get hit by some awkward injuries. Moreover, I don't think he's such a 'big personality' in the dressing-room as Maguire, and after being on the sidelines so much at City in recent years, he's more likely to be able to accept a peripheral role in the squad with quiet good grace, and even perhaps with gratitude. It's just a pity that he's had so few first-team minutes this season.
It's nice to see Quansah and Tomori getting a look-in; proof that going to play on the continent, although it might remove you from the consciousness of the English sporting press and the public, need not exclude you from the England manager's thoughts (although Tomori hasn't got much of a look-in since he moved to Milan five years ago...). Quansah, in particular; I've always felt that he showed a lot of promise; and I think Slot's abrupt rejection of him may prove to have been one of his biggest blunders (along with spurning Harvey Elltiott, and pissing Mo Salah off; and buying Isak straight after buying Ekitike; and buying Frimpong and Kerkez when there was no obvious place for them in the squad or the style of play; and...); it's been great to see him blossoming since his move to Leverkusen this year. However, you suspect they might only be getting this chance because of the recent injuries to Reece James and Trevoh Chalobah; and probably neither will actually go to the World Cup. [And poor Quansah has apprently been denied his chance now, owing to a thigh-strain.]
I'm glad to see Ben White involved again at last - even if it is only after a long list of injury withdrwals. After such a long, self-imposed exile, it may be impossible for him to fully integrate himself again and regain the trust of teammates and fans. But, frankly. if Reece James isn't fit, he'd be starting for me! Diminiutive, injury-prone Livramento doesn't yet quite have the experience for the biggest stage, I don't think; Djed Spence neither; and we're short of other options in that position.
Justified spurning: Trent Alexander-Arnold
I went into some detail around 18 months ago why I felt Trent was not enough of an all-round player to fit in most teams, including the England one. Unfortunately, my view still hasn't changed. And a difficult first season at Real Madrid hasn't been the best platform to recommend himself to Tuchel. This is the decision which is going to most inflame the punditry, no doubt; but I think our manager is spot on. Not all great players have a place in the national team; they need to be a good tactical fit with the rest of the talents around them - and I don't think Trent can be that.
Unfortunate spurnings: Jarrad Branthwaite, Myles Lewis-Skelly
Branthwaite, I suppose, just hasn't had many minutes so far this season. But unless he's actually got a current injury problem, I would have included him here. He is the most promising young left-sided centre-back in the country (the best, really; since Guehi isn't naturally left-sided, has just fashioned himself a quirky niche role playing in that position off his wrong foot), and so needs to be developed as a potential starter, regular first-back up in that position. Lewis-Skelly just hasn't been given any minutes by Arteta this season; but he made such a promising start to his England career last year, I think there should be a case for keeping him involved as much as possible - even if he's doubtful for inclusion in the final squad.
Midfielders
Unexpected inclusions: Jordan Henderson, Phil Foden, Anthony Gordon
Henderson, I suppose, is still useful to have around as an elder statesman, involved for his experience and leadership presence, in this expanded, 'training camp' squad; but it would be a bit of a travesty if he went to the World Cup as well, when he clearly seems to be incapable of playing regular top-level football in closely back-to-back games any more.
I suppose I'm glad enough to see some loyalty being shown to Foden and Gordon, despite their thus-far very underwhelming seasons. However, I do worry that there is some serious underlying problem with Foden that causes Pep to keep dropping him; and, if there isn't, I fear this lack of confidence from his manager may have broken him. He has consistently failed to make an impact on the international stage for some years; and I can't see him deserving another chance now, in a World Cup, when he's obviously not likely to get near a start ahead of Palmer and Bellingham and Eze. Although I like Gordon's pace and attitude, he's had such a lacklustre season so far that he probably ought to lose out to Madueke, and even perhaps his clubmate Harvey Barnes, in the final squad - unless he finishes really hot over the remaining seven games.
Unfortunate spurnings: Alex Scott, Rico Lewis, Lewis Miley
I'm glad, at least, to see Adam Wharton get another call-up - although I rather fear that he'll be cut from the final 26-man squad. However, I think Alex Scott has been playing more than well enough for Bournemouth to merit inclusion again as well (he acquitted himself well enough in November's squad). Miley and Lewis, I suppose, haven't been getting enough first-team football with their clubs this year; but they are such outstanding talents that I would have liked to see them included in an expanded squad like this, to encourage their development for the future. If they can find a manager who will play them regularly, they should be in contention for the 2028 Euros, both terrific young players.
Culpable omission: Morgan Gibbs-White
OK, this is the one selection in this super-sized squad that really gets my blood boiling. There is a strong case that Gibbs-White should be the first back-up to Palmer in the No. 10 role for us - ahead of Morgan Rogers or Phil Foden. He certainly deserves to be given the chance to make that case in this squad.
Forwards
Unexpected inclusions: Dominic Calvert-Lewin, Dominic Solanke, Marcus Rashford
Solanke I can see: I like his pace, workrate, and versatility. Even though he's only just back from a long injury, and is having a torrid time with Championship-bound Spurs,... I think he is a profile of player we probably need in the squad. And I suppose it's again nice to show some loyalty to Marcus Rashford, after good service to England over a number of years. But, after a promising start at Barca, things seem to have slowed down for him rather; and he really hasn't been scoring many goals for them. And for me, I'm afraid, he's always going to fall uncomfortably between two stools: he has many of the elements of a great winger and of a great centre-forward... without actually being either one. Calvert-Lewin I just don't get; yes, he's probably having his best season ever - but it's still not quite good enough: he's inconsitent, injury-prone, and just not 'international class'.
Unfortunate spurnings: Ollie Watkins, Danny Welbeck
These two very nearly earned the 'culpable' tag as well! I think the omission of these two - in favour of the far less impressive Dominics - could prove costly to our World Cup campaign. Watkins has had a very subdued season; but I think that's been mainly down to Villa's patchy form and lack of regular service to him. He's still been working hard for the team, and looking sharp on the rare occasions when a decent chance has presented itself. He's a better complement to Harry Kane as a back-up option than any of the other contenders, I think; and he has a very promising rapport with Morgan Rogers, which could make the pair of them a dangerous substitution option in games where we're struggling to find a breakthrough. Welbeck has had a terrible injury record through the years, and, yes, he's getting a bit long in the tooth for international football now; but he's always been an outstanding striker, and he is having one of the best seasons of his career - he certainly deserved a chance here, over the perennially flakey Calvert-Lewin... or, probably, Rashford too.
So, not a terrible squad, by any means: very solid, and overall much as expected. But there are just a few rather dodgy choices - decisions that fill me with a slight unease about what might happen when it comes to naming the final World Cup squad.
I have a soft spot for Scotland and the Scots. Edinburgh is my favourite city on Earth, and I dream of retiring there one day.
I've always rather liked their national football team too. In my early childhood, England had an unfortunate habit of failing to qualify for the World Cup, so Scotland were the only 'home country' to root for in the tournament. And by the time England did manage to qualify again, in '82, I'd got rather used to following the Scots, and was actually inclined to root for them harder than 'my own team'. It probably also helped that Scotttish football was going through a 'golden age' in the '70s and '80s (the number of 'foreign players' at English clubs was strictly capped, but that rule didn't apply to the 'home countries', so there was a ready conduit for the best Scottish talent to move quickly to top English sides), and so their leading players were all familiar and beloved stars in the English First Division.
Also, my best drinking buddy from college, and one of my principal antagonists in FPL, is a proud Scot, so I always share in his joy, as well as feeling some of my own, when the Scotland football team does well.
And crikey, did they do well at Hampden on Tuesday night - securing a thrilling victory against a technically superior Danish side, to qualify them for the World Cup Finals for the first time in 28 years!! It was one of the most ecstatic football moments I've witnessed in many years. And I was very, very happy for my old friend - and for all other Scottish fans around the world.
But... it has bothered me rather that in so much of the subsequent commentary on the occasion, and in particular on the three remarkable goals which clinched the victory, people have been dubbing this result, or one of the three spectacular goals... The Greatest Moment in Scottish Football History.
Er, NO. Not unless you're a Very Young Person. It was a very great 'moment', certainly; ONE of 'The Greatest of All Time'.
But not The Greatest. Sorry, that's ALWAYS going to be this.,,, Stocky, diminutive, prematurely middle-aged-looking midfielder Archie Gemmill suddenly channels his inner Brazilian to improvise a swerving run from the edge of the box that leaves three Dutch defenders flat on their arses, and then hammers an exuberant finish into the roof of the net..... to put Scotland 3-1 up against The Netherlands at the World Cup (and they - the Dutch, that is - were the best team in that tournament, the best team in the world at that point; should, by rights, have won the Cup that year!).
That was the single most sublime moment in my football-watching life. And I don't think it will ever be topped.
Dear old Archie (still with us; now 78 years old) is not getting the respect and remembrance he deserves.
People have such short memories today!
[By the by, of the three wondergoals Scotland conjured last Tuesday, I like Kieran Tierney's the best. Overhead kicks and lobs from the half-way line are spectacular rarities, but they're essentially a bit hit-and-hope - they require a substantial element of luck. Tierney looked like he knew his shot was going in three or four paces out from hitting it!]
But this time, not only do we have a really exceptional crop of young players to choose from, we also seem to have a manager who may know what he's doing....
Top Youtube football analyst Adam Clery puts forward this bold thesis that, quite apart from tactical insight and astute man management, Thomas Tuchel might be unique among recent England managers in having the cojones to leave out some of our starriest players in order to achieve a better balance in the side.
I find it difficult to disagree too much with any of Adam's ideas - because he's a very shrewd observer of the game, and also an irresistibly likeable, down-to-earth chap. I'm kind of 50/50 on this one, though. I approve of the general point (it's exactly what I said when Tuchel first took over, about having the courage to regard no player as a sacred cow); and I'm very excited about the stability Elliot Anderson suddenly seems to be giving our central midfield. But you have to be a little bit wary of getting over-excited about our smooth progression through a particularly puny qualifying group (even teams that have looked vaguely threatening in recent years - Serbia, Albania - suddenly weren't again!!).
And I am not completely convinced about the current personnel - or the the notion of omitting major talents for this to become our regular starting lineup. I'd probably prefer to build for the next 10 years around Palmer and Bellingham (and Saka and Eze...), rather than go with a bunch of slightly less stellar options who 'fit better with Harry Kane' (for this one tournament!). But it's certainly something to think about.
"Intuition is cosmic fishing. You feel a nibble, then you've got to hook the fish." Richard Buckminster Fuller "We are ...
