Post by Salem6 on Sept 14, 2004 17:08:30 GMT
The great European question: why do English clubs fail in Champions' League?
Glenn Moore
14 September 2004
sport.independent.co.uk/football/european/story.jsp?story=561474
Whether the recollection is Ole Gunnar Solskjaer's winner, Bayern's Sammy Kuffour prostrate in despair or the celebrations of David May the only certainty is that the memory is fading. It is now five years since Manchester United became the ninth and last English club to lift the European Cup and the Premiership's continuing failure to justify its self-billing as the "best league in the world" is becoming embarrassing.
Back in the monochrome days of the Football League, English clubs dominated Europe. From 1975 to the Heysel disaster of 1985 only two of 11 finals did not have English representation and seven of those ended in triumph.
Heysel led to a six-year ban which was blamed for English clubs' struggle to reassert themselves upon their return - though the ability of European clubs, always technically superior, to match English endeavour was equally significant. A generation on in football terms Premiership clubs continue to underachieve. United's triumph is the only final appearance since the Champions' League and Premier League were each launched in 1992. That record has been exceeded by the leagues of Spain, Germany, Italy, France and the Netherlands and matched by Portugal.
As Arsenal, Chelsea, Manchester United and Liverpool this week take their first steps towards the 25 May final in Istanbul it is time to ask why English clubs have as much trouble with Europe as the Conservative Party.
Among an array of respected observers canvassed for their opinions, one who hopes to be confronting the problem head on tonight is Joe Cole, the Chelsea and England midfielder. Cole is a thoughtful critic of the tactics employed by English teams, and feels this is at the heart of their failure.
"I think we don't do well in Europe, and on the world stage, because when you play against good teams you have to be able to keep the ball," Cole says. "A lot of English teams play 4-4-2 and it is both difficult to keep the ball, and to get it back, because you have no one breaking between the lines, playing in front of the back four and in the hole behind the strikers.
"That's what foreign clubs have been doing to us for the last 10 to 15 years. Ever since I was playing for England from Under-15s you would play against good international sides and it would seem like they had five or six players more than you in midfield. But our football is evolving with the foreigners who have come into the game. That's the way we play at Chelsea and we keep the ball very well."
Chelsea reached the semi-final last season but most pundits regard England's strongest contenders as Arsenal and are mystified as to why they have not proved it.
Former player David O'Leary, who took Leeds to the semi-finals, and his old mentor, George Graham, who took Arsenal to European Cup-Winners' Cup success in 1994, have both professed surprise. Searching for a reason Graham said: "They play the same way whoever they are up against. On the continent managers come up against new problems and have learnt to counter it. When we lost 5-2 at home to Benfica [in the 1992 European Cup] I thought 'I'll learn from that' and when we won the Cup-Winners' we beat some of the best sides in Europe at the time. On certain games Arsenal need to sit back and have a different strategy."
It seems they may do so. At the weekend Wenger said his team would be more patient at home. Brazilian midfielder Gilberto Silva added: "We need to play differently. We need to be more intelligent about our game. If you try to attack all the time in Europe you give big teams and big players space. But if you just sit back they'll kill you as well. You need the balance. You need good possession football, to be building with the ball, pass, pass, pass, then at the right moment do something special."
David Pleat, the former Tottenham manager, who has covered a lot of English clubs' European failures in his media work, developed this theme: "The game has changed. It used to be that possession was nine-tenths of the law. It is now accepted that the speed you get players forward on the break is the key. The best example is Arsenal. They come out of defence with the ball and suddenly there are three or four players advancing on your area.
"Continental teams keep the ball better. Our game is quick, quick, quick, not slow, slow, quick, quick. They are better at controlling the ball from an early age, they learn when and where to break. We are not good at holding on to a lead.
"You have to show your supremacy, tell the opposition you're in command the way Gazza did. Keep the ball, but do it with a purpose. The Continentals are more relaxed. The English game is frenetic because the crowds are close to the pitch and that transmits itself to the players. They induce pace. They do not allow what they perceive to be slacking.
"The Italian game is like chess. They and the Spanish understand when to drop off and slow it down, when to seize the opportunity and push forward."
Ian Rush, a finalist at Heysel and a coach at Liverpool before taking up his present post as manager of Chester City, agreed that "foreign teams come here and seem to know what to do", but added: "We're getting there. Manchester United only lost to Porto in the last minute and they went on to win it.
"I think the English teams will be strong this year," added Rush. "The important thing is to keep a clean sheet at home. We have players who are capable of scoring goals away. One group stage and more knock-out rounds should suit English clubs better. It was all knock-out when English clubs were winning it."
Ironically it is the knock-out stages where English clubs have struggled. United have won once in six ties since Barcelona and four in 10 overall while Arsenal have won one in three. Failure to keep a clean sheet is usually the reason. "Defending in England still leaves a lot to be desired," added Graham.
"The Continental teams defend deep and in numbers like Internazionale did at Highbury [in winning 3-0 last season]. They soak up pressure and counter-attack. Remember that United-Real game which everyone waxed lyrical about [Real won 4-3]. It was entertaining but you can't win the cup if you concede that many goals. That was the year the Italians had both teams in the final. It wasn't pretty to watch but they played to win."
Stuck in mid-table
Record of English clubs since 1992
English clubs were allowed back in the European Cup from the 1991/ 92 season (though English teams were in the Uefa Cup from 1990/1991). This is the record of the leading European countries since then:
Nation W F S-F Total
5pts 3pts 1pt
Spain 4 3 6 35
Italy 3 5 2 32
Germany 2 2 3 19
France 1 1 4 12
Netherlands 1 1 1 9
England 1 0 4 9
Portugal 1 0 1 6
Yugoslavia 0 0 1 1
Czech Rep 0 0 1 1
Sweden 0 0 1 1
Scotland 0 0 1 1
Greece 0 0 1 1
Ukraine 0 0 1 1
Glenn Moore
14 September 2004
sport.independent.co.uk/football/european/story.jsp?story=561474
Whether the recollection is Ole Gunnar Solskjaer's winner, Bayern's Sammy Kuffour prostrate in despair or the celebrations of David May the only certainty is that the memory is fading. It is now five years since Manchester United became the ninth and last English club to lift the European Cup and the Premiership's continuing failure to justify its self-billing as the "best league in the world" is becoming embarrassing.
Back in the monochrome days of the Football League, English clubs dominated Europe. From 1975 to the Heysel disaster of 1985 only two of 11 finals did not have English representation and seven of those ended in triumph.
Heysel led to a six-year ban which was blamed for English clubs' struggle to reassert themselves upon their return - though the ability of European clubs, always technically superior, to match English endeavour was equally significant. A generation on in football terms Premiership clubs continue to underachieve. United's triumph is the only final appearance since the Champions' League and Premier League were each launched in 1992. That record has been exceeded by the leagues of Spain, Germany, Italy, France and the Netherlands and matched by Portugal.
As Arsenal, Chelsea, Manchester United and Liverpool this week take their first steps towards the 25 May final in Istanbul it is time to ask why English clubs have as much trouble with Europe as the Conservative Party.
Among an array of respected observers canvassed for their opinions, one who hopes to be confronting the problem head on tonight is Joe Cole, the Chelsea and England midfielder. Cole is a thoughtful critic of the tactics employed by English teams, and feels this is at the heart of their failure.
"I think we don't do well in Europe, and on the world stage, because when you play against good teams you have to be able to keep the ball," Cole says. "A lot of English teams play 4-4-2 and it is both difficult to keep the ball, and to get it back, because you have no one breaking between the lines, playing in front of the back four and in the hole behind the strikers.
"That's what foreign clubs have been doing to us for the last 10 to 15 years. Ever since I was playing for England from Under-15s you would play against good international sides and it would seem like they had five or six players more than you in midfield. But our football is evolving with the foreigners who have come into the game. That's the way we play at Chelsea and we keep the ball very well."
Chelsea reached the semi-final last season but most pundits regard England's strongest contenders as Arsenal and are mystified as to why they have not proved it.
Former player David O'Leary, who took Leeds to the semi-finals, and his old mentor, George Graham, who took Arsenal to European Cup-Winners' Cup success in 1994, have both professed surprise. Searching for a reason Graham said: "They play the same way whoever they are up against. On the continent managers come up against new problems and have learnt to counter it. When we lost 5-2 at home to Benfica [in the 1992 European Cup] I thought 'I'll learn from that' and when we won the Cup-Winners' we beat some of the best sides in Europe at the time. On certain games Arsenal need to sit back and have a different strategy."
It seems they may do so. At the weekend Wenger said his team would be more patient at home. Brazilian midfielder Gilberto Silva added: "We need to play differently. We need to be more intelligent about our game. If you try to attack all the time in Europe you give big teams and big players space. But if you just sit back they'll kill you as well. You need the balance. You need good possession football, to be building with the ball, pass, pass, pass, then at the right moment do something special."
David Pleat, the former Tottenham manager, who has covered a lot of English clubs' European failures in his media work, developed this theme: "The game has changed. It used to be that possession was nine-tenths of the law. It is now accepted that the speed you get players forward on the break is the key. The best example is Arsenal. They come out of defence with the ball and suddenly there are three or four players advancing on your area.
"Continental teams keep the ball better. Our game is quick, quick, quick, not slow, slow, quick, quick. They are better at controlling the ball from an early age, they learn when and where to break. We are not good at holding on to a lead.
"You have to show your supremacy, tell the opposition you're in command the way Gazza did. Keep the ball, but do it with a purpose. The Continentals are more relaxed. The English game is frenetic because the crowds are close to the pitch and that transmits itself to the players. They induce pace. They do not allow what they perceive to be slacking.
"The Italian game is like chess. They and the Spanish understand when to drop off and slow it down, when to seize the opportunity and push forward."
Ian Rush, a finalist at Heysel and a coach at Liverpool before taking up his present post as manager of Chester City, agreed that "foreign teams come here and seem to know what to do", but added: "We're getting there. Manchester United only lost to Porto in the last minute and they went on to win it.
"I think the English teams will be strong this year," added Rush. "The important thing is to keep a clean sheet at home. We have players who are capable of scoring goals away. One group stage and more knock-out rounds should suit English clubs better. It was all knock-out when English clubs were winning it."
Ironically it is the knock-out stages where English clubs have struggled. United have won once in six ties since Barcelona and four in 10 overall while Arsenal have won one in three. Failure to keep a clean sheet is usually the reason. "Defending in England still leaves a lot to be desired," added Graham.
"The Continental teams defend deep and in numbers like Internazionale did at Highbury [in winning 3-0 last season]. They soak up pressure and counter-attack. Remember that United-Real game which everyone waxed lyrical about [Real won 4-3]. It was entertaining but you can't win the cup if you concede that many goals. That was the year the Italians had both teams in the final. It wasn't pretty to watch but they played to win."
Stuck in mid-table
Record of English clubs since 1992
English clubs were allowed back in the European Cup from the 1991/ 92 season (though English teams were in the Uefa Cup from 1990/1991). This is the record of the leading European countries since then:
Nation W F S-F Total
5pts 3pts 1pt
Spain 4 3 6 35
Italy 3 5 2 32
Germany 2 2 3 19
France 1 1 4 12
Netherlands 1 1 1 9
England 1 0 4 9
Portugal 1 0 1 6
Yugoslavia 0 0 1 1
Czech Rep 0 0 1 1
Sweden 0 0 1 1
Scotland 0 0 1 1
Greece 0 0 1 1
Ukraine 0 0 1 1