England Men’s National Team In 2006 World Cup. By Bobbie (http://www.flickr.com/photos/bojo/175804868/) [CC BY 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
With a national men’s team that, despite having talent like Wayne Rooney and Frank Lampard, hasn’t won a major international tournament since 1966, one would expect that the British would have changed up their approach to football (Murphy). Alas, there hasn’t been much change in their style despite heartbreaking loss after heartbreaking loss. Route One can’t keep up with the more refined styles of countries like Spain (Clark). News outlets have been decrying the state of British football for years and the public disappointment mounts with each tournament exit. Still, no change. David Winner, the author of Brilliant Orange, a study of Dutch culture and football, remarked, “They’ve been losing that way for 60 years”. Many believe that the importance that the English place upon toughness, hard work, and aggression prevents their players from developing a more well-rounded approach to their favorite sport (Murphy).
For centuries, the soldier has been the epitome of British values. They want their citizens to be disciplined, unrelenting, and fierce in everything they do and expect no less from their footballers. British media outlets often refer to their players as soldiers or fighters. Soldiers are supposed to serve as a component of a greater machine. Soldiers need not be creative. Soldiers need not step up as individuals and do something out of the ordinary. This mentality can still be clearly seen in the way they play the game of football (Murphy).
Another reason that the British have been so resistant to change playing styles is because they fear that a more possession oriented style will not sit well with Premier League fans. British football fanatics have become accustomed to seeing a high-octane, full-contact game. How would they react to see a possession oriented team knock the ball around for 20 minutes at a time? According to David Winner, and myself, they would hate it. It’s everything they don’t want to see happen on the pitch. Teams would run the risk of having less attendance at games, lower viewership numbers, and less money because of it (Murphy). However, is the resurrection of the national program worth slightly lower ratings for little bit? That’s the golden question for now. The Brits are looking to make changes in their youth development system to give young players the dribbling and passing skills needed to play a more free-flowing game. Time will only tell if the British are ready to get off of Route One.
The way that the British played to win the 1966 World Cup isn’t much different from the way they play now.
How to Cite this page: “England’s Route One: Old Habits Die Hard”, Written by Andrew Jordan(2016). Olympic Football 2016 Guide, Soccer Politics Blog, Duke University, http://sites.duke.edu/wcwp/tournament-guides/olympic-football-2016-guide/team-playing-styles-in-soccer/englands-route-one/route-one-old-habits-die-hard, (accessed on (date)).
