Soccer’s Greatest Myth

The biggest myth in the game of soccer is the presumed relationship between the quality of a domestic league and the quality of a national team. Nowhere on earth is that myth more zealously purported than in the US. And given the quality of results we’ve seen last month from MLS teams against international opponents, the inevitable round of nonsensical predictions about the impact these results will have on the US Men’s national team is in full force.

From the MLS All-Star victory over Chelski, to DC United’s 4-0 shellacking of Celtic and 1-1 draw against Real Madrid, the unbearable punditry postulations are flowing like unruly away supporters from a tear-gassed section of the stands. An unfortunate side-effect of the current deluge of soccer available on US television, is the commensurate barrage of idiotic commentary from American analysts who are either ignorant of soccer's greatest myth, or just plain ignorant.

The theory goes as follows: in order to have a strong national team, you need a strong domestic league that serves as a convenient feeder of quality players, which translates into to success in international competitions. This theory, which upon examination is so vigorously sold around the world, not just in the US, one wonders who is responsible for its perpetuation and for what purpose.

Let’s start with the supposed best leagues in the world today in no particular order:

The EPL (England)
La Liga (Spain)
Serie A (Italy)
The Bundesliga (Germany)
Ligue 1 (France)
Eredivisie (Holland)

At first glance, the myth rings true, since next to the names of the leagues are some of the best national teams in the world. But curiously absent are a few countries that are perennial favorites for every international tournament they enter, as well as a few notable absences that have actually won something with rather mediocre leagues and a few anomalies to the theory that bear explanation, and we'll get to later.

The following is the first installment in a series of posts that dispels the greatest myth in soccer, provides an explanation for why it isn’t true, and concludes with some ideas of what actually makes a great footballing nation that consistently or even just periodically, challenges for international titles. Ultimately, the last post will examine MLS, the US national team, and what, if any, ought to be the relationship between the two, and why it’s currently so out of synch.

The Problem with England

The problem with England is that it's probably the only country in the world whose media and out of control PR black hand, by their hype of anything they can get their hands on, contribute to unreasonable epxectations, unbearable pressure and one big failure after another. By far the biggest example of the league to national team myth is the EPL, the old English First Division, and the England team. Remember that England haven’t won anything in 40 years (1 World Cup on home soil - nothing before and nothing since), while the EPL, according to an audit by Deloitte & Touche in 2002 accounts for 25% of all profits in European football. One explanation of why England have failed so miserably internationally, despite having the most financially successful league in the world, is that the EPL, in terms of footballing quality is simply over-rated.

Now anyone who’s ever suffered through 90 minutes of an EPL classic between Wolverhampton Wanderers and Southampton may commiserate. But inconvenient to this explanation is the fact that Manchester United and Liverpool have both won the European Cup in the last 7 years, and English teams have been in the European Cup semi-finals or quarter-finals every year since the 1996-1997 season. Modern economic considerations aside, it is on historical analysis that this theory really falls on its face.

Consider that between 1974 and 1985, long before the EPL began, English teams won an astounding six European Cups in a row, 7 out 11, and an equally impressive 9 final appearances, between Liverpool, Nottingham Forest, Aston Villa and Leeds United (Liverpool won 4 of 5 finals in which they played, while Leeds played in and lost their lone final in 1974 to the great Ajax team). So from all that interational pedigree and all that success, what exactly did the England team win in that period? You guessed it, a nice hot cup of jack squat.

Now the cynic would suggest that the best players in those Liverpool teams weren't even English. A sampling of the Liverpool stars from that period suggests as much (Kenny Dalglish, Alan Hansen and Graeme Souness are Scottish, John Toshack and Ian Rush are Welsh, not to mention all the Irishmen). You may also say that the EPL is currently overloaded with foreign talent, English players don’t make up the best teams in the EPL, and thus the national team doesn’t stand to benefit from the success of those teams. But take a look at the following list of players, and ask yourself what international manager wouldn't like to get his hands on the following players:

Wayne Rooney
Paul Robinson
Gary Neville
Ashley Cole
Sol Campbell
Jamie Carragher
John Terry
Rio Ferdinand
Steven Gerrard
Frank Lampard
Joe Cole
Jermaine Jenas
Aaron Lennon
Peter Crouch
Michael Carrick

What do these players have in common? They were all regulars in the top 5 teams in the EPL. In fact, that list doesn’t give the entire picture, there are more players not included, in this list, that either came from the EPL (David Beckham) and/or are in teams not in the top 5 (Michael Owen), or just weren't even included in the National team at all (Jermain Defoe, Shaun Wright Phillips). You could argue that this is, in fact, an embarrassment of riches - and you'd be right.

Curiously, the best English players on the best English teams, are precisely the players who have miserably under-achieved for England. Frankie “Four Fingers” Lampard didn’t see a shot he didn’t like in Germany – he also never saw his name on the scorer’s sheet, despite playing every minute of every game for England, and literally taking more shots than anyone in the tournament. And while Gerrard made a good account of himself in the first 3 games, he faltered in the knock-out stages. For that matter, who can forget his ghastly give away to Thierry Henry that cost England a point against France in Portugal 2004. Joe Cole looked great for about 15 minutes against Sweden, and Becks was his usual useless self for all but the 60 seconds he spent taking every free kick awarded to England for 5 games. Rooney got himself sent off when it counted, as did Beckham in France 1998. In fact, thanks to the extraordinary David Seaman’s very ordinary positionary sense (a la Peter Shilton in 1990) in Korea/Japan 2002, England squandered a chance to overcome a 10-man Brazil team. This is by no means a complete list; it's merely a taste of the littany of failures for the England team at major international competitions.

Frankly, what looks like a choke, acts like a choke and sounds like a choke is…well a choke. And that’s precisely what England players have given us since 1966. Don’t believe me? How many penalty shoot-outs have England won in international competition? How many England players regularly take penalties for their clubs? The answers: none and a lot, and 2 of them missed theirs in Germany 2006 against Portugal. Here a choke, there a choke; choke, choke everywhere.

Ol’ McEngland had a team that can't pull it off when it counts – and that’s why, despite having some of the best players, in the best league in the world they haven’t won the big one. Any big one. Can that change? Sure, but does it have anything to do with the quality of the league? Absolutely not: it has to do with the character of their players, or more precisely the lack thereof in the clutch. Every great international team has had one or more great players that rose to the occasion and lifted their team to the promised land – every great international team except England’s, that is.