England, the end of celebrity and why it matters

England expects. But perhaps not quite as much as it used to. After the fraught days of the Golden Generation, of the lunacy of Baden-Baden where you could sit on the terrace at the art gallery and watch paparazzi chasing WAGs and their personal trainers through the park, of the endless fretting about fractured metatarsals and the inevitable disappointments, the build-up to Euro 2016 feels happily low-key. The celebrity culture that dogged the England national team for years is gone, not because of any recalibration of the national mindset, but because the players just aren’t that famous any more.

Skimming down Roy Hodgson’s players for the friendlies against Germany and Netherlands, what stands out is how few are guaranteed a place. Even though Hodgson specifically said last week that Wayne Rooney is not assured of a starting role, the assumption is that if he is fit he will be (although whether that justifiable is another matter).

Other than that, only Joe Hart – now out of the squad with a calf injury – can be absolutely confident of starting when England’s Euro 2016 campaign gets underway against Russia in Marseille on June 11.

For Hodgson the uncertainty represents both a challenge and an opportunity. He at least, though, should be able to avoid the problem that eventually overwhelmed Sven-Goran Eriksson of having half a dozen undroppable players who didn’t fit in a coherent system, while everybody blithely insisted that talented players would find a way to play together.

Michael Owen, Wayne Rooney and David Beckham could have played quite happily together in a 4-4-2, but that meant Frank Lampard and Steven Gerrard in central midfield, two players who could have dovetailed neatly with a holding player behind them in a 4-3-3 but who lacked the defensive nous to play in the middle of a four-man midfield. And that’s to say nothing of poor Paul Scholes, cast out in an unfamiliar position on the left that he clearly didn’t like and was probably a factor in his premature international retirement.

Hodgson has no such stars. He can focus on balance knowing he can leave out anybody without there being any great backlash. He can pick a team based on form and fitness – even if there are worrying hints that he will take Jack Wilshere if the Arsenal midfielder shows any sign of recovering from his ankle injury. And Hodgson has the lesson of the World Cup to demonstrate what happens if he deviates from his basic principles.

In the March before the World Cup, England played a friendly at Wembley against Denmark. Hodgson fielded a 4-3-3 with Wilshere, Gerrard and Jordan Henderson behind Daniel Sturridge, Rooney and Raheem Sterling. It wasn’t particularly sophisticated, using weight of numbers to protect the back four in the absence of a natural holding player, and the game was stultifyingly dull.

England looked solid – against an admittedly unambitious side – and won 1-0 but everybody was so bored that it prompted a welter of criticism. This followed something of a theme: after a 0-0 draw away to Ukraine that left England in control of the group, Hodgson bounded into the press-conference, clearly expecting to be praised for his tactical acumen, only to find himself facing accusations of negativity.

So Hodgson allowed himself to be swayed. By the time of the pre-World Cup friendlies in the USA, he had moved one of the three midfielders further forward so 4-3-3 became 4-2-3-1. In the tournament itself, Henderson and Gerrard played as the two midfielders. Neither naturally sits in front of the back four, and the shortfall in that area was arguably the largest single factor in England’s defeats to Italy and Uruguay.

Throughout qualifying for the Euros, Hodgson has stuck to the 4-3-3. There have been slight tweaks with the shape: sometimes Sterling playing behind two forwards, sometimes a winger and two central players, sometimes a more orthodox and symmetrical line of three forwards, but he has always sought to protect the back four. That suggests determination not to repeat the error of the World Cup: the defence was always protected, even though in the qualifiers England dominated possession in a way they may not – and may not want to – in the tournament itself.

With the exception of the Switzerland games and, perhaps, the away match against Slovenia, England’s task in qualifying was to break down opponents who packed men behind the ball. That will not be the case in France – and that might be to England’s advantage.

The obvious strength of this England is their pace in forward areas: Sterling, Danny Welbeck, Jamie Vardy and Sturridge are all rapid – as is Theo Walcott, although his form is such that it’s hard to make a case for his inclusion. It was exploiting that that led to the two goals away against the Swiss. There may still be those who would prefer England to play as though it were 100 years ago and they were still supreme, looking to dominate every game they play, but if Hodgson plays to their strengths, he will look to sit deep, frustrate opponents and strike on the counter.

As to who the personnel will be, that’s rather trickier. Eric Dier’s emergence this season means he is the only natural holding player in the squad, so, form and fitness permitting, he should probably start as the anchor. His relationship with Dele Alli and the 18-year-old’s ability to spring forward from deep, linking back to front and transforming 4-3-3 to 4-2-3-1 makes him a likely starter. Completing the midfield three England then need a shuttler, somebody prepared to do the unglamorous work and plug holes.

Henderson looks like the man in possession, but James Milner or a fit Fabian Delph could probably perform the role just as well (Mark Noble’s omission from the squad is an indication of how many solid if not spectacular options England have in central midfield).

The front three then seems a case of selecting a centre-forward – Rooney or Harry Kane – with two flyers alongside him. Again, there are a wealth of options allowing Hodgson to select on form and fitness rather than worrying about celebrity and reputation.

This is an England squad lacking star quality, but that might be their greatest strength.