Английн шигшээ багийн ахлагч Харри Кэйний талбай дээрх үүрэг оролцоо Дэлхийн аваргын тэмцээний дараа хурц шүүмжлэлийн бай болоод байна.
Дэлхийн аваргын хагас шигшээд Аргентинд хожигдсон тоглолтын дараа АНУ-ын ерөнхийлөгч Дональд Трамп Английн шигшээ баг тэргүүлж эхэлснийхээ дараа шилдэг довтлогчоо хамгаалалтын бүс рүү татсан нь тактикийн хувьд ер бусын алдаа байсан хэмээн байр сууриа илэрхийлжээ. Тоглолтын 55 дахь минутад гоол оруулсны дараа Томас Тухелийн удирдсан Англи хамгаалалтад шилжсэнээр Харри Кэйн довтолгооны бүсэд нөлөө үзүүлж чадалгүй, эсрэг багийн хаалга руу ганц ч удаа бөмбөг хүргэлгүй тоглолтыг өндөрлүүлсэн юм.
Харри Кэйн нь сонгодог довтлогчоос илүүтэй талбайн гүнд тоглож, дамжуулалт өгөх замаар довтолгоог зохион байгуулах дуртай тоглогч юм. Аргентины эсрэг тоглолтод тэрээр өөрийн талбайгаас урт дамжуулалт өгч, Энтони Гордоны гоолын эхлэлийг тавьсан нь түүний энэхүү олон талт ур чадварыг харуулсан ч баг нь ялагдал хүлээсэн нь энэхүү тактикийн маргааныг улам дэвэргэв.
Бавари Мюнхенд ч мөн адил үүрэг гүйцэтгэдэг Харри Кэйн өнгөрсөн улиралд 44 тоглолтод 50 гоол оруулсан нь түүнийг дэлхийн шилдэг тоглогчдын нэгээр үлдээж байна. Гэсэн хэдий ч Английн шигшээ багийн бүрэлдэхүүнд Жүүд Беллингхэм, Деклан Райс нарын дамжуулалтын хязгаарлагдмал боломжоос шалтгаалан Харри Кэйнийг гүнээс тоглохыг шаардах нь багийн довтолгооны хүчийг сулруулж байгаа гэх шүүмжлэл тасрахгүй байна.
Дэлгэрэнгүй эх сурвалжийг харах
Эх сурвалжийг нээх ↓
Donald Trump has involved himself in one of English football’s interminable debates.
Does Harry Kane, one of the great centre-forwards of his era, spend too much time outside the attacking areas?
Many people in England believe so and have blamed that tendency for the team’s failure to realise its tournament potential. Now, that side of that argument has a new member: the President of the United States.
“You have a great player in England who I’ve played golf with. And he is Harry [Kane] who has been fantastic,” Trump said, at a pre-final news conference alongside Gianni Infantino.
“I think they perhaps made a mistake when they made him a defensive player. What do I know about soccer? They took the lead, and they took their best player and put him on defence.
“We got to be a little offensive, right. But no, I’m not going to call it, what do I know about coaching? But that was a little unusual.”
Trump was referencing England’s semi-final defeat to Argentina. After taking the lead in the 55th minute, Thomas Tuchel’s side retreated, surrendered possession, and attempted to defend for the rest of the game.
In American football terms: it was a prevent defence and it has proven wildly unpopular.
For Kane, the captain, it meant that he had no attacking influence on the rest of the game. He made a few clearances, blocked a shot, and helped England defend aerially. For most players, that would be circumstantial — a consequence of a coaching decision — and yet this was a theme of Kane’s entire game (during which he had one shot and had no touches inside the Argentinian penalty area) and has been a mainstream grievance for much of his 121-cap international career.
He plays deep. He involves himself in early phases of possession. Instead of always being used at the tip of the formation, where you would find a forward like Erling Haaland, the 32-year-old Kane is often used as a receiving option in midfield or to shift the focus of attack via his long-range passing.
Before everything went wrong against Argentina, there was a fine example. At the beginning of the move that led to Anthony Gordon’s goal, Kane received ball from Reece James deep in his own half, shown on the screenshot below.
He took a touch and whistled a long-range pass upfield, stretching the Argentinian defence and forcing Nicolas Tagliafico (below) into a botched clearance. Declan Rice (circled) then recovered the ball, beginning the second phase of a move from which England scored.
Kane is an unusually gifted player. He’s both a world-class goalscorer and an outstanding playmaker. In the instance above, his raking pass created a goal from what was originally a one-on-four situation in Argentina’s favour. None of Kane’s contemporaries would have been in position to play that pass, or been able to had they been so. Not Erling Haaland, not Robert Lewandowski, Kylian Mbappe or Cristiano Ronaldo in his prime.
So, his diversity has tremendous value, but it also tends to be where criticism is aimed when England fail.
As per President Trump’s “defensive player” comments, that has proven to be the case again. And easy as it is to dismiss Trump’s footballing opinions, there are many in England who agree, albeit with more compelling arguments.
Are they right?
Some context first. Kane has never been an orthodox forward. At no point in his career, from his breakthrough at Tottenham in 2014 to the present day, has he ever been a penalty box-dwelling goalscorer. That tendency to roam from his position and combine with his teammates has always been part of his game. The trait has become more pronounced over time, as he has aged, but every coach he has had, at club or international level, has used him in a similar way.
That’s currently the case at Bayern Munich, for whom he plays an even broader role than he does for England. It’s common to see him receive passes in the position shown above, or deeper, and to create chances in the same way. In last season’s Champions League semi-final first leg, Bayern lost 5-4 to Paris Saint-Germain; it was one of the games of the European season and it featured this goal from Luis Diaz, created by — yes — Kane dropping deep and flighting a pass over the PSG defence.
Dig through Bayern’s season and there are all sorts of attacking moves which depended, initially, on something he did far away from goal. He also scored 50 times from a combined 44 appearances in the Bundesliga and Champions League, so it was not coming at any obvious cost, either. In fact, Kane’s influence on his club side was so profound that before the World Cup, he was considered a candidate for the Ballon d’Or, football’s highest individual honour.
England’s semi-final elimination will take him out of contention, but he is still considered one of the best players in the world precisely because of this breadth. As such, condensing all that value into a traditional forward role seems like a misallocation of resources. Bayern were able to beat Real Madrid with Kane playing in the same way. They came very close to beating PSG, now back-to-back European champions.
England’s use of Kane is really necessitated by their spread of attributes. At this tournament and several previously, their attack has been built from dynamic wide forwards and a group of midfielders that, while talented, does not possess the widest range of passing ability. Declan Rice, Elliot Anderson and Jude Bellingham are all excellent players, but Rice and Bellingham progress the ball by carrying it, and while Anderson’s passing can be incisive, it tends to be over a short or medium range.
Within that kind of team, Kane certainly needs to occupy positions that allow him to take the chances that should fall to a centre-forward. His header against DR Congo, for instance. However, he is one of very few players in this England squad capable of driving passes accurately and effectively over long distance. That is a key weapon in creating space, even if it only exists in theory. It is a clumsy comparison, for non-football fans, but consider an NFL quarterback incapable of throwing a deep ball. If that option is not there, it’s very limiting and that, roughly, would be among the problems England would face.
Kane and England were eliminated by Argentina (Juan Mabromata/AFP via Getty Images)
It means that the cost of positioning Kane exclusively in attack is to effectively make the team more blunt and, most likely, reduce the impact of both the wide forwards (Anthony Gordon and Morgan Rogers) and the midfielders who profit from running beyond Kane. It’s similar at Bayern, where the attacking mechanics simply do not work without Kane’s involvement.
Still, this is a debate for a reason. Could Kane have performed a modified form of that role at this World Cup, dropping deep less frequently and more often being a traditional, physical outlet high up the pitch? Perhaps. Having that utility against Argentina, which might have allowed England an avenue up the pitch, certainly sounds preferable in hindsight. And yet that ignores how valuable Kane is behind the ball, as a robust defender.
Round and round; it’s a problem without a proper solution. More so because, whatever complaints may be aimed at Kane’s positional tendencies, nobody has scored more than his 82 goals for England. With years left in his career, nobody is ever likely to.
But then this is English football’s version of a conundrum that exists in every sport. Whenever there is irregular talent, someone capable of breaking their role’s conventions, there are arguments about conforming to orthodoxy.
Forwards score goals. Forwards should be in the penalty box.
Given his age, Harry Kane might never play at another World Cup, and his chance to end England’s 60-year pursuit of that trophy could be over. But this issue, which somehow now has Donald Trump as a participant, will never be resolved.
