England: 5 key questions to answer ahead of last 16 clash with Mexico | OneFootball

England labored to a 2-1 victory over DR Congo in a game that threatened to humiliate new coach Thomas Tuchel and make a mockery of the English FA’s decision to extend his contract just before the World Cup.

After a dismal first 20 minutes – or first quarter as the US broadcasters would prefer us to say – they had barely put a foot right. Overrun by a high-energy and surprisingly ambitious DR Congo side, they trailed to a shot by Brian Cipenga following a swift and devastating counter attack.

It was better after the hydration break – as has so often been seen at this World Cup for teams struggling to get a foothold in games. They are not hydrations breaks as we all know by now, but a chance for advertisers and coaches alike to have their say.

England were better but thwarted several times by the excellent Lionel Mpasi in the DRC goal. And as the game plodded on, England fans were wondering whether this would be the most embarrassing result in the team’s history.

Kane to the rescue

But as ever Harry Kane came to the rescue, sparing Tuchel’s blushes and probably his job with two expert finishes that puts him on 5 goals for the tournament and tied second in the golden boot race.

The first was an excellent finish, out thinking and out smarting the static Axel Tuanzebe to power home a header from substitute Anthony Gordon’s deft chipped cross.

The second was even better. Gordon again supplied the striker with a cute reverse ball, before Kane made room away from two defenders before lashing the ball at an astonishing 112 kph (70 mph) on the turn into the roof of the net. It was a truly extraordinary finish.

Lessons to learn

As the team heads off to the vociferous and high altitude Azteca Stadium, home of their famous Diego Maradona Hand of God defeat in 1986 (although his second goal was one of the best ever World Cup goals), Tuchel and his team have some hard thinking to do.

Here are five of the key questions that need answering:

1. What is happening at right back?

It is England’s Achilles’ Heel and raises serious questions about Tuchel’s squad selection. Choosing Reece James and Tino Livremento as his right backs was a huge risk. Both have had seasons massively impacted by injury. And guess what? Both are injured. Livramento flew home before a ball was kicked but instead of recruiting a specialist centre half Tuchel drafted Trevor Chalobah, a centre half. It made no sense. Now England are playing their fourth choice right back, and for the closing stages against DRC, their first choice midfielder.

The dilemma is that Declan Rice looked better than all the others before him. He’s played there for Arsenal a few times, and not only was he solid defensively, but he sparked England’s equalizer with a clever inverted run to the byline and cross. With Rice at right back, and Saka and Eze on, the Arsenal trio suddenly brought some collaborative teamplay and understanding down that flank. To play Rice there against Mexico would seem a ridiculous waste, but is it?

England have options in midfield to fill Rice’s place, while they have zero options at right back better than Rice. Spence had a shocker against DRC and everyone else is injured. Rice is one of the best players in the Premier League. His passing is excellent, he knows how to defend and go forward. He is England’s set piece taker so knows how to deliver a standout cross. His connection with Saka – who must start if he is fit – is outstanding and would solve one of the major problems England have had so far, which is players connecting on that side of the pitch. Looking at what’s available, Rice might be the best option.

2. Speaking of which, is the midfield wrong?

On paper, England have a very strong midfield trio of Declan Rice, Elliott Anderson and, ahead of them, Jude Bellingham. Yet the chemistry is bad. Neither Anderson or Rice contribute enough going forward while they are susceptible to the counter attack, leaving their defence vulnerable. The shape might need changing. Rice sitting deep shielding the back four and Kobi Mainoo given license to push forward to break the lines is one solution. This frees Bellingham to play higher and not worry about getting back.

This would require both wide players to track back and support their full backs, something conspicuously absent in England’s performances so far.

Or playing Bellingham back in a more conventional 4-3-3 and introducing Rogers or Eze in the front three. But not as the sort of conventional wingers that Madueke, Gordon or Rashford are. They are better at drifting inside, finding pockets or space or playing central in tight areas. This would free up space on the wings for the full backs to exploit.

Whatever the answer is, it doesn’t seem to be the status quo as England’s midfield is neither driving the play forward or protecting the defence.

3. Kane and Bellingham are carrying the team. Who else can step up?

None of the four wide players used so far – Madueke, Gordon, Rashford or Saka, have pulled up any trees. They’ve all looked better off the bench than when starting.

It may be a player who has yet to properly feature. Eberechi Eze or Kobbie Mainoo spring to mind. Mexico, unlike opponents who England have played so far, will look to dominate the ball and attack at will, so gaps will be there to exploit. England have so far in this tournament moved the ball too slowly and not played enough between the lines. Both of these players can solve those problems.

4. Is it time to change the goalkeeper?

Jordan Pickford is an England stalwart. 88 caps, ever present since 2018. But he has not had a good World Cup. In short, England needs a goalkeeper they can rely on, and Pickford doesn’t look like that at the moment.

Against Croatia in the opening game, he played his part in conceding two sloppy goals and should have done better with the first. Against Ghana he was lucky to escape after rushing out of his goal, missing the ball and colliding with the onrushing attacker Prince Abu. England fans’ hearts were in mouths as a Ghana foul could have resulted in a red card for Pickford, but the referee instead gave the foul to England. Whether he bottled the decision or not, England and Pickford got lucky.

And in the knockout game against DRC, he was beaten at his near post by Brian Cipenga in a way no world-class international keeper should be.  

Dean Henderson and James Trafford will be checking their gloves just in case but perhaps now is not the time to be changing keepers. England have enough problems to be thinking out going into the Mexico game without worrying about bedding in a new goalkeeper.

Not Entirely His Fault

In Pickford’s favour, playing behind an ever changing defence cannot be easy. We all know that a settled back four will help a goalkeeper as they build trust and don’t second guess each other. This allows the keeper to get on with his job rather than trying to do his defenders’ jobs as well.

He has also rarely let England down and is the sort of character not to be worried by a couple of average to poor performances. Lacking confidence is not something Pickford suffers from.

His best saving grace is that he hasn’t had that much to do in the games so far, and he’s always one to go walkabout or lose concentration in these games. He’s always much better when he’s busy. And against Mexico, you can guarantee he’ll be busy.

5. How do England cope with playing at 7,200ft above sea level?

Air at the Azteca contains 20% less oxygen than Kansas City, their home-away-from-Albion. And while the Mexico players are used to it (and thriving), it may well explain why every team that has gone there this World Cup has failed. Not just failed, but not even scoring a goal yet.

It’s a daunting task made harder by the fact that any Olympic athlete expected to compete at that altitude would go there two weeks in advance to acclimatise. After returning to their Kansas base after beating Dr Congo and flying to Mexico on Friday, England have two days max.

Mexico have lost twice at the Azteca in 88 games and are unbeaten in 10 World Cup finals games stretching back to 1986. Whether the players, the altitude or the fanatical crowd face the bigger challenge is a moot point. One way or the other, it will be the hardest game England have faced for decades.

The thinking of getting there as late as possible involves a theory that they need at least two nights’ sleep at altitude to try and get enough rest. That is balanced against the longer they are there, the more risk of sickness there is before the 2-3 week recommended acclimatisation period kicks in; a period which of course they don’t have the luxury off.

It’s a bit of a no-win situation for England and puts them at a distinct disadvantage to their hosts. But they must deal with it as best they can.