Euro 2012: The squad game

International tournaments are not just about the first XI, to win one you need the whole squad to pitch in. So why waste a space on a Stewart Downing? 

Football in the 21^st Century is very much a squad game, no longer just for the first eleven that play week in week out. Rotation is common, in some ways to keep egos in check but also as a consequence of the greater physical demands placed on players in the modern game where they are required to fun faster and further than ever before. Having a squad of players to pick from however also allows managers far greater tactical flexibility; it allows them to tailor their selections and tactics depending on the situation or the opponent. And yet, at Euro 2012, many of the teams don’t seem to have used their squads at all well. Indeed in most of these cases it’s precisely because the squads weren’t picked effectively in the first place.

It might seem obvious but perhaps it needs highlighting, players should only be taken to an international tournament and included in a squad if the manager is confident that they can make a difference if selected. With only 20 spaces available once you take out the usual three slots allocated to goalkeepers, players should only go if you are not afraid to consider that they could start and/or change a game when brought on. They should not be merely be back up options in case of injury or suspension but considered for selection when it comes to each game and form part of the manager and their support staff’s thinking about how to achieve victory.

Too many squads appear to have been chosen without this in mind, managers happy to pack a bench with players they see as no more than back up and in most cases never considered for action. In particular when it comes to England, why were players like Stewart Downing and Jermain Defoe brought along when the manager clearly had no intention of using them, except as a very ‘worst case scenario’? With only 20 places to play with this is something of a luxury. Against Italy, Ashley Young was clearly struggling on the left wing and Wayne Rooney wildly out of sorts in attack, and yet their potential replacements were never given any serious consideration to replace them.

To give England credit however, the most positive aspect of the tournament from their point of view was that Roy Hodgson made some changes game to game, depending on the opponent and the situation the team found themselves in. However, when it came to the crucial game against Italy, the status quo was maintained for the whole game with little in the squad to significantly change things around.

England were by no means the worst offenders, France bizarrely packing their squad with more defensive midfielders than would ever likely be needed resulting in players like Blaise Matuidi that saw no game time being effectively a wasted seat on the plane. In most of the French games, the team badly needed goals yet the attacking options in the squad that Laurent Blanc had selected remained rooted firmly on the bench. If he didn’t trust them, why make that selection in the first place?

The three sides that have used their resources the best unsurprisingly have been the teams that have got the furthest. Germany, Italy and Spain all selected squads where it wasn’t just a case of eleven first teamers and nine backups; players were picked because the manager thought that should the occasion arise that a player could start and make a difference. Spain has used a wide variety of their excellent midfield options while Germany brought in a whole new frontline for their game against Greece.

With limited numbers in an international squad, there can’t be time for wasting spaces on players brought purely as back up and who you don’t trust to throw in at the deep end. When Italy played at the 2006 squad they used pretty much every single out field player at some point. The fact they won that tournament tells you everything you need to know.