As an Englishman i have mixed emotions. On the one hand, it wasn't really an "English" side. Italian manager, with only by my count only four English players starting.
But, it still sums up the culture of English football...if you can even call it football. It basically goes along the lines of, "we're not as good as these technical footballers so we'll just park 8 blokes behind the ball."
But the sad thing is, we can be just as good. Paul Gascoigne, Paul Scholes, Chris Waddle - these guys shouldn't be such anomalies over the past 25 years. Im quite certain that there is no genetic advantage to being of continental European heritage or South American when it comes to possessing coolness on the ball as well as dribbling and playmaking skills.
And these are the qualities that 9/10 win big football tournaments. England haven't only just won the one major tournament - WC '66 - but we've never even made another final. Clearly, we have deep rooted issues.
And whilst ever we celebrate one of our top sides in Chelsea delivering a performance which saw one, i repeat one...yes...one! shot at goal at Stamford Bridge; well then things will never change.
They will go to the Camp Nou next week and, god willing, get raped 5 nil. And yet many Engish people will still talk about the courage of the Chelsea players. Rather than how we can ensure our own supremely talnted youngsters can become the next Andres Iniesta or Paul Gascoigne, rather than the next Theo Walcott or Nicky Butt.
I guess my point is, Chelsea played that way because it's the only way they could win. Just as England do vs the quality sides at the WC (Argentina & Brazil in 2002, Portugal at Euro 2004/WC 2006). But, when all is said and done, when do they ever win. Answer, NEVER. So clearly this brand of football wins you nothing. But we'll never learn that because long-ball shite is ingrained from day one it seems.
