England: Owen Hargreaves the future or back to the past?

Whilst Owen Hargreaves can rest at home in the rosy glow of a job well done albeit tempered by the fact it was all for nowt. He alone it seems can put his feet up and accept he did nothing wrong and proved those who felt he could do little at this level wrong. Leaving aside that seems to be all certain players wish to acheive it leaves the question should he now be a first choice?

It really comes down to a question of whether we want a holding player in the England team. A pure holding player with real energy but no great range of passing. If so then at least this world cup and a quick scan at premiership teams show Hargreaves as likely first choice. Nonetheless I have to question whether England starting in a 451 with a holding player was not a way of playing for penalties effectively.

The idea of going to 451 was to allow our midfield goal scorers to get forward - Lampard and Gerrard. For all the stupid talk they generally did quite well at getting forward but Lampard did not having any 'luck' shooting. Nonetheless only the partial would have said they did not want him in those positions. Initially Carrick played this role and whilst England did not win heavily there was a certain fluency and Lampard and Gerrard got forward and England often had men in and around the box.

By going to Hargreaves from Carrick that fluency went. Indeed it was obvious in the first minute: the centre half gave Hargreaves the ball and his first instinct/move was to give it back. Lampard then came back and England were back to where they started except with only 1 forward and a 5th defender. This in the end achieved what it was most likely to, penalties.

One could argue, and it is very arguable, that if he wanted a defensive midfielder then it should have been at the expense of one of the other midfielders not a 2nd forward. Certainly it is hard to argue that Rafael Benitez trusts Gerrard in a central 2 and indeed plays him wide in 442 or 433. So for rational people Beckham should have made way and Gerrard moved right. This was not going to happen and hence the whole logic of the extra central player was lost.

Nicky Butt was tried in this role in a 442 but once again England could not play fluently through the team. There is a good argument it has been lack of mobile outlets out wide; in 02 it was an unfit Beckham and Sinclair; 04 Scholes out of position and an unfit Beckham; and this time Joe Cole who was sporadically successful, till teams realised he was the only outlet with an ageing and not moving Beckham.

So 451 I would not play Hargreaves as he is simply a 5th defender and means we still need another player to come deep and play the ball out. One could argue Chelsea use this formation but they play lone forwards who play for the team and genuine wingers all of whom are expected to work for the team and not themselves. In a 442 I forsee the same problems. In the end a footballer like Carrick with some pace out wide and even functioning forwards who can take and hold a ball better than Owen, Crouch and Rooney would be a better start unless we continue to play for penalties or 1-0.