Henderson doesn't have a genius playing beside him to create magic

So what is your point Martin Samuel? Long-winded discourse about what? Most people are reading this on their phones. Blueboy, United States.

I can’t really help it if you’re thick mate, but here’s some good music. Five points up next.

Point one: England, our England.

This reporter doesn’t understand Gareth Southgate’s – and many Premier League team’s – formations. Jordan Henderson is the holding player and he does that job admirably, if not to world-class standard. Its then two from Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain, Jesse Lingard, Jack Wilshere, Dele Alli, Adam Lallana and Ruben Loftus-Cheek, who will be playmakers. The problem is three of them in Wilshere, Lallana and Loftus-Cheek are never fit. Kido44, Birmingham.

I don’t think you know what a playmaker is, do you Kido? Of those you listed only Wilshere, and at a push maybe Loftus-Cheek, would be deployed to dictate the tempo of the game. Oxlade-Chamberlain was played alongside Henderson against Holland but his was the more energetic, ball-carrying role and it was Henderson who was detailed to collect the ball from the defence. So, yes, he’s holding as the deepest central midfielder, but he’s doing more than that, too.

England use their midfielders to tackle. Given the long-ball game they employ the midfielders don’t need any ability to pass. Big Observer, Dundee.

So, were you watching England and don’t know what you’re looking at, or watching Scotland and are basing your opinion on outdated presumptions? England haven’t been a long-ball team for some while.

Surely the manager should come up with a game plan to suit the players we have, not the players we wish we had? There's plenty of perfectly functional teams who don’t have a Paul Gascoigne or Paul Scholes in midfield but manage to put in half decent performances in World Cups. Southgate is in a position where he has to solve the problems, not hide behind excuses. Roy Hodgson’s record was never mitigated by the fact he had to rely on a declining Wayne Rooney and a few promising youngsters who should now be ready to give a better account of themselves at a tournament. Southgate seems a decent guy but he doesn’t get a free hit; he gets a tune out of what we have or he steps aside. Getting out of the group is the minimum, and quarter-finals should be the aim with the players we have. Nick, Aylesbury.

And I said that, Nick. That would be the decent performance to which you refer. I’m talking about a performance that is more than decent, that takes England beyond the last eight for the first time since 1996 and I feel one of the flaws in the team may be insurmountable to that end. I do think Southgate is coming up with ways to work around the obvious weakness in the England team, as the football in these most recent friendlies showed. Yet we must also be realistic. International managers cannot buy talent when faced with a void and some positions are too crucial to simply patch around without there being some limitation to progress. If England don’t have a good goalkeeper, for instance, we cannot just find a way to stop the opposition taking shots at our goal; and if there is a lack of creation in midfield, while there may be ways around it, they will never be as good as having a player like Scholes or Gascoigne pulling the strings. And, by the way, Hodgson had Rooney in the seasons when he scored 34, 16, 19, 14 and 15 goals for Manchester United, Harry Kane when he scored 31 and 28 goals for Tottenham, plus Kane, Alli and Kyle Walker when they were PFA Young Players of the Year, and Jamie Vardy when he was Footballer of the Year. He was hardly blighted.

Confusing that you are calling for patience for Southgate even though you believe he is using a system that is ultimately doomed to failure? Surely it would be better for a manager to identify weaknesses in the team and play in a manner which avoids exposing them? We could wait 20 years and still not have a player at the level of Andrea Pirlo or Toni Kroos. Slowboatin, Newcastle.

True, but I think one will emerge from the younger teams and until that time we have to work with what we have and concede that it may dent our progress deep into tournaments. But talking of the future…

Obviously a massive outsider and probably too soon, but Mason Mount is running the show in every game he plays for Vitesse Arnhem. In other countries they would maybe take a punt. Mullo, Glasgow.

I’m not sure they would, Mullo. Mount is 19 and yet to kick a ball for Chelsea, his club. The loan to Holland is intended to give him experience and he appears to be thriving there, with 24 league appearances and seven goals. His age group appearances for England have also been impressive, and he was voted Golden Player in the European Under-19 Championship, which England won. Yet, having said all this, it would still be a hurried promotion to fast track him into the senior team at a World Cup after one season in first-team football in a league that is substantially weaker than our own. One hopes Mount gets a proper chance at Chelsea next year and does not just become another sausage factory product, because he looks an exceptional talent. With the right career path I see no reason why he might not be an England player soon, but not yet.

Henderson is an amazing player but, as always, England's fans and media can’t recognise it. Please when you have the time, watch Barcelona and pay attention to Sergio Busquets. You won’t see too many moments when he moves the ball forward but with sideways and backwards passing, he opens space for his team-mates. Henderson is not Busquets but every time he plays Liverpool’s defence looks much stronger. If you really believe that Fernandinho, for example, is a better player, then football is not for you. He is one of the best defensive midfielders in the world. Croatian Sensation, Croatia.

Yes, thank you for discovering Busquets for us dummies. He really had passed us by. Now, if you also watch Barcelona you will see another player in that midfield. Andres Iniesta. If Henderson had Iniesta by his side, I would agree his limitations would not be so obvious – just as Busquets' conservatism does not impinge on Barcelona’s creativity. As it is, Henderson’s limitations are an issue for England because he can’t simply slip it to a genius midfield partner to create magic. And I think Fernandinho is exceptional, by the way, and have done since I first saw him play for Shakhtar Donetsk. He would walk into Southgate’s England team.

Portugal didn’t have a playmaker when they won the 2016 European Championship. They had a central midfield of Andre Gomes and William Carvalho, Neither are playmakers and certainly not in the Kroos mould you compared to England’s midfield. Dan 90, London.

Actually, Dan, they did have a playmaker: Adrien Silva, now with Leicester. Not in Kroos’s league, but a better user of the ball than Gomes, who lost his place in the starting line-up after a run of four drawn games. Silva started in his role in the semi-final and final, with Carvalho holding, and Portugal won both times.

Wow, way to write the team off before they’ve even kicked a ball in Russia. How about supporting and backing the lads for once. Porterfield73, Canada.

That’s for fans. My job is to provide commentary which we try to keep separate from cheerleading. So I like what Southgate is doing but think it may have limitations in the later stages of the tournament. That seems quite a realistic view. Still always nice to get a lesson in patriotism from someone who has fled the country.

Point two: Jonjo for England (or maybe not).

Jonjo Shelvey is surely a better option than Jake Livermore, because there’s always a chance he could play a killer pass, especially with the pace we have out wide. Lee1, Newcastle.

Why does Southgate not try Shelvey? He has nothing to lose and at least he can pass it 30 yards. Els and Blue, Billericay.

There was quite a lot of support for Shelvey on here and, I admit, his range of passing is attractive. As is the testament of one of his most vocal supporters, Graeme Souness. Graeme thinks Shelvey is the one English midfielder who delivers an ambitious ball early, and that would get the most out of front men like Kane, Vardy and Marcus Rashford. I think his lack of discipline would be a problem and his passing is not so great – he’s not Glenn Hoddle – that it outweighs any negatives. I get the impression Southgate thinks this, too. And what does he have to lose – well, down to 10 men against Tunisia, quite a lot. Anyway, soon we’ll be in Australia. And who better to take us there than this column’s favourite Melburnians.

Point three: the lovely Australian cricket team.

The people who say that poor rookie Cameron Bancroft should never have been dragged into it are so naive. He’s only a rookie at Test level but has worked his butt off from a very early age to get there. He undoubtedly has known about roughing one side of the ball and polishing the other to achieve reverse swing for years. So it’s impossible that he did not fully appreciate what he was doing. Engagebrain, Cape Town.

I agree, EB. Bancroft is no rube. I do think, however, that as one of the newer members of the squad he was used by the now infamous leadership group, which is why he is perhaps receiving greater sympathy than Steve Smith or David Warner. I think it fairly safe to assume it wasn’t his idea.

Why does diving in football not warrant this kind of outrage? Just because it is becoming the norm? Cheating is cheating. HOAFM, Romford.

Indeed, but diving in football seems to be more spur of the moment and down to the individual. I think what has shocked about the Australian cricket episode is how pre-meditated it was and that it was a collective decision.

All sports nowadays seem to suffer from cheating. Some worse than others I concede, but when money and prestige is involved cheating follows. Casualobserver, Swansea.

I don’t agree. It doesn’t follow that money and prestige automatically equate to cheating. There are many athletes who, with both on the line, would never stoop so low and it should not excuse those who do.

Your quote: ‘Bancroft’s attempt at manipulation could not have been made more obvious had he taken a Black & Decker Workmate to a quiet corner of Newlands.’ Even though I agree wholeheartedly with the tone of your report, a Black and Decker Workmate is a workbench and not a drill as Martin Samuel implies. Clearly, the only tool Martin has ever used is a Biro. Reallyyouthful, United Kingdom.

Not going to deny that. All I would say, though, is that I did not intend to conjure the image of a drill, but of Bancroft at a work station, better to apply his sanding technique. I know exactly what a Black & Decker Workmate is because, many years ago, we bought one for my granddad. And what hours of joy he got from it too, set at perfectly the right height to balance a large gin and tonic on, as he sat in a deck chair under the two big trees in his garden. We’d put a small white tablecloth over it if there were guests, of course. We’re not animals.

Most of us here are not only disgusted with this team but also the management that have allowed sledging to get out of hand. I don’t believe this is the first case of ball tampering either. Our teams over some time have lost any sense of sportsmanship and will now do anything to win while their leaders turn a blind eye. Temiti, Adelaide.

Without doubt the only impressive aspect of this debacle, Temiti, has been the fury of the Australian public. Not all of them, obviously. There are still some in denial. See below.

OK, let’s do this. Allegations Warner revealed further ball-tampering exploits to England players over drinks at the end of the Ashes series? Where are these allegations?. All I’ve seen is one journalist claiming ‘a source’ told him this. No formal allegation, no player coming out and saying it, just a piece of tabloid journalism and some pictures of strapping for a hand injury. The bowler didn't notice anything odd about the ball? Why would he? The umpires didn’t. As for reviewing footage of previous matches, I know that England didn’t bat for that long during the recent Ashes series, but it would still take a bit of time to go through it all. Lastly, Darren Lehmann not being aware of any skulduggery. That’s happened before. Troy Cooley, England bowling coach during the 2005 Ashes after the claims that Marcus Trescothick used mints, denied having any clue about the practice. ‘I had no knowledge of it and I certainly wouldn't recommend anything like that,’ Cooley was quoted in the Daily Telegraph. BenD76, Brisbane.

Let’s do what, Ben? Equivalency? Dissembling? Play dumb? Well, if you insist, but we’re sharper than that on here. Fact is, the ICC were aware of Trescothick using saliva from sucking Murray Mints to shine the ball in 2005, when he wrote about it in his autobiography three years later. I’ll agree it is unethical. Illegal’s different. The ICC said it would not outlaw sucking sweets and Australia took the matter no further. Maybe because the practice had been around for many years, as Allan Border and several very experienced Australian internationals admitted. As for the rest of your flimsy defence – I would imagine the ‘source’ is an England cricketer who does not want to be named because it would look like sour grapes, having lost. Anonymous or not, the story is surely worth a follow-up inquiry, unless Cricket Australia aren’t interested in looking. Same with the bowler. He gets the ball in hand after every delivery, not at the end of each over, so would notice sudden deterioration. Equally, I fail to see why three players would tamper with the ball, without informing the players whose deliveries were going to make that effective? Suppose the bowlers had other plans? Suppose that did not want this solution? The ball is shined to the bowler’s specification, or at least he is part of the decision-making process on how it is prepared. Looked at logically, how could he not be? As for the umpires not noticing anything awry, since the incident with Pakistan and Darrell Hair, umpires seem scared to call ball tampering – which could explain why television cameras were needed to expose the cheating. A hasty investigation, closed almost as soon as it opened, with plenty of grey areas and questions left unanswered. But you continue hiding behind your paper thin equivalencies and mitigations. You must be so proud.

Oh please, the moral outrage from the English press rings a little hollow when Mike Atherton was given a slap on the wrist and Trescothick an MBE and a relatively free pass. I am sure Samuel might trot out an old article of his condemning Atherton as proof of his consistency, but it doesn't change the fact that his and Trescothick’s cheating were let through to the keeper by the English press. A short suspension for Smith and Warner, and welcome them back to the team in time to beat the English and retain the Ashes, with another round of English whining. Waz, China.

We’ve dealt with Trescothick, but here’s what you forget about Atherton: his cheating was exposed by the British media. The incident occurred during a home Test against South Africa in 1994, and Atherton was caught by footage captured on the BBC. Having heard the Australian coverage, I doubt the same would have happened at your place – and this ball-tampering scandal came to light through the work of South African broadcasters. Equally, far from being ‘let through to the keeper’ the reaction to Atherton here was so strong, so damning that in his press conference at the end of the match he attacked ‘the gutter press’. And he used dirt, which while wrong, is still what many bowlers rub their hands in, quite legally, to get a better grip of a damp ball. Not the same as sandpaper, but nice try on the equivalency front. And don’t worry, your lot have made sure Smith is back for the World Cup and the Ashes. Wouldn’t do to stand too long on principle, would it?

When I watched James Sutherland’s press conference, I got the distinct impression that he was part of the problem. He is the chief executive of Cricket Australia, who appointed Darren Lehmann as coach and still think he’s squeaky clean. He also said that there was going to be an investigation into the whole culture around the team, which suggests that there is something wrong with that culture. Would that be the team managed by Lehmann, then? If so, who is responsible for instilling the culture in the players? If it’s the manager, he has to go. If it’s not the manager, he has no control over his charges – so has to go. QED. Roses are Red, Manchester.

Spot on. Yet to dismiss Lehmann might raise other questions – such as why the chief executive seemed such a distant figure until the crisis happened. If the culture has disintegrated, it has done so on Sutherland’s watch, too.

Point four: the lovely hosts of our next World Cup and why everyone is happy in China.

There are about 15 new and beautiful stadiums in Russia. In England we have old, dirty, disgusting stadiums except for Arsenal and Manchester City. Russians are lucky and we are jealous. English Gayclown, South Georgia.

May I take this opportunity to thank Mr Putin’s valuable stooges, robots, lickspittles and quislings for their fascinating contribution to below the line comments whenever Russia is mentioned. What would this column be without them? Rational, maybe.

Boris Johnson claims Vladimir Putin is using the World Cup for propaganda purposes, while at the same time he uses the World Cup in Russia for propaganda purposes. Oh, the irony. Jason 123, Burton.

Indeed. And I notice he’s now back-tracking on boycott talk having realised it’s a vote-loser if the team doesn’t go.

Loved China. Lived and ran a business there for eight years. To describe the government as tyrannical is ridiculous. Most citizens are incredibly happy and satisfied with their government. More than can be said for the United Kingdom. Scaremongering from this rag of a newspaper. Visit China, they make the UK look like they’re living in the stone age with their economy and infrastructure. Steven, United Kingdom.

So why are you back here, Steven? I mean, if China’s such a paradise, business or not, surely you’d stay. Just checked the air pollution level in Beijing today. Good is 0-50, OK is 51-100, bit dodgy 101-150, bad news starts at 151. Beijing is 187. ‘Reduce outdoor activities and sports. Children, elders and people with breathing or heart problems should avoid long or intense outdoor activities and exercise.’ Now, I don’t know your idea of good urban infrastructure, Steven, but being able to go for a walk without choking would certainly be part of it. When Manchester City and Manchester United were in Beijing in 2016, pollution levels hit above 200, meaning six hours outside did equivalent lung damage to a packet of cigarettes. No doubt the people were happy with that, though – just as they were positively delirious in 2008 when the Olympics came to town. There were 77 requests to protest in the official protest zones – and 77 were turned down. That’s one way of keeping the image of public satisfaction high. Meanwhile, approximately 100 miles south of Beijing, an agricultural community was destroyed because its water supply was rerouted to deliver a green Olympics to the capital. Road blocks stopped people from that area travelling north, while taxi drivers were instructed to take any passengers with unusual requests directly to the police. No doubt in your world, Steven, 31,000 displaced locals were only too delighted to make this sacrifice and only didn’t come to Beijing to protest because they were too busy inflating party balloons. You say you ran a business, Steven. Maybe stop talking through your wallet, and wise up. Everyone looks happy when the gun pointing at them is kept neatly out of the picture. It’s as sincere as this.

I missed the bit where China were killing people with chemical weapons on UK soil. But I'm sure you're prepared to post links Martin? FrankB, Doncaster.

Sorry, Frank, I didn’t realise that until chemical warfare was unleashed on British soil everything was rosy and we should just shut up.

You conveniently forget Britain’s murderous past. Britain has been involved in 185 wars in the past 300 years, has killed more people than Hitler, Stalin or Attila the Hun. Britain holds the record for the quickest genocide in history, the wiping out of Tasmanian Aborigines over a period of 72 years. Everywhere Brits went they killed indigenous peoples including in the United States, Australia and Canada. Don’t forget the illegal wars in Afghanistan and Iraq that have killed two million with Britain taking a full part. Britain should be tried for Crimes Against Humanity. Before trying to take the splinter out of Russia's eye perhaps you should take the log of wood out of your own. WhoGains, Bagshot.

Is there a trial for stupidity? For sixth-form, agit-prop cobblers masquerading as informed debate. For it will certainly come as a surprise to the 4.6 per cent of Tasmania that identified as Aborigine in a 2016 census to discover they are extinct; just as it came as a surprise to me to find that because of a terrible chapter in British history from 200 years ago, we cannot call foul if Russia brings chemical warfare to the streets of Salisbury in 2018. Nobody forgets anything about Britain’s past, but equivalency in this area is nothing less than idiotic. Must Germany stay silent on modern terrorist atrocities because of World War II? Did Spain deserve the Madrid bombing because of the Inquisition? Also, your figures are a joke. The human costs of the wars in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq – you forgot Pakistan, by the way – are still terrible, but stand at between 367,000 and 395,000. Even taking into account indirect deaths due to, for instance, illness as a result of displacement, the cost of the war is still half what you say. And these figures include Allied forces deaths, journalists, aid workers, insurgents and civilians killed by insurgents as well as western – not solely British – military. Still, how are things in leafy Bagshot. Michael Gove still your MP? That big Waitrose on the way to Pennyhill Park is nice, I hear.

Point five: in which some people with highly selective memories congregate on a familiar corner.

Martin Samuel is obsessed with Jose Mourinho. This is the guy who told us Alexis Sanchez didn’t sign for the money, he signed for the best manager. The same manager who thought Kevin De Bruyne and Mohamed Salah would not make the grade. Let Luke Shaw play under a manager like Mauricio Pochettino at Tottenham and he’ll prove Mourinho wrong. Hanif, Leicester.

As wrong as I’m about to prove you now? Hardly. So here’s what I actually wrote about Sanchez and Mourinho on January 16, in a column that said why his agent, Fernando Felicevich, deserves his money. ‘He will have made a transfer happen that few believed possible. He will have diverted a player from the club of his choice to a presently inferior rival. He will have persuaded him not to reunite with a coach he plainly admires to sign for one whose reputation is of difficulty.’ So, Manchester United were an inferior rival to Manchester City, Mourinho’s reputation was one of difficulty when compared to Pep Guardiola. So it was just as you said, Hanif, except exactly the opposite. As for Shaw, he could sign for Pochettino at Tottenham in the summer, just as Mo Salah could have when he left Chelsea for Fiorentina on loan in February 2015. Notice anything? He didn’t. Salah wasn’t picked up by another English club, and neither was De Bruyne. So if Mourinho was such a fool, if he was so remiss in not seeing the talent beneath his nose, makes you wonder why the other 19 managers didn’t jump right in. Or Jurgen Klopp at Borussia Dortmund for De Bruyne, seeing as he actually went to Germany. Maybe, just maybe, those players weren’t as good then as they are now?

Mourinho’s ‘high standards’ you say? Let’s see, in 2015-16 he lost his dressing room at Chelsea and that led to his sacking? What about earlier that season when he mistreated the female physio in sight of the TV cameras for all to see? Remember De Bruyne and Salah? So what kind of high standards are you referring to Mr Samuel? Your defence of this coach is totally weak to say the least. Blueloo, Singapore.

Not as weak as leaving out a list of achievements that would fill the rest of the page to focus on six months of turmoil and failure. Why is 2015-16 significant, but not 2014-15? Why are two Champions League titles with inferior clubs ignored? The only foreign coach to win back-to-back titles in England in his first two seasons, and that doesn’t register? Finally, why is a female doctor – and she has a name, it’s Eva Carneiro – demoted o the role of physiotherapist? Slightly more disrespectful than anything Mourinho may have said.

I despised Mourinho at Chelsea. It's all about him and his ego. As a lifelong Manchester United fan of over 50 years I'm really struggling. The current situation is worse than when we went into Division Two because at least we still played great football. He won things at Chelsea because the general standard was lower and he could grind teams down. Things have moved on but he hasn’t. He gets by spending money, and could never do what Sir Alex Ferguson did at Aberdeen or with the youngsters at United. He has managed to screw Rashford up, the biggest prospect for United and England in decades. The squad don't want to play for him, that is obvious, so get rid now. TimG7, Cambridge.

Well, if you are really struggling now, it must have been hard for you between 1968 and 1977 when your club won…let me see, eff all. And between 1967 and 1993 when there were no league titles. So this is what Mourinho is up against, everybody. A sense of entitlement the size of a small planet and a bloke who thinks it was better when Manchester United went down. Better the year they finished below Queens Park Rangers, Coventry, Stoke, Birmingham City, Sheffield United and Ipswich. Better the year they lost 3-0 at QPR, and dropped six points to Leicester. Better the year they were beaten at Old Trafford by Leicester, Derby, Coventry, Sheffield United, Leeds, Tottenham and Manchester City. Better the year they were knocked out of the FA Cup by Ipswich, and the League Cup by Middlesbrough. And Tim – if Mourinho only won at Chelsea because standards were low, wouldn’t those underachievers he brushed aside so easily also include Ferguson-era Manchester United? Sorry to introduce logic to your half-baked rant, but there it is. And now some Logic from way back. Logic Records, from Germany. Until next time.