England closer to goal

Ian Ridley says that criticism of Terry Venables is both unfair and unhelpful

Terry Venables got back to his west London home, re-ran the video and retired to bed at 3.15am a satisfied man. On waking a few hours later - unlike his predecessor the pyjamas were not soaking wet - he was a little taken aback that no one else seemed as pleased as he was.

What Venables ought to have realised is that people have been talking balls all week. If not about the orange one with which Geoff Hurst scored against Germany in winning the 1966 World Cup then about his team's performance. Even a well- respected former manager was wondering why England were not playing with more passion 20 minutes from the end of the goalless draw against Croatia.

As a response, Venables contented himself with: "Well, we've seen it enough times in Europe." Indeed we should know by now that playing with boundless passion is exactly what the opposition want. Too often trench- fodder English teams have hurled themselves at patient, absorbent visitors only to be caught on the break. Poland in 1973 springs to mind.

That was a game England should have won on the number of chances created and last Wednesday was the same. One good finish from half a dozen well- fashioned opportunities would certainly have changed the perception. Instead of gloom, it might have been glory: Venables's new England defence would have been touted in the tabloids as a trio of stunners. "That would have been unhelpful too," Venables said. "All I believe is that we have made terrific progress." The adjective may be overstated but the sentiment is not.

And it may be worth taking stock of that progress, since it seems in question. Having failed to qualify for the World Cup, England were at a low when Venables took over early in 1994. A few uplifting results were required, he decided, and they duly arrived. Since then, spurning the temptation of instant feel-good results by choosing demanding opponents, he has been concerned with bringing the team into the modern era by means of tactical development.

Unfortunately we live in fast-food days. With all its instant fulfilment - not least two teams usually trying to claim three points for winning rather than play for a draw - the Premiership has spawned an expectation that international football cannot deliver. The service, particularly in friendlies, is slower, and excellence is less easily arrived at.

Last Wednesday, when Venables employed only three recognised defenders with Paul Ince in midfield as cover, was in many ways the conclusion of Venables's campaign. For a man who supposedly has a grasshopper mind, it has had the thoroughness of a spider's web.

Now it seems he has arrived at his way of playing and, allowing for the injuries over the next fortnight, he probably has his 22 in mind, though it will mean disappointing at least eight who have good claims, he says. And though the structure of the opposition may dictate his starting line-up, he is close to being able to pick a best 11.

Much depends on what has become of the crucial position in his team, the utility player whose job is to balance the numbers by commuting between defence and midfield. Ince, whom Venables describes as a "worrier", apparently had his reservations but now appears to have confirmed the job as his.

Ince's self-doubt betrays one of the problems that Venables must solve before the opening match against Switzerland on 8 June. "We need that extra 10 per cent of commanding it, of 'give me the ball'," he said. "A lot of the players have got a way of playing but they have got to have a bit more arrogance, a bit more bounce about themselves."

Self-esteem has been eroded, he says, by poor results for both club and country in recent seasons, but an encouragement for him on Wednesday had been how the players had grown in belief, in both the formation and their own ability compared with the technically talented Croats. They may not have been trying wholeheartedly to deliver a Suker punch, but they were certainly seeking to avoid defeat.

That made it difficult to judge how good a combination Gary Neville, Mark Wright and Stuart Pearce were. It is to Venables's credit that he employed instinctive full-backs to work the formation rather than the more ponderous Premiership norm of three centre-backs.

And that is the reason why Venables deserves indulgence. Here is a man at least attempting to bring more creative elements to the team. One hopes that amid the disciplined approach Paul Gascoigne might rediscover something more inspired and that David Platt trusts his knee to take him forward more often.

Despite the missed chances, Steve McManaman, Teddy Sheringham and the outrageously promising Fowler, who contributed more than either of the more heralded Davor Suker and Alen Boksic at the other end, also deserve indulgence.

In saying so, and in supporting the Venables path, one leaves oneself open as suitable material for a role in The Emperor's New Clothes. But it is too late to stop now, and it is too early to pronounce judgement.

Less indulgence can be afforded the FA. For England's last home match before Euro 96, against Hungary on 18 May, they should simply abandon all excuses about setting dangerous precedents and ensure that Wembley is full by charging no more than a tenner a ticket. That at least should please people.