Could the real John Terry please stand up?
So the domestic season is over, the play-offs complete and all we have as fans to tide us over is the prospect of England vs Brazil, and then a more suitable opponent, Estonia.
Discussions about Beckham's inclusion to one side, and the ongoing Gerrard/Lampard debate...well...ongoing...
What about McClaren's option for skipper?
Out with the old, in with the new. That was McClaren's starting point. Beckham, who was decidedly below-par in Germany 06, was dropped from the squad after his honourable resignation as captain.
So JT's selection as captain was roundly applauded. It was a welcome change, and the results matched.
But now?
Can JT lead England?
So far, I'm not so sure. Against Israel and Andorra we were collectively appalling, but it remains crucial that the captain starts to challenge players, on the pitch where they're not up to scratch. Is it because he's afraid of speaking out? Is he in awe of the other big names? Or is he simply adjusting to his new role. A leader must lead, and sometimes that involves pointing out people's failings.
There is no questioning Terry's leadership abilities for Chelsea, he leads with passion and guts, throwing himself recklessly into challenges. We've seen none of this so far for England.
But the captain is the manager's representative on the field. Has the manager made clear his intentions? Can Terry articulate adequately the manager's plans? For Mourinho he seems more than able. So perhaps the poor captaincy is a direct link to poor planning and explanation from the manager? Is McClaren wrong through and through?
When the English cricket team so comprehensively beat the West Indies in cricket, where Vaughan once more demonstrates his captaining qualities, can Terry emulate this?
So that's the choice: Is Terry able to bring his club-captaincy to the England party, or is he doomed to glimmer rather than shine? And if he isn't the man for the job, who should be?
|