I'm fine thank you and you?

There is one very obvious reason Wayne Rooney would make a successful centre midfielder and it goes by the name of Paul Scholes.

Scholes retired this season to cacophonous sounds of appreciation from football’s great and good.

Zidane, Xavi, Davids, Lippi, all were in agreement, Scholes was one of the best midfielders of this or any generation.

There are stylistic similarities in the way Scholes and Rooney play, a panoramic understanding of the dimensions and angles on the pitch, comfort in playing short and long, thunderous and accurate shooting, even the way they kick the ball can be said to be not dissimilar. They receive the ball better than any other English player, never static, always on the move.

Where they differ is the pace and speed that they bring to their teams. Scholes was all about quick release, making the ball do the work – simple space finding movement, and the correct pass. Rooney seeks, although he knows when he shouldn’t, to carry the ball himself before passing or shooting. 

Rooeny has shown himself adept at just about every modern forward positional permutation – wide left, wide right, the hole, the line leader, the poacher, the target man. His primary faculties though suggest he could flourish in centre midfield. A prophetic reading of the flow of a game, passing of range and accuracy, boundless stamina, and a physicality to withstand the rough and tumble that make the Premier League more tragicomedy than romance. He carries the ball like no Englishman has done since the days Paul Gascoigne was in his pre-knee knack pomp.

A lack of discipline and volcanic temper are often used to berate Rooney. He has made high profile on pitch mistakes resulting in expulsion and suspension, in this he is not alone. Scholes protested into retirement that he was a good, but occasionally retributive, tackler – 90 yellow cards made him the third most cautioned player behind Lee Bowyer and Kevin Davies. Gascoigne’s painful misdeeds are well documented. Would Rooney explode and then implode tasked with the role of midfield conductor?

The answer is one of psyche. Sir Alex Ferguson has successfully exploited Rooney’s flexibility, squashing him into some fairly odd shaped tactical holes, with generally brilliant results. The most legitimate murmurs of discontent have come after his less successful England outings. For England Rooney is more of a supernova whereas at United he is a bright star in a constellation.  This expectation seems to be a psychological burden.  Ferguson is adept at counseling his players, in a way that few recent England managers are.

Tactical innovation is another aspect that Ferguson is not credited with often enough. The courage to chance a new formation or a player’s position have long set him apart in the English game.  Although impressed with Rooney’s midfield performance against Galati, Ferguson has said that still sees Rooney’s long term position being upfront.  Paul Scholes began his United career as a striker – he was slowly called back from the front line until he ended his career as a deep lying playmaker siting infront of the United defence.  That was one realignment that worked spectacularly well for Manchester United, tragically England never got to reap similar reward.

It was Paul Scholes destiny to have been England’s artist in residence, their central conductor, the Anglo-Xavi.  Sadly he spent most of his international career garrisoned on the left wing, as the stronger personalities and tactical demands of first David Beckham and later Steven Gerrard and Frank Lampard occupied the thinking of his longest serving international coach.  Scholes twinkled intermittently, but his star shone all too briefly for England. Glenn Hoddle and then Kevin Keegan recognised his quality and gave it license. The long and tedious reign of Sven Goran Eriksson, who implored the England press and public to save Rooney, killed Scholes the international.

After a pulsating teenaged start under Eriksson, Rooney’s national team performances reached a painful nadir in the South Africa World Cup. The stifling grip of Fabio Capello and caustic happenings in his private life saw Rooney, and the England team around him, plumb new depths of ineptitude. Could he find redemption leading England to victory from the centre of the Maracana in the 2014 World Cup Final? England need midfield players who can keep the ball.  And Rooney certainly.   It will take a brave manager to take such a gamble.  No one gambled on Scholes and everyone lost.

Possible England team for the 2014 World Cup:

Hart; Clyne, Jones, Smalling, A Cole; Wilshire, Cleverly, Rooney; Sturridge, Wellbeck, Caroll.

<a href=”http://polldaddy.com/poll/5643395/”>Should Wayne Rooney play in centre midfield?</a>

Casillas

Lahm

Ashley Cole

David Luiz

Vidic

Pepe 

Alonso

Modric

Alexis Sanchez

Cristiano Ronaldo

Gareth Bale

Smith has gone part of the way down the ‘Fill in the gaps from a World XI when you remove the Barcelona players’ and also a few steps down the path of the ‘How do you tactically defeat Barca?’

As such his selection is full of good players but unlikely to emerge victorious in this fictional battle.

If plugging the holes in the World XI I would argue that David Luiz, Pepe, Luka Modric. Aleix Sanchez and Gareth Bale are debatable choices.  Sergio Ramos, Maicon, Thaigo Silva, Lucio, Mesut Ozil, Cesc Fabregas, Jack Wilshire, Wesley Sneijder, Samuel Eto’o, Carlos Tevez and Wayne Rooney amongst others might merit inclusion.

The more taxing selection emerges when trying to select a team to beat Barca, rather than occupy the mythical list of the World’s best footballers.

The first problem is finding a system that can contain and exploit what many are labelling an unbeatable team.  One option in this fantastic endeavour is to out-Barca Barcelona.  Tiki-taki the masters of said art to death.  A daunting prospect.

Smith’s defence can stay almost untouched but the slightly more rugged qualities of Vidic could be jettisoned in favour of a centre half more comfortable with the ball at his feet such as Lucio.  In midfield, the 360 degree Modric, for his ball retention and ability to rotate and pivot away from tackles would stay but the defensive aggression of Pepe, would appear anathema to a team of aesthetes.  Pepe could then drop back to the centre of defence taking the place that Smith had earmarked for David Luiz.  Moving Alonso to the Busquets role in front of the defence would vacate space for another player with the principle duty of keeping the ball.  Until Arsenal met Barcelona in the last 16 of the Champions League in February 2011 that role would arguably have gone to Cesc Fabregas.  But, regardless of issues of fitness, he appears to have been usurped by his club mate Jack Wilshire as the pre-eminent pass and move midfielder in the Premier League.

At the outer reaches of the team if the template is Catalan, would lie a willing runner a la Pedro and a finisher in the mould of David Villa.  To call a footballer of Villa’s multiple talents a purely a finisher is to do him a massive dishonour he of course does much more in terms of movement, invention and sacrifice.  Pedro’s primary function is territorial – he makes and takes the space created by the force of Dani Alves’ runs from fullback and the confusion created whenever Lionel Messi floats away to those places opponents fear to follow.

the middle prong in our Barca mirror XI would be Cristiano Ronaldo.  He is unlucky to be sharing an epoch with Messi.  It is his fate to shine brightly but never bright enough to overshadow his Argentinian nemesis.  On Ronaldo’s right Carlos Tevez would supply all the running of Pedro, with more in terms of aggression and game grabbing desire.  Wayne Rooney is no David Villa, the two are quintessentially different in style and temperament.  As Barca washed United away at Wembley Rooney was resolute.  He at last appears close to recapturing the form that looked destined to take him to the pantheon of the great players of his age.

Casillas
Lahm
Cole
Lucio
Pepe
Alonso
Modric
Wilshire
Tevez
Cristiano Ronaldo
Rooney

It is still possible to make strong cases on behalf of Sergio Ramos, Sami Khedira, Wesley Sneijder, Alexis Sanchez and Samuel Eto’o to be included in this team.

But whether they would fare any better against Barcelona than Smith’s side is obviously questionable.  If the objective is to press high up the pitch, move and pass the ball rapidly, and attack with numbers flowing in myriad patterns with the threat of magic in the air then I think this team would fare better than Smith’s selection.  Would it out Barca, Barca?  I don’t think so.

For that another approach is required.