Does England Have A Plan B?

It's not looking good for Wayne Rooney. And as Rooney's chances of playing in this summer's World Cup go down the toilet, so do England's chances of lifting the trophy in Berlin on July 9. No Rooney, no World Cup. Why bother showing up, right?

Well, perhaps all is not lost for the Three Lions. England still has enough class to win Group B over the likes of Paraguay, Trinidad and Tobago, and Sweden. Should England win their group, they'd take on the runner-up from Group A, arguably the weakest group in the tournament. So, might as well still show up and give it a go. That means it's time for Plan B.

I have two hard and fast rules (which I remind Bryce of every time we speak) when it comes to assembling a football team, particularly for a short tournament:

1. You must have a ball-winning holding midfielder.
2. You must have fast, skillful wingers that can torch opposing fullbacks.

England doesn't exactly pass the test on either of those rules. Frank Lampard and Steven Gerrard are attacking midfielders with questionable defensive skills and a bit lacking when it comes to slowing down the game and keeping control of the ball. And while Joe Cole will take on opposing defenders down the flank, he isn't the fastest guy out there, nor is his counterpart out on the right wing, David Beckham.

I believe Sven's "midfield of stars" is the single biggest problem area for England. While all skilled individually, a midfield of Cole, Lampard, Gerrard, and Beckham fails to meet my criterion for a winning midfield formula. Anyone who watched England play quality opposition in the last four years - Brazil, France, or Portugal, for example - will remember how dominated England was in terms of ball possession. England's midfield spends far too much time chasing the ball, and then giving it away cheaply when it finally does win it.

The absence of Rooney will only highlight these issues even more. Rooney was the one player who would actually come back to the halfway line, take a short ball, and run at opposing defenders. Without him, it's the same old long ball approach.

So, what is my answer to solve the problem presented by the "midfield of stars" and the absence of Rooney, you ask?

Play five in midfield.

By playing five in midfield, England can't follow both of my rules. But it can pick one, which is better than not following the rules at all.

If England wants to play more of a possession game and put the clamps on an opposition forward or attacking midfielder, they can play Michael Carrick or Ledley King in the holding role in front of the defense and behind Lampard and Gerrard. This would give England a true holding midfielder and free up both Lampard and Gerrard, who will need to score more goals with Rooney missing, to push forward. Lampard and Gerrard would get the ball closer to the halfway line instead of back near their own goal and would be far more effective. Carrick is solid in possession and an excellent passer, while King is the stronger defensive player.

If England wants to attack more, they can play Shaun Wright-Phillips on the right side. SWP, while not having the best of seasons on the Chelsea bench, is that combination of skill and blinding speed on the wing. He would give opposing defenders fits, and he'd take some of the burden off of Cole on the opposing wing. Plus, this would enable Beckham to drift more where he pleases in midfield, which he tends to do when playing for England. While you'd still be missing a holding player, you would instead have three central midfielders. Three could get the job done better than two, even though Beckham, Lampard, and Gerrard are not great holding players or ball winners.

True, with five in midfield, you are missing something up front. But this shouldn't limit Michael Owen's game a lot. His job always has been to get on the end of long balls. He will miss Rooney's service, but should still be effective.

Also, the lack of a second forward shouldn't mean fewer goals for England. England score an extremely high percentage of goals from set pieces, where midfielders and defenders get on the end of crosses. This won't change without Rooney in the lineup. Regardless, none of the potential forward options - Defoe, Crouch, or Bent - are proven goal scorers and none is an obvious automatic replacement for Rooney up top.

Crazy ideas? Perhaps. But England need to roll the dice here. Defoe, Crouch, and Bent cannot do what Rooney does. So why not add something to the midfield? Either way you go, you are giving the midfield something it clearly is lacking with the usual quartet and strengthening your team. Five in midfield will help England to win the ball more frequently and actually do something with it once it gets it besides hit it long. For once, the England midfield will have options.

Sven Goran Eriksson hasn't shown himself to be very adaptable over the years. The absence of Rooney will force him to be. For England to make it past the quarterfinals and truly be a threat at the World Cup, five in midfield is the way to go.

Please email us your thoughts at bookableoffense@gmail.com. Photos courtesy www.soccernet.com, www.uefa.com, and www.football.co.uk.