Final Observations of England Friendly Against Czech Republic (2-2)

• It’s clear that England is really lacking in two positions – left wing and center forward. Steven Gerrard is a very good player and performed well on the left today, but that’s not his natural position and he doesn’t give England much width. He needs to play in the position Frank Lampard occupied today. Stewart Downing should be nothing more than a squad player. Wayne Rooney, as we all know, is not really a striker, and neither Jermain Defoe nor Emile Heskey (who has 5 goals in 45 appearances) are the answers for England long-term. Fabio Capello left the best options for those positions at home, in my opinion, in Ashley Young (left) and either Darren Bent or Peter Crouch up top. Bent or Crouch paired with either Defoe or Rooney and England would be in business. Young provides the pace and on-ball qualities that England just doesn’t have. Joe Cole is a versatile option who can play either wing and as a second striker, but I’m not sure if he’s consistent enough on the international stage to start.

• Wes Brown scored today, but I don’t think he’s the best option at right back. Glen Johnson brings more to the table than Brown while making half as many mistakes, of which Brown made two bad ones in this game. Luke Young isn’t a bad player. Phil Neville is still serviceable. It seems like Brown’s spot isn’t even up for contention, and that’s a problem.

• The Czech Republic were the better team in this match. They’re not half as flashy as England can be at times, but they get the job done. It was nice to see them rebound with a victory after that disastrous collapse against Turkey in Euro 2008, the last game they played. They deserved the victory and were harshly done by when Joe Cole scuffled home the late equalizer.

• As with the U-21’s, I was disappointed with the turnout at Wembley. Look, there aren’t too many international games played each year so when there is one, I’d expect it to be sold out or close to it. If you don’t think you’re going to get that at Wembley, move the game to a smaller stadium. There’s no need to have a “national stadium” anyway, not when there are other fully capable grounds in the country.

• England’s players didn’t have the same passion as their Czech counterparts. I can’t blame it on their new captain, John Terry, I just think they need to put a little more into their performances in the future. It’s hard to explain, really – it seemed like something was missing. They get plenty of credit for their two comebacks, though, because those are hard to come by at this level (unless you’re Turkey, of course!)

• All things considered, Capello can take some positives and negatives out of this game. As I said, his team came back twice from a goal down. David Beckham looked very good on the right side and still gets it done. Ashley Cole put in a solid 90 minutes. The negatives, though, outweigh the positives. England generated nothing up front. They were very, very sloppy at times. David James wasn’t at his finest, even though there was nothing he could do about Jankulovski’s fantastic free kick. There's a lot to improve upon, and I'm sure Capello knows that.

England is back in action on September 6, when they'll pay a visit to minnows Andorra. Andorra began their qualifying campaign for World Cup 2010 today with a 3-0 loss at Kazakhstan. It'll be England's first game in UEFA Group 6 and should be a victory for the Three Lions. They outscored Andorra by a combined 8-0 in their two games against the 182nd-ranked team in the world in Euro 2008 qualifying.

Lampard Paired With Gerrard in England's Starting Lineup

Yes, you read correctly.

We've seen this story before. Frank Lampard and Steven Gerrard can't play together in the same midfield, but yet England boss Fabio Capello is going to give it another try in today's friendly against the Czech Republic. This should be interesting.

The other surprise in the starting lineup is Gareth Barry, not because of his inclusion but because of his position. Barry will be playing left wing, definitely not his best role or the one he's been so successful in for Aston Villa lately. Why play Barry, who has a great relationship with Gerrard and would allow the Liverpool captain to go forward, in the holding role, where Barry is best, when you can play Lampard, who gives you nothing defensively? Makes no sense to me.

Here's the full lineup:

(4-4-2)
GK: James

RB: Brown
CB: Ferdinand
CB: Terry (captain)
LB: A. Cole

RMF: Beckham
CMF: Gerrard
CMF: Lampard
LMF: Barry

ST: Rooney
ST: Defoe

More analysis later.

Frank Lampard to Inter Milan?

Born and bred in London on opposite sides of England's capital, Frank Lampard could very well be leaving home to rejoin former manager José Mourinho in Milan.

According to BBC Sport, Inter Milan have begun negotiations with Chelsea to bring the high-profile 30-year-old midfielder to Serie A. It is understood that Chelsea have received a fax from the Italian giant inquiring about Lampard, who has only one year left on his current contract at Stamford Bridge and so far has been hesitant to commit to a new deal.

With the arrival of Deco last week and the holdover presence of the rather large figure that is Michael Ballack, not to mention the fact that Zenit St. Petersburg and Russian national team star Andrei Arshavin is now being linked to Chelsea as well, it seems safe to assume that Lampard doesn't really figure into new manager Luiz Felipe Scolari's future plans. If Arshavin was to be signed, Chelsea would have three terrific attacking midfielders in a formation that, going by Scolari's past history, really only has room for one at a time. With Lampard and Arshavin, Chelsea would have four players for that one position, and simple mathematics tells me that that won't work out.

Inter's first offer is reported to be somewhere in the neighborhood of $13 million dollars, $3 million less than what Chelsea just paid for Deco. In an earlier post I talked about how $16 million for Deco is a steal, and with that in mind, $13 million for Lampard would be flat-out highway robbery. I understand that his value decreases the closer his current contract gets to expiring, but there is no way that a proven 20-goal-per-season player is only worth $13 million.

Chelsea and Luiz Felipe Scolari can continue to say all the right things in public about how they'd like Lampard to stay in West London, and they really have no choice but to say that or else his value will be slashed even more, but the fact of the matter is this is Lampard's decision to make and his alone.

It's no secret that he is one of Mourinho's favorite players and it's no secret how much Lampard loves playing for Mourinho, and to be honest, I think this is the perfect time for Lampard to move on. He's won two Premier League titles an FA Cup, and two Carling Cups, and been named to the PFA Team of the Year twice, all with Chelsea. The only major trophy he didn't win was the Champions League, and that was through no fault of his own with the way he carried the Blues in the later stages of that competition last year before they lost to Manchester United in PK's in Moscow. He can't accomplish any more with the club, and I think his tenure there has run its natural course.

Chelsea and Inter will surely go back and forth discussing a transfer fee for Lampard, because there's just no way Chelsea would only sell for $13 million. Remember, just one or two seasons ago, this is a guy who was valued anywhere between $35-$40 million, so a sum of not even half of that seems very outlandish. Lampard is in the prime of his career and would benefit from the slower pace of Serie A.

If I had to put a percentage on Lampard leaving for Inter Milan at this point, I'd say it's at least 50/50, if not 55/45 or even 60/40 towards him going. There's no room for him at Chelsea and Mourinho is a huge Lampard fan as I already mentioned.

Update (07/08-6:57 PM): Inter’s first official bid — nearly $16 million dollars — will be rejected by Chelsea, the West London club announced. Chelsea have also stated that they “will not enter into any discussions” regarding a possible transfer for Lampard, but come on, we’ve heard that plenty of times before and then that club eventually sells the player anyway.

What Was Avram Grant Thinking?

They say hindsight is 20/20, and that’s certainly true. That doesn’t make it worthless though, especially when the party involved has already made a few questionable decisions in the past.

So then, Mr. Grant, let me ask you why you didn’t start John Terry, Frank Lampard, and Nicolas Anelka yesterday in your Champions League Round of 16 first leg at Olympiakos. Was it because you didn’t approve of Lamps scoring TWO goals last weekend in the FA Cup? Was it because you think that Florent Malouda is a better attacking option than Anelka, who has scored 13 goals this season? Was it because you wanted to go with a guy in Ballack who hadn’t played a Champions League game all season?

Listen, Ballack, Malouda, and Alex (who maintained his place ahead of Terry) aren’t exactly slouches, don’t get me wrong. They also aren’t as good as the three players who they started over. When you get to the Round of 16 in the Champions League, you have to play your best team and it’s as simple as that. There are no easy games at this stage of the tournament; teams that reach the last 16 don’t get there off a fluke or because of luck, they’re there because they proved they should be over six games in the Group Stage. You can’t disrespect an opponent by playing a weakened side. Bringing Anelka and Lampard on late in the second half isn’t good enough. You can’t expect them to do anything if they don’t get many minutes; it’s tough to come off the bench cold into a tough match and contribute, especially when you’re not used to being a substitute in the first place.

I don’t want to hear that Grant was trying to rest these guys for the Carling Cup final against Spurs this weekend. That match is five days away from yesterday’s game in Greece; Lampard, Terry, and Anelka would have had plenty of time to recover. I would’ve thought that players who can score goals (Anelka and Lampard) would’ve been preferred away from home over players who don’t usually score from the run of play (Malouda and Ballack) because away goals mean more in the Champions League. I would’ve thought that going with the club captain, John Terry, over Alex, who is a center back in name only as he loves to go forward, was the smarter move.

People are saying that Chelsea are in prime position now to advance to the quarterfinals. I don’t agree. Sorry, a 0-0 draw for the home team in the Champions League favors the home team because they didn’t give up a goal to the away side. Now, Olympiakos doesn't even have to win at Stamford Bridge; they can play for another 0-0 draw and take their chances in extra time and/or PK's, or push for that all-important away goal in normal time and then park the bus.

Do I think Chelsea will still advance? Yes. I just don’t think they did themselves any favors yesterday and I put the blame squarely on Avram Grant for not selecting his best side.