IN the World Cup, third-place playoff games remind us of that old line about democracy. Everybody gets what nobody wants.
Alan Shearer, and other prominent pundits, have all insisted that no one wants to hang around after losing a semi-final. As the song goes, they really do just want to pick up their football and come home.
But there are a couple of intriguing issues still to settle when England and Belgium meet on Saturday. Harry Kane has six goals. Romelu Lukaku has four. Kane may feel like the Golden Boot represents no more than a consolation prize, but it’s one he publicly wanted nonetheless.
Plus, Three Lions coach Gareth Southgate could use the playoff as a marker to test the nation’s progress. Without dampening spirits after England’s euphoric run to the semi-final, there’s no getting away from the fact that they played some pretty rudimentary stuff against Croatia.
For all the talk of Southgate’s evolution and possession-based football, Three Lions lumped far too many long balls in the general direction of Kane’s sweat-soaked forehead without success.
Southgate should take the opportunity to play Marcus Rashford, Fabian Delph, Ruben Loftus-Cheek and Trent Alexander-Arnold in a tournament fixture that actually means little, but gives the chance to experiment with a Plan B.
Plus, there’s a minor historical incentive. England lost the playoff in 1990. The Three Lions can at least go one better than Gazza, Lineker and company.
As for Belgium, the Red Devils deserve a final hurrah in Russia. A team with Kevin De Bruyne, Eden Hazard and Lukaku shouldn’t go out with a whimper.
Indeed the cagey nature of the England-Belgium clash in the group stages does give the playoff an air of unfinished business.
It’s not a game that the footballers particularly want to play in, but it still promises to be a half-decent contest to watch.
Neil Humphreys
Singapore’s best selling author and Football columnist
