Coach Ralph Soccer Connection

07/25/2026

WORLD CUP DEBRIEF #3: ENGLAND
England’s performances are scrutinised to exhaustion, and the 2026 World Cup was no exception. Despite the endless debate, I’ll go against the grain: England played well, securing third place — their best finish since 1966. Of course, there’s one glaring caveat: the inevitable disappointment of the last 25 minutes against Argentina.

I didn’t expect England to win the World Cup, but I thought they had a chance — and as it turned out, they really did. It was an opportunity not taken. Unlike in 1966, when England benefited from home advantage, this tournament was always going to be gruelling: the travel, the heat, and Mexico’s altitude all took their toll. Comparing generations is never easy, but England’s defence falls well short of the legendary ’66 lineup. Gordon Banks, Bobby Moore, and Ray Wilson were world-class and would eclipse England’s current defenders. Bobby Charlton was the Jude Bellingham of his era, and up front, England boasted two consistent goal scorers — Roger Hunt and Geoff Hurst, with the great Jimmy Greaves in reserve — rather than just Harry Kane. Manager Thomas Tuchel faced both weaknesses and squad limitations. For the most part, he managed them well, though his right-back selections were puzzling. Reece James is an outstanding player, but it was surely foreseeable he wouldn’t last the entire tournament.

England’s best football came in the second half of their opener against Croatia — a level they arguably didn’t reach again until the third-place playoff, which felt more like a testimonial match for Didier Deschamps. France were the most exciting team but ultimately fell short. Spain were deserved winners, though their style, while admirable, rarely excites. England did what was required in each match: they were disciplined, organised, and had two match-winners in Bellingham and Kane, both capable of rescuing the team. Credit is due to Tuchel’s predecessor, Gareth Southgate, for building a foundation the German could improve. Despite the limitations, the squad still had talent, pace, and depth — assets generally used well until the ill-fated Argentina game.

In retrospect, the semi-final was finely balanced, with England perhaps having the edge before Anthony Gordon’s goal put them ahead. The debate now centres on whether England reverted to old habits — dropping deep to protect their lead. After scoring, the team retreated, echoing the Southgate era’s caution. In earlier matches, Tuchel used Hydration Breaks to spark his team, but this time, his words seemed to fall flat. Substituting Ezri Konsa, a defender, for the counter-attacking threat of Anthony Gordon appeared to be an attempt to reinforce the back line, but it backfired. In the final 10 minutes, two more defenders — “Big” Dan Burn and Nico O’Reilly — were introduced, the latter presumably to contain Lionel Messi as he began to influence the flow of the game.

Meanwhile, Reece James and a fatigued Declan Rice made way. This was likely the scenario Thomas Tuchel envisioned when he selected Jordan Henderson for the squad: a backs-to-the-wall moment requiring experience and composure. Unfortunately, Henderson was unavailable, having broken his arm celebrating the Azteca victory. Many questioned his recall, suggesting he should be a coach instead; it is not the same. While Henderson probably played a key role in setting standards during training, he couldn’t contribute on the pitch when it mattered most. For Tuchel, his trusted veteran wasn’t there when the crunch moment arrived.

For many fans, the closing minutes of the Argentina semi-final will linger longest. Ultimately, Thomas Tuchel must shoulder responsibility. He made bold choices, but they failed. Coaches, like players, can have off days — unfortunately, this was the one that mattered the most. It would be fascinating to hear Tuchel’s private reflections: what would he change, given another chance? I suspect he knows where he went wrong, even if he’ll never admit it publicly. Who can blame him?

The post-mortem is, inevitably, familiar: if only Trent Alexander-Arnold had been there to deliver crosses for Toney and Rashford, or Wharton to break Argentina’s lines. Never mind Cole Palmer and Phil Foden. Would Tuchel pick a different squad if given another chance? Only he and his staff know the answer. When the dust settles, England’s third-place finish stands, and the experience will serve Tuchel well heading into the 2028 Euros. The next question is whether he’ll remain in charge. He’s contracted through 2026, and unless he feels he’s reached his limit, he should stay. The only real issue, as Arne Slot experienced at Liverpool, is loss of fan confidence after a painful collapse. With long gaps between international fixtures, the fury will fade. I believe Tuchel has the resilience to weather the storm and take on the pressure.

Third place under such challenging conditions is nothing to scoff at. Brazil, Germany, and Italy — who failed even to qualify — would have gladly traded places. My suspicion is that even if England had won, some would still complain about their style. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: who would want to be England manager?

England have secured their best men's World Cup finish since winning the tournament 60 years ago. Is their performance at the 2026 edition being under-appreciated?

07/23/2026

WORLD CUP DEBRIEF #3: SCOTLAND
Selecting an All-Time Liverpool XI, my team would feature Steve Nicol, Alan Hansen, Andy Robertson, Graeme Souness and Kenny Dalglish. That’s 5 Scots in my top LFC XI from players who played for the Reds in the last 60 years. My point is that Scotland has produced many top players in my lifetime. During the seventies it was Scotland, rather than England, who flew the flag for the UK in the World Cup Finals. But after the late nineties, things began to change. The influx of foreign players into both the English and Scottish leagues reduced the pool of homegrown Scottish talent, and the national team’s fortunes suffered. From 1998 until 2021, Scotland failed to qualify for a major international tournament, a stark contrast to their earlier prominence.

Manager Steve Clarke, a coach I would label as “resourceful”, bucked the trend, having his side qualify for two successive Euros as well as this year's World Cup. Despite passionate support from The Tartan Army, the Scots have struggled upon qualification in every final, with the 2026 World Cup being the latest disappointing performance. Under Clarke, including the group stages of the past two Euros, Scotland’s record stands at 1 win, 2 draws, and 6 defeats. The manager's resourcefulness clearly hits a wall, as Scotland has consistently found it difficult to translate qualifying momentum into tournament success.

The Scots admittedly had a tough draw this year with two top-ten teams, Brazil and Morocco, in their group. The light at the end of the tunnel was that 8 of the 12 third-place teams would move into knockout rounds. If the Scots could defeat the so-called “patsies” in their group, Haiti, they would have a good chance of advancing. They did win but only by a solitary goal. With defeat to the two top 10 teams likely, Scotland would have to ensure they did not lose heavily. Unfortunately, with a goal difference of -3 after the two losses, the Scots were one of the 4 third-place teams unable to make the cut to the knockout rounds. Those were the results; what of Scotland’s performances?

It’s not unkind to say that Scotland were poor and once again found wanting in the pressure of finals competition. In their opening game, little Haiti were the better team in the second half, with Scotland hanging on for the 3 points. The Morocco and Brazil games were both lost through costly defensive lapses — errors that are punished at the highest level. While Steve Clarke had clear limitations in his squad, the performances lacked not just attacking threat but also composure and belief. Scotland managed only one goal in the tournament, underlining a deeper creative and psychological problem to be addressed if future campaigns are to be more successful.

Post-tournament, we have the usual chest-beating and recriminations. In qualifying, Scotland were often second best to Denmark and Greece but could still gut it out and create chances. That was not to be seen in Boston and Miami over the last month. One interesting insight was that Clarke’s skill set as a coach was not suited to tournament finals, when he had considerably more time to deal with the team than in qualifying. His strengths came to the fore in qualifying, with a shorter turnaround time between matches.

Another thought was that Scotland no longer has enough players competing at the higher levels of play. Whilst true, examples like Cape Verde and Curacao show that teams with players from lesser-known leagues can still perform above expectations with the right structure and mentality. Scotland, on paper, is significantly stronger than these countries, yet the minnows performed with more cohesion and belief. Similarly, Norway — a nation of comparable size — has advanced by investing in youth development, coaching, and a modern playing philosophy.

When I was growing up, Scotland was a strong football nation while Norway were considered a lesser light in European football circles. Times have changed, and Scotland now has much to learn from these nations' approaches. Can decisive steps be taken to emulate Norway's current level by focusing on development and infrastructure? What can Scotland learn from others, and what are they willing to implement?

Despite renowned Scottish FA coaching schools, there is a disconnect somewhere. A National Academy between Glasgow and Edinburgh is being touted as a possible solution, and — if successful — regional academies could follow. However, this will require real investment and a willingness by the Scottish FA to prioritise long-term development over short-term fixes.

I’m hearing schools football in Scotland isn’t what it once was, so where do the children play? Compared with the United States and the problems it faces, Scotland is a much smaller country. Is there a way to reorganise youth football nationally? It’s a smaller country, and the centres of population are clearly demarcated. Shouldn’t it be easier than the challenges the youth game faces in America? Again, whatever solutions are feasible, it's the long game if Scotland wants to rise again in international football and start producing Dennis Laws and Kenny Dalglishs regularly.

Taking it all in, I don’t have the answers and can only observe from across the ocean. What I do know is Scotland's history and great passion for football. While England is the home of Association Football, Scotland was more than the neighbouring rival. Scots provided much of the impetus for the sport's initial growth historically, as well as innovations: passing the ball for one! When my beloved Liverpool played their first-ever game, all eleven players were Scottish. The nation’s passion is manifested by the Tartan Army, who follow their team through thick and thin. Alternatively, could it be that the game is stuck in the mud north of the border, with history and tradition standing in the way of progress?

Steve Clarke graciously stood down after Scotland were eliminated. He deserves credit for returning Scotland to the world and European stage, but his successor faces an even tougher challenge. Reasonable goals must include qualifying for major tournaments and playing with greater ambition, even in defeat. Yet if the passion of the Tartan Army is to be fulfilled, nothing short of a comprehensive overhaul — rooted in long-term vision, investment, and bold reform — will suffice. The Tartan Army deserves far more than what they received at the 2026 World Cup, and the time for change is now. Will it be taken?

07/22/2026

WORLD CUP DEBRIEF #2: USMNT
I always find it difficult to assess the USMNT. So many are critical when things don’t meet expectations. I moved to the country in 1983 as the professional league was dying and the national team was very much in the wilderness. That is where I see the sport coming from to where it is today. When the USMNT breakthrough came in 1990, the World Cup squad was made up primarily of players just out of college, with a couple still playing there. It wasn’t surprising that the USA lost all three games, but lessons were learned, and 4 years later on American soil the last 16 was reached. A 1-0 defeat to eventual champions Brazil suggested progress was being made.

After a disastrous 1998 World Cup, the USMNT bounced back in 2002. A historic 3-2 victory over Portugal (Figo et al.) saw the team fall by a single goal to eventual finalists Germany in the quarter-finals. Since then, the USA has failed to go as far, falling as they did this year in the round of 16. Consequently, the 2026 World Cup is written off as another disappointment. It was a home-turf tournament, and yet another typical USMNT World Cup performance was delivered.

Before examining this year, it's important to be mindful of how the draw can favour a team in the knockout rounds. In 2002, the USA came up against familiar foes in Mexico in the last 16. That is a team that the USA can beat. In recent tournaments, Belgium (2014) and the Netherlands (2022) are countries that the USA will lose to more than they will defeat.

This time it was Belgium again, but a Belgian team said to be on the decline after the bulk of their “Golden Generation” had moved on and one that had hardly impressed previously. As we all know, Belgium triumphed comfortably, and the dreams of the US fans lay in tatters as the inquests began. The Balogun red card controversy disrupted preparation for the game without a shadow of a doubt. Did political interference affect the United States? Yes and yes again. The team was suddenly under pressure as the entire football world turned on the Americans and their perceived special treatment by FIFA. A single telephone call wrote off the impressive displays of the earlier games. Further, the Belgians were galvanised. It was apparent from the kick-off.

Would things have been different had Balogun not played? That we will never know. Perhaps it would have been the USA who were galvanised, and Balogun’s replacement, Ricardo Pepi, is a proven player at Champions League level. Putting the Belgium debacle to one side, I think the team showed enough to suggest that overall things are moving in the right direction. The squad is made up of seasoned pros balancing experience with potential. Despite Lexi Lalas's thoughts, I thought the shadow team that lost 3-2 to Turkiye with the last kick of the game showed up very well. Some experts forget that the Turks were pre-tournament favourites to win the group. The US options in reserve are well in advance of previous World Cups. Keep in mind injuries kept out players like Johnny Cardoso (Atletico Madrid) and Cameron Carter-Vickers (Celtic), who would have undoubtedly added to the cause.

Good players, but what of the football? The best I can remember from a USMNT, especially that opening half against Paraguay. The USA has pace and showed they could knock the ball around with skill. Coach Mauricio Pochettino’s imprint was on the team for all to see. Can it be built upon for the future? Further, can the USA make it into the last 8 and beyond? There is something to build upon for sure, whether Pochettino stays on or not. The country has an established professional league and players playing professionally all over the world. The pool is growing continually, but taking things to the next level is neither easy nor straightforward. We should not expect linear progression.

Having a pool spread so far apart presents challenges. If the number of Americans competing regularly in the Champions League continues to rise, it will be an avenue for a future coach to build the core of a team to compete with the best. One interesting aside with this year’s edition. Traditionally, the US has been strongest in goal. Keller, Friedel, Howard and Guzan are all goalkeepers who enjoyed lengthy and successful careers in the Premier League. A keeper at that kind of level would surely have strengthened the hand of Pochettino this year.

Naturally, the disappointment has led to the usual soul-searching about the state of the game in the USA. I’m not going to discuss this in depth, but I think it has to be accepted that Pay-to-Play and College Soccer are ingrained in the American way. I see both these routes as helpful for the game as they give visibility. Look at all the top-class soccer facilities nationwide, for example. They were not there in 1983. However, these routes will not yield the best that American soccer can offer.

The World Cup has brought a lot of money into the coffers of US Soccer. How about some serious investment in a nationwide Academy system based on principles of other established soccer countries? Most of all, invest in a bigger and more thorough recruitment system. Over the past few years, I’ve been coaching at the youngest ages in club soccer. There’s some real talent here in Massachusetts, particularly in the ethnic communities. Where do these players go? Multiply this by 50 with a well-funded scouting network, and who knows what level of player can be produced.

It sounds so simple, but it is the long game. It isn’t the modern way. However, I see no other way of producing a USMNT that can regularly expect to go beyond the last 16 in the World Cup. For me, the performances of 2026 are way beyond what we had in 1983 and 1990. 2002 too. It’s easy to clamber up the bottom rungs; the upper rungs to the very top will always be more of a challenge. Before the Belgium game, the US team had impressed the football world internationally with their performances. Remember, many worldwide do not consider the USA a football/soccer country. For a short time, they did.

07/21/2026

WORLD CUP DEBRIEF #1: THE 2026 TOURNAMENT
The 2026 World Cup was a success. For me, it was the best World Cup since North America’s previous tournament in 1994. We approached the tournament with some trepidation, but by and large those issues were bypassed. Not totally; I will return to them in due course.

First, the many positives.

The football was entertaining. It was unfortunate that, like ’94, the Final did represent the overall state of play. However, fears that extreme weather conditions and exhausting schedules for the top players would affect the quality of football did not come to pass. Further, the increased number of games and the competing minnows generally did not affect the proceedings. Indeed, the smaller nations provided many of the highlights. Curaçao, after a 7-1 shellacking by Germany, recovered and performed with credit. Cape Verde did even better, holding Spain, the eventual champions, to a 0-0 draw. The game gave the football world a new hero to cheer: Vozinha, a veteran 40-year-old keeper playing in Portugal’s second division. “Cabo Verde” made the knockout rounds, falling 3-2 in extra time to defending champions Argentina. Overall, 2026 gave us much to enjoy on the football field.

The fans flocked to the games en masse. Ticket prices way in excess of previous tourneys did not detract from the attendance. South American fans brought their passion and colour as always, though I expect it was via the significant diasporas, as opposed to travelling fans, each nation possesses in the USA. Several European teams showed their fanbases off in a manner that will not soon be forgotten. The Dutch Oranje with their “Links Rechts” Left-right march to the stadiums, the Norwegian fans' “Viking Row”, and in Boston, where I live, the Tartan Army took over the city. Statues throughout the city centre could be found wearing traffic cones on their heads. A custom of the Scottish fans. We should also not forget the college town of Lawrence, Kansas, and their love affair with the Algerian national team. Overall, the fans, teams and the World Cup overshadowed America’s 250th. I’m old enough to remember the Bicentennial. Even living in England at the time, it was difficult to ignore that the USA was having a giant party. In 2026, the party was the World Cup.

Accordingly, the 2026 World Cup was a great spectacle. ’94 was a success due to record-setting attendance, which provided impetus to establish a professional soccer league. ’26 went further with its packed, colourful, space-age stadiums. It became an event for sections of the American populace unfamiliar with the game. As if scripted, the big names showed up: Mbappe, Kane, Haaland, and of course Lionel Messi. Though he showed his age in the latter stages, the diminutive Argentinian could still pull some strings. It’s good for the future of the American game with Messi continuing to show his skills in the MLS. TV cameras regularly caught the fun moments, spotting the personalities of sports, screen, and the music world in the crowd. Soccer continues to come of age in the USA.

Media coverage of soccer hit new heights in the USA. Back in 1994, the tournament was covered primarily on television and in the newspapers. This time it was more. The internet and social media gave us new heroes, replays of the great goals, and controversial incidents. It gave a new dimension. I followed the tournament primarily through podcasts. A shout-out to James Richardson’s “Totally Football Show”, the Brazilian Shirt podcast, the Sports Agents and Men in Blazers. BBC’s South American correspondent Tim Vickery and Henry Winter of World Soccer provide much insight lacking on television.

Beyond the games, TV coverage had its moments. James Corden was brought back with a soccer-related late, late show, “After Hours”, that gave us laughs and generally reflected the joy the World Cup was bringing to the country. Even former Patriots (American) football star Rob Gronkowski had his own World Cup show: “The Other Football”. TV wasn’t like this in ’94. Ditto the television commercials dominated by footballers: 1) David Beckham, 2) Lionel Messi, 3) Christian Pulisic. Pre-tournament cynics claimed that 20% of the country’s 330 million population had no idea that the World Cup was happening. It should be close to zero by now. The World Cup was everywhere. The television audience for the USA-Belgium and England-Mexico quarter-finals reached an estimated 33 million, exceeding the NBA Finals, completed at the start of the tournament, by 13 million.

So much positivity, but as we feared beforehand, it wasn’t always a bed of roses. Gianni Infantino’s FIFA and the so-called “Geopolitical World Cup” still reared their ugly heads.

First, there was the “magic dollar”. Infantino priced the tickets around what he gauged American sporting events would cost. Many games were priced considerably beyond. In a brushstroke, many true fans were priced out. It did not detract from overall attendance; I’m sure Gianni will feel justified making more of the magic dollar. It was considerable. Infantino and FIFA generated a record-breaking revenue of $15 billion, twice that of the 2022 Qatar Tournament.

Passing costs onto the hosts meant significantly higher costs for train travel to the stadiums. It was expensive to be there. What this means for future tournaments and other FIFA events remains to be seen. I’m interested in attending the Women’s World Cup next summer in Brazil. Will Infantino price tickets for the locals or go for the cash grab once again? Add in hydration breaks, which were for the benefit of television corporations and which it is said FIFA will seek direct recompense for in the future, plus a 64-nation tournament. Infantino’s direction appears to be clear.

Second, FIFA's supposedly non-political concerns appeared to involve politics. The organisation didn’t cover itself in glory in several respects. It created a mythical “peace prize,” and since then FIFA and Infantino have continually appeared to act in a manner that wasn’t non-political. The most recent example being the Malvinas banner by the Argentinian team. In 2024, two Spanish players were banned for 2 games following a comparable demonstration over Gibraltar. This time, ‘¡de nada!’

Of course, all was overshadowed by the furore over USMNT’s striker Folarin Balogun’s red card, which was going to prevent him playing in the quarter-finals. Presidential intervention, admitting no knowledge of what a red card was, led FIFA to suspend the card for a year. A similar offence by England’s Jarrell Quansah - serious foul play - was punished with a two-match ban. As a fan, I thought the Balogun red was harsh while the Quansah call was the correct one. However, that is not the point. FIFA unashamedly bent to political pressure. Of course, Infantino sidestepped the issue, passing the decision on to an unnamed disciplinary committee. Nobody believes him.

While politics didn’t run amok as feared, there was still a Somali referee being denied entry, and the treatment of the Iranian team was shoddy. They performed remarkably well despite the hurdles placed by the government. The Final was anticipated to be a potential stage for the current administration. It was not as overtly bad as the Club World Cup Final 12 months earlier. However, the singing of the US national anthem, the anthem of the host, is both unparalleled and unnecessary. Then the presentation of the trophy. Why a person who has been so critical of Spain of late - “a wasted cause” - would want to be pictured with the celebrating Spanish team is a mystery to me. I understand in Spain he was photoshopped out of the team’s celebrations.

Finally, with great irony, Andrew Giuliani, Executive Director of the White House Task Force for the World Cup, commenting on the Argentinian Malvinas banner, stated it is their First Amendment right in America to have the right to free speech. In the past week, when government officials posed the direct question of whether Joe Biden won the 2020 election, they feared for their place if they responded in a way not acceptable to the administration. This is the First Amendment right to free speech?

Putting all aside, kudos to the fans and the media for their overall coverage of the 2026 World Cup. There was much joy and goodwill on display. A special mention to a Scouser, Roger Bennett, and his Men in Blazers media group. Over the last 12 months, Bennett has provided a build-up focused on excitement and anticipation. I admit I was dubious, but well done, Roger; you persevered and won the day. So did many others. Despite all the nonsense, football was the winner. The main takeaway of the 2026 World Cup is clear: soccer in the United States has taken a huge step in the right direction.

Next debrief, I will look at the national teams of the USA, Scotland, and England.

The best goals. One final winner. ⚽🏆Relive the standout finishes f...

07/20/2026

KEVIN KEEGAN RIP
Such a shock to learn of the passing of a Liverpool great, Kevin Keegan. I was there when he made his debut against Nottingham Forest. He had been signed a couple of months earlier for only £33,000 from fourth-division Scunthorpe United. There were few expectations, yet from the first whistle, it was clear he was a special player. His energy and commitment brought his first goal for the Reds only 12 minutes into the game.

He formed one of the first “big-man/little-man” striking partnerships with Welsh centre-forward John Toshack. Within a year, he had played his first game for England. It was a period of great success for Keegan and the club: 3 League titles, an FA Cup, 2 UEFA Cups and a European Cup. Kevin Keegan was at the centre of it all.

Back in those days, I used to enjoy reading autobiographies of top footballers; Keegan’s book was different. While he remembered his successes fondly, he was never afraid to be critical when he thought it was warranted. LFC didn’t escape his wrath, even though he loved the club and the fans.

His final season at Anfield was 1976-77. Before a ball had been kicked, he announced that he would be leaving the club at season’s end as he wanted a new challenge abroad. His way of thinking was unusual for the time. Some supporters didn’t receive the news well, yet Keegan played on undeterred. The Reds came agonisingly close to a treble, and Keegan signed off in style as Liverpool defeated Borussia Mönchengladbach 3-1. He gave a man-of-the-match performance, and off he went to Germany to play for Hamburger SV.

Looking back, I feel Kevin is a little bit underrated at Anfield. Part of the reason was that he was succeeded by the great Kenny Dalglish as Liverpool’s dominant run in English football continued to even greater heights. At Hamburg, after initial struggles, he had great individual success, winning the Ballon d’Or in 1978 and 1979. He is also overlooked when pundits and journos look back on English football greats. The likes of Brian Robson, Paul Gascoigne and now Harry Kane are lauded ahead of him. Only four Englishmen have reached the pinnacle of the Ballon d’Or, and Keegan did it twice. Later in his career, he returned to England to play for Southampton and later Newcastle United. Newcastle is a very similar city to Liverpool, and Keegan became a legend there too, first as a player, then as manager.

In a sense, Keegan was a successor to the great George Best as a footballer with a pop star image. Whereas Best was a natural, Keegan had to work hard at his game. I think it’s fair to say he outshone the Belfast boy in the long run. A friend of my sister said I looked like Kevin Keegan from the back. Make of that comment what you will!

To remember the great man, here are highlights from the 1974 FA Cup Final against Newcastle. It’s a 7-minute video showing his energy and passion, with 2 goals to top it off. I was there that day when he etched his name in LFC history forever.
YNWA

Liverpool 3-0 Newcastle 1974 FA Cup Final at Wembley in one of the ...