Rio, Roy and the wrong decision

Dropped: Rio's omission was a surpise
to many

As a Northern Irishman I usually give my support to England at major tournaments, mainly because the chances of Northern Ireland reaching another tournament are about as remote as Balotelli becoming a priest. This year I got quite excited at the idea of Roy Hodgson creating a compact, determined unit that could possibly shut out more technically gifted opponents. Preparation for the tournament seemed to be going quite well too, Roy had made a bold decision to drop Rio Ferdinand, a veteran of 81 caps, for 'footballing reasons', and in the friendly's against Norway and Belgium, a resolute England produced two solid 1-0 victories.

It was only in the aftermath of the win against Belgium that normal service resumed for a national side that continually that spends as much time in the front pages of tabloids, as it does in the back pages. Gary Cahill was ruled out of the competition with a facial injury and the expectation was that Ferdinand would be the obvious replacement. To the surprise of professionals, journalists' and pundits, Hodgson called up Martin Kelly, a right back in a Liverpool side that had its' lowest league finish in decades. Ferdinand himself took to twitter asking "what reasons??", clearly in reference to the Hodgson's decision to overlook him yet again. The general consensus seemed to be that Rio was left out due his relationship, or lack of it, with former skipper John Terry. Terry, accused of racial abusing Ferdinand's brother Anton, is facing Westminster magistrates court on July 9th and should he be found guilty Hodgson and the FA board will have left themselves with no option but to resign. 

Interview: Roy clarified his reasons for dropping Rio.

In an interview with the BBC, Hodgson clarified his reasons for dropping Rio, but his rationale produced more questions than it answered. He felt he couldn't bring Rio because he could not guarantee that he would start, claiming he was too good a footballer to be a 'squad' player. It is this point that baffles me completely. Surely it makes sense to bring an experienced player, regardless if he plays every game and that knows how to handle pressure at the highest level, over a 22 year old right back with only 1 cap. I know who I would rather see in the dressing room if England progress to the latter stages of the competition. It is important to highlight that I think Kelly is great prospect with a fantastic future ahead of him, but in this instance I don't believe that he can compete with the cream of the crop in terms attacking talent. As for Terry, his talent is unquestionable but I can't help but think that with all the controversy that he brings, it may have been best to withdraw himself from the squad. His presence will almost certainly undermine the European Championship campaign if England fail to win the competition, the media will have their scapegoat and Hodgson will be heavily criticised for making a 'bad' decision. 

This leads me to my next point, if Capello was still in charge, would he have made the same choices. He is known for trying to keep the emphasis on football alone and to protect his players from the media circus that follow them. Personally I believe Capello would have made the same choice and chose to avoid the morale  sapping tension that would have been present, had both players been selected. Capello had a brutal honesty about him, especially when it came to the media. In my view Capello probably would have just admitted that the reason Rio had been dropped was because he had to make a choice, and he chose Terry. Obviously this is all subjective, but one thing is for certain, Capello was a man who stuck to his principles, so much so that he resigned from his post over the removal of Terry as captain by the FA.

Charged: Terry faces an anxious wait to clear his name

If England don't win the Euros there is no doubt that this issue will resurface and face intense media scrutiny. This could become an potentially volatile situation, considering that the verdict of Terry's trial will fall directly in the aftermath of the competition. Hodgson might find that the decisions he has made in the run up to the tournament, could also be the decisions that cost him his job.

Personally I think that Roy Hodgson has acted with respect during the entire process. He contacted Rio to explain his decision, something that many international managers wouldn't do. Terry, of course, is innocent until proven otherwise and it would be unfair to drop him considering the verdict is not due until after the tournament. Whether Hodgson has made the right choice remains to be seen, but one thing is for certain, this won't be last we hear about this issue.

Like what you've read?? Follow @scott_cranston on twitter for updates and further articles.