LESCOTT TALKS 'BACK THREE' NUANCES OF TAKING MAGUIRE AND WHY IT WAS THE RIGHT DECISION

Former Three Lions defender Joleon Lescott believes England manager Gareth Southgate made the right decision in taking Harry Maguire to the 2022 World Cup. Maguire's selection was criticized due to his poor form for Manchester United, as well as his absence from Erik ten Hag's starting XI in the run-up to the Qatar World Cup. As Lescott points out in an exclusive interview with Warner Bros Discovery Sport, there are so many other factors at play as well.

“I believe that a successful transition requires a good relationship with your partner [in center-back], and I think that is definitely helpful,” Lescott tells WBD Sport about taking Maguire. Trying to remember how much I played with John Terry in 2012, I ask myself, "Is it necessary?" I believe we played together every time I was in the squad. Therefore, it was probably slightly different for him. As a result, he had to cross over to the right.

Several factors are considered during the selection process. The majority of them are simple: There is quality, you can perform, yes, when selected, but then you wonder how he trains and what he does when he is not selected? Do we still expect him to be the leader we expect? Moreover, I am not referring only to Maguire, but to other members of the squad as well. However, Gareth has seen all of that first-hand."

The main focus of speculation is Southgate's formation, with most reports stating that he will utilize the three-man back line that has proved so effective in both of England's last two tournaments.

There has also been the suggestion of playing with a back four in the group stages, where England are heavy favorites to qualify, and switching to a back three in the knockout stages. According to Lescott, continuity with the system will provide the best opportunity for the players to succeed. According to him, you could get away with it [starting with a back four then switching] because I still believe we will qualify. In other words, does that mean you get away with it for that and then you lose the first knockout stage or one of the early knockout stages and everyone will say 'well, you should have done that'?

“It is likely he will use the formation you desire during most of the tournament, giving players a glimpse of what to expect in the future. It is a completely different situation than when you play France, Holland, Portugal, etc., in the groups, when you receive the ball in a completely different area and scenario.”

The game is a new experience for all the players, and again, these are all experienced and quality players. It is well known how scrutinized England is, how differently it is highlighted when it is England. Therefore, I believe that the best opportunity for the players would be to use the same formation but rotate the personnel."

A Having been a former defender himself, Lescott was a versatile option capable of playing both left-back and center-back. WBD Sport reports that he would have greatly enjoyed playing in a system such as this. “ Playing full-back has been a pleasure for me, and I enjoy getting forward, but I have also enjoyed defending, which gave me the opportunity to defend more one-on-one," said Lescott. "That was probably my greatest advantage." In other words, I was able to say, "I'm up against someone who wants to challenge me and I have to defend myself in different situations."

A tantalizing alternative universe is also presented where the England team he played in varied their formations by using a back three. As a possible back three, he suggested himself, Rio Ferdinand, and John Terry. Among the players used as wing-backs are Ashley Cole, Leighton Baines, James Milner, and Glen Johnson. In the midfield, there are players such as Steven Gerrard, Frank Lampard, Owen Hargreaves, and Michael Carrick. The front line would consist of Wayne Rooney, Joe Cole, Jermain Defoe, and Peter Crouch, among others. There is no doubt that the proposal is attractive. However, as a defender, what are the most significant differences and intricacies associated with switching from a back four to a back five?

In response to Lescott's statement, he said: "I think the biggest difference is the area you are defending, you are probably protecting a little wider area." Therefore, it is more spatial in nature. There is a slight difference in your recovery runs. Although you have to cover a wider area of the field, I do not believe it is a completely new concept.

“Defenders should now delay rather than attack. It is not a case of 'Oh I need to win the ball' when you are going towards them [attackers] in wide areas; it is 'Okay I need to delay this attack, so my teammates can recuperate'. It's just about understanding the relationship a little bit more, identifying the most comfortable position, so I think they will enjoy the freer nature of the game compared to a two anyway since you will be getting a bit more on the ball.

Whenever there is a two and you notice a split, recovering is more difficult. The angle you are creating for your teammates to receive as well as the angle you are creating for yourself is amazing. It is sometimes difficult to complete the recovery run if things do not go according to plan. There are times when, while splitting, the middle player gets the ball and suddenly it is like, "Oh, he has lost it now your center-backs cannot get inside." However, when it is a three, there is always going to be someone nearby. Therefore, it is slightly different for that aspect as well."

By Rashmi Goel