A word in defence of Wayne Rooney

Wayne Rooney’s Facebook fan page isn’t often worth scrolling through; more often than not, it is a mess of self-indulgent advertisements. Like most footballers, it is a corporately-driven vehicle to push Rooney’s market value under a veil of bringing him closer to his fans. Today, however, it was worth following as the England man launched a surprising attack upon the English press, claiming he was unsure what they ‘were getting at’ when speculation emerged about his extended role in yesterday’s training session.

Rooney: a frustrating but not fruitless night for England's star man (thetimes.co.uk)

Such a frank view is notable for its rarity among the traditionally secretive and professional England World Cup camps – John Terry, for example, suffered the wrath of Fabio Capello when he appeared to criticise his manager’s methods in South Africa. At the same competition, Rooney presumably suffered a similar handing-down after his infamous outburst towards England fans in the aftermath of the dour 0-0 draw with Algeria.

But this was different and, in my view, immeasurably more justifiable – England’s hierarchy wouldn’t have let Rooney’s words see the light of day if it wasn’t. An already mounting campaign against Rooney’s inclusion in England’s XI reached fever-pitch after the Italy defeat, but it’s a campaign that is as unjust as it is overblown.

Before his performance on Saturday night is even analysed, it appears the quality of the player has been lost on some critics. This is a player that has shone in an otherwise dire Manchester United season, scoring seventeen Premier League goals in a side that was mismanaged and entirely bereft of confidence. He is set to become England’s record caps-holder and it’s almost inevitable that he will better Bobby Charlton’s record of 49 goals for the national side.

It seems as though the only blemish nay-sayers can find on his record is World Cup finals appearances, with many having doubts about his ability to perform on the biggest stage but, in reality, how solid is this argument? He entered the 2006 tournament recovering from a serious injury and was never able to find fitness let-alone form. The fact is that he should probably never have gone, but that mistake was not his. Four years later, he was admittedly off-form, but the fact that Jermain Defoe was voted by Capello as England’s best player says everything about the quality of performances in South Africa in general.

Other critics point to his performance on Saturday night as further reason for his not being involved, but this is an equally-flawed argument. It doesn’t need to be said that Rooney was played out of position and had an admittedly quiet outing, and yet he still managed to contribute an assist – how many other England players could provide a cross so accurate on their weaker side in those conditions? - and create chances for himself. One of which he would have scored, some suggest, if his shirt had been red.

This is perhaps the most accurate criticism of Rooney’s doubters, and it may be so that Rooney would not have fired wide if the badge on his chest was United’s. Although a player of his ability and value should be putting these chances away, I can’t help but think that the matter is one of comfort.

The difference is that Rooney is valued at Old Trafford – the £300k-a-week and appreciation of United fans is evidence of that – in a way that he is not valued with England. He is shunted out in unfavourable positions and criticised when he’s not at his absolute best. Whilst it may seem absurd to suggest that someone who is paid to play football needs comfort from fans and the press, there is nothing to gain from offering the opposite.

The reaction of the English press to Wayne Rooney is something that continues to baffle me. Most would agree that he is our best player, one of few with the ability to change a game – the closest we have to Brazil’s Neymar. Despite his less-than-impressive performances so far at this World Cup, the Brazilian press will not lambast their ‘boy wonder’, and he will be better for it. Give Rooney the same treatment, and the same can hopefully be said for him.

Rooney has contributed more to the England team than most, and yet he finds himself as the focal point for much of the criticism levelled at the side. Frank Lampard’s press call today meant it occurred to me that the argument against his involvement is almost paradoxical. As England’s vice-captain rightly said, the criticism levelled at Rooney is mainly born out of the fact that he is our best player – a fact that should mean he is the first name on England’s team-sheet.

Perhaps that is over-simplifying matters, but the point is that there is nothing to gain from this treatment of Rooney. Although he was, for the most part, quiet against Italy, criticisms of his performance are ill-informed and hasty. Stick a player out-of-position and the least you can ask is for a decent job to be done. Rooney managed that and more in laying-on England’s goal.

Like Alan Shearer and most other onlookers with knowledge and balance, I would suggest it would be madness to judge Rooney fairly until he is played in his favoured position. As Patrick Vieira suggested on ITV, Rooney is the kind of player teams should be built around rather than vice-versa. Hopefully on Thursday night we’ll see Sterling out wide –where he is equally effective – and Rooney through the middle, where he can play with the comfort he needs to excel at a World Cup finals.

Until then, criticisms of Rooney are merely unhelpful and, worse, ill-informed assessments of England’s best player.