On a warm June afternoon in 2009, I found myself part of a mismatched six-a-side lineup. At 30, I was the second-oldest player, surrounded by energetic teammates in their early twenties. Our opponents, a group of Bolivian farmers, seemed to have decades more experience. While we donned sports gear, they were in jeans and work boots. Despite our best efforts, we were thoroughly outplayed, the final score slipping from my memory, though it was clear that “square pegs in round holes” was not a plausible way to conclude the match.
How did this team of older players manage to outmatch us? The answer is simple: altitude. Near Lake Titicaca, at an elevation of nearly 4,000 meters, we were at a severe disadvantage. Even the slightest sprint left me gasping for air. This was no level playing field.
Given the readership here, many of you have likely traversed the Inca Trail or are reading this from an expedition on Kilimanjaro. You understand that acclimating to the Azteca Stadium’s altitude in merely two days is virtually impossible, regardless of how many coca leaves one consumes.
Experts contend that for England to adapt to these challenging conditions, they should have either arrived at halftime of their first group match or landed just moments before kickoff, fooling their bodies into performing before the inevitable onset of altitude sickness. Picture Jordan Pickford gesturing animatedly, perhaps not entirely in character. You get the gist.
The Azteca sits at approximately 2,200 meters above sea level, meaning Dan Burn will be slightly higher at 2,202 meters. One can only imagine the accommodations he’ll have, likely a toddler-sized bed with his legs dangling out the window while the local fans blare car horns throughout the night. We witnessed the fatigue that plagued the Ecuador players, raising questions about the effectiveness of noise-canceling headphones. How many alternative hotels will England need to secure a restful night?
Dan Bardell, during a recent episode of the Guardian’s World Cup Daily podcast, humorously suggested using the cast of *Dear England* as a decoy squad. The idea is to place them in the team’s official hotel while secretly relocating Harry Kane and his teammates to a nearby backpackers’ hostel. At least this way, a few players might get the rest they need.
This line of thought could be perceived as making excuses in advance, yet there is a growing understanding that facing Mexico in Mexico City will be an incredibly tough challenge. The Mexican team appears stronger, and despite having numerous talented players, England has its share of pressing issues. Suddenly, expectations for this major tournament seem surprisingly grounded.
One significant benefit of being in Los Angeles at this moment is avoiding the constant anxiety that would follow England’s game against the Democratic Republic of the Congo, particularly regarding the problematic right-back situation. However, regardless of your location, it’s impossible to escape the unsolicited and often misguided tactical opinions from those who may not regularly follow football.
Djed Spence’s performance on Wednesday left much to be desired, but he wasn’t responsible for the DRC goal. He was pulled out of position due to a lack of coverage for Noah Sadiki, who was making a run through the center. The ball seemed to be aimed for Sadiki in any case. It would have been irrational for Spence to ignore that movement. Either Noni Madueke needed to rush to cover Brian Cipenga, or a midfielder, likely Elliot Anderson, should have tracked Sadiki. Furthermore, there was no pressure on the ball when Chancel Mbemba made his pass. The issues are systemic, affecting both the midfield and defense, and these vulnerabilities have already been laid bare, with further exposure likely.
Starting Rice at full-back would be a questionable decision. I can’t bear to hear someone exclaim “square pegs in round holes” during commentary. If all other right-backs are sidelined due to injury, is John Stones starting as center-back against a formidable Mexican attack a greater risk than maintaining the Marc Guéhi-Ezri Konsa partnership in the middle with Spence on the right? If Rice is fit, the central structure remains firm. Anderson has performed quietly well thus far, so the wingers are the primary positions that require rotation.
It’s overly simplistic to label Madueke and Marcus Rashford as poor performers while Bukayo Saka and Anthony Gordon are deemed good simply based on the goals scored while they were on the field. The reality isn’t so binary. The DRC players visibly fatigued in the closing 20 minutes; what’s to say the opposite wouldn’t occur if Gordon starts and Rashford comes on? None of the wingers have particularly shone, and there hasn’t been much space to exploit, even against opponents who didn’t employ a Ghanaian low block.
Given the challenging breathing conditions at the Azteca, Thomas Tuchel’s tactics will be intriguing to observe. Mexico typically starts at a rapid pace, and there is inherent risk in playing a deep defensive line. However, it might be wise to conserve energy and strike on the counterattack—Kane dropping back to facilitate play, which has been noticeably absent thus far. Perhaps the wingers could be deployed for a half each to completely wear themselves out.
If England finds themselves eliminated in a hazy defeat against Mexico at 3 am UK time, it won’t be a cause for shame. We can all recover and move on by morning.
Of course, with each World Cup, a small, foolish part of my mind holds onto hope that this will be the one. Achieving victory in Mexico would be a remarkable feat. However, should England manage this, it’s likely they would face Brazil, Argentina, and France at sea level. An easy task, indeed—no Bolivian farmer could prevail in that scenario.
- World Cup 2026
- World Cup
- England
- Mexico
- comment
