Yes, Tuchel might be able to take England through the Rubicon by winning a major final. Among its many assets, unlike Capello, there would be no language barrier. But the feat would, on some level, have a taste of compromise, an Anglo-German affair, an admission that all of England’s vaunted belief in “DNA” had been in vain.
Foreign coaches can achieve a high degree of acceptance in countries that persuade them to enter into marriages of convenience. Just look at the affection in which Carlos Queiroz is held in Iran. But with England, sensitivities are more complex. A certain level of patriotic allegiance is expected. With Capello, however, it all came across as a grimly mercenary enterprise. He showed little interest in improving his English or understanding much about England. He combined the ostentation of life among London’s super-rich with a managerial rigor that left his players crawling on walls during the 2010 World Cup in South Africa.
Tuchel is nobody’s idea of a Capello clone. Urban, multilingual and relentlessly encouraging players who want to learn, he has an array of qualities that could take England forward. But England would be better advised to look within for its solution to the post-Southgate conundrum. The question is who would be tenderable. Eddie Howe would need a lot of persuasion to turn his back on the Saudi-funded revival at Newcastle, while Graham Potter is locked into a five-year Chelsea project. Holland is the clearest internal candidate, having watched Southgate closely and gleaned invaluable expertise, but he might lack the required stardust.
In this context, the temptations for AM to once again tap into the global market are alluring. But they should, even with Tuchel and Pochettino available, resist. For the one unchanging truth about international sport is that it should ultimately pit the best of one country against another. Twist it, and you risk diminishing its essential meaning.