Ukraine vs. England: Michael Carrick's Absence Remains a Mystery

As tentative and small as it was, England moved a step closer to the 2014 World Cup after an instantly forgettable 0-0 draw with Ukraine.

The point sustains their lead in Group H, keeping them just ahead of their opponents in this game, as well as Montenegro. However, had Michael Carrick been involved, things could have been far more straightforward.

It was Ukraine who had the greater chances during this contest, keeping the visitors pinned back in their defensive third for prolonged periods of play. The closing stages were especially nervy for Roy Hodgson's side, who could not afford to lose.

Few England players—bar the excellent centre-backs—emerged with much credit from this performance and the main gripe was an inability to maintain possession and dictate extended phases in the ascendancy.

Rickie Lambert's hold-up play disintegrated as the game progressed and none of Jack Wilshere, Frank Lampard and Steven Gerrard—as a central trio—were able to recycle possession or find space and time for their side. Why Michael Carrick wasn't involved at some point, given these particular failings, was especially confusing.

The Manchester United man remains criminally underused at international level, despite being England's most metronomic and effective passer. Given the authority he plays with for his club, there's an argument for him starting every international game. At the very least he needed to come on at some stage to shore up midfield and influence this match.

If he's only to be a bit-part player for his country and put on the bench to be used in specific scenarios, then when else will his skills be required if they weren't what was desired here?

Watching on, Hodgson would have grown increasingly tetchy with the sloppy manner his side continually surrendered possession, almost encouraging Ukraine to press forward. Yet why it never crossed his mind to introduce his nation's most reliable passer is baffling. 

England averaged a paltry 73 percent passing accuracy in this match, which is very poor in modern football. It was also the first time they averaged under 50 percent possession during this qualifying campaign—two statistics Carrick would have drastically augmented, consequently making England's plight far easier.

To put their shabby passing into context, 73 percent is their worst return this campaign (by 4 percent), and in six of the other seven qualifiers they have found a man with at least 85 percent of their passes.

This match provided a massive contrast to that regular accuracy and it was a situation Hodgson should have recognised and brought in Carrick to rectify. No Premier League player passed more last season, and his exceptional retention skills and ability to move his side around and provide structure should have been utilised.

His presence would have brought his side far more time in the middle. England would have constructed more measured attacks, kept Ukraine quieter for extended periods and experienced a lot more control over proceedings.

If he didn't alter the scoreline, at the very least he would have made the game a far more comfortable ordeal for supporters, reducing the risk of England's qualifying campaign unravelling fast.

For Carrick, a player who has already found persistent bench-warming frustrating enough to almost retire from England duty, this shunning doesn't bode well for his international future.

If he's to throw in the towel once more, one can't help but feel Hodgson and England have continually missed a trick by not involving him more.

Statistics via WhoScored? 

Follow @Matt_Cheetham