England's Defeat to Germany Is Not as Disastrous as People Suggest

A quick scan of social media following England's 1-0 defeat to Germany last night would give a damning verdict of the national side and their performances.

Much of the talk centered around how Germany were playing a supposed "B" team at Wembley—and therefore, because England could not beat them, it is more damning evidence that England are not good enough.

Who knows if England are good enough to compete at the World Cup? That discussion can only be raised as and when the tournament arrives. A desire to read too much into a friendly match is a significantly English trait, without a doubt.

Germany B? OK, But It Was England B, Too

While it clearly was not the strongest side Germany have at their disposal, it was hardly England's premier side, too. Chris Smalling's performance at the heart of the defence was far from convincing—but he is not even a regular starter for his club, let alone England. Smalling will not be at centre-half for England's first World Cup game unless a dramatic amount of injuries occur.

Tom Cleverley once again was a passive figure with an England shirt on. But once again, is Tom Cleverley really going to be a regular fixture for the national side at the tournament in Brazil next year? Highly unlikely. Whilst Cleverley will no doubt be in the squad, he will not be a starter.

Adam Lallana did well again, but he is still raw in terms of international experience. The whole point of friendlies are to trial these kinds of players and systems—just as Germany did at Wembley. There would not have been the same reaction had Germany lost 1-0.

You can also throw the likes of Jordan Henderson, Ross Barkley and Rickie Lambert into that mix too.

Friendlies Mean Very Little

How many times in the run building up to an international tournament have England impressed in friendlies? Plenty in my lifetime, for sure. And what has it meant in the resulting tournament? Absolutely nothing.

Again, this is not to say that England can or cannot challenge at the World Cup. That question cannot be answered just yet. But personally, I feel Roy Hodgson has got the balance of these friendly games pretty much spot on.

He's handed opportunities out to those at club level who have impressed—just as people have clamored for in recent years. And he has used the friendlies to mix things up and trial some new systems, which you cannot fault him for.

Defeats to Chile and Germany mean very little over a couple of friendlies. Hodgson's England have shown resilience to qualify unbeaten for next years tournament in Brazil. They have proved that, when it matters, they can be very hard to beat and actually play some nice football.

Lets judge England on the games that matter. Of course, nobody likes losing to Germany in any kind of international fixture, but a friendly defeat is far from terminal for the future of the national side.