Jon Dahl Tomasson’s first match was a nightmare.
After the 2-5 loss against Portugal, Olof Lundh’s profile did not hold back.
“En brutal keel drag. An outclassing. A knockout,” he writes.
Many have called for a more offensive Swedish national team after Janne Andersson left the role as national team captain. Many were therefore excited to see what Jon Dahl Tomasson would come up with when he led Sweden for the first time. He had only had a few days in his first collection, and the toughest possible opposition awaited, in the form of Portugal away from home.
Lundh’s great criticism
Sweden did start the match energetically, but it didn’t take long before the goals began to trickle in. At half-time, Sweden was 0-3 down, and early in the second half, the fourth came as well. Viktor Gyökeres got a reduction, and Gustaf Nilsson also netted for Sweden, but it was a crushing loss by a whopping 2-5, and afterwards the criticism was harsh against the “new” Sweden.
The popular TV4 expert Olof Lundh did not hold back in his criticism after the match.
“It is not possible to make up this performance as anything other than a brutal keel drag. An outclassing. A knockout. Yes, you can call it whatever you want except a real football match. In the end, Portugal won 5-2 and it was closer to seven or eight conceded behind Robin Olsen than it was anything like an even match,” he writes in a column on the Football Channel.
“Humiliation”
Lundh also believes that the effort was so bad that it was “embarrassing”, not just for the national team captain.
“For a long time it was boys against men, juniors against seniors, professionals against amateurs or whatever comparisons you want to draw. It was, of course, painful for Jon Dahl Tomasson, the confederation management who invested in the Dane and for the players to be part of this experience. Humiliation,” he writes.
Lundh believes that the whole thing can be explained by the short preparations, as the players only had three days to understand Jon Dahl Tomasson’s idea and tactics. Lundh urges to trust the process, at the same time he does not hide under the chair with how bad the effort actually was.
“Sweden took risks and it paid off time and time again. It’s easy to point to players who deflected passes or went astray, but there was almost zero form of collusion. For long moments it was downright painful to follow Sweden so far from the resistance,” he writes.
Sign up for our newsletter
Share