Gary Lineker called out England’s performance for precisely what it was. Whining Harry Kane’s drivel is the real issue here, writes IAN HERBERT

Yes, of course, Gary Lineker spoke accurately when he said journalists had taken advantage of his description of England as ‘s***’, during a press conference with Harry Kane to discuss the performance against Denmark.

It’s a process that happens almost every week and that greases the wheels of today’s football ecosystem. Sometimes executives want a vehicle to vent about what they’ve seen coming out of the TV studios, and we are that vessel.

It’s been Guardiola’s way of leaving something behind on Carragher, with Klopp giving it to Keane and Ten Hag giving it back in spades to anyone who’s ever carried a microphone after Manchester United won the FA Cup.

The studio’s comments will always determine the questions. The broadcast producers want this. Controversy means profile means reviews. Football is an angry world these days.

Lineker spoke on his ‘Rest is Football’ podcast about ‘journalists being what journalists are’, and how they can be ‘a bit tricky about these things, trying to deceive footballers.’

It has led to Gareth Southgate’s side being heavily criticized from all quarters in recent days

This included Gary Lineker, who described England’s performance in their draw against Denmark as ‘s***’

Somewhat irritating, because of the clear air of superiority there. You can get that ‘us and them’ in the upper echelons of football, rooted in the sense that those who report and write are an inferior species because they have not played the sacred game and are not the keepers of the keys.

Football journalists have different skills, not inferior skills, that expose the machinations that the rich and powerful would rather you didn’t know about.

The clandestine steps to create the European Super League. Manchester City’s legal push for unlimited spending. Almost any transfer you want to mention. Fuel for the next studio discussion. More oil for that contemporary ecosystem.

But I’m struggling to generate much anger about Lineker’s “journalists being what journalists are.” Partly that’s because I like him and his work and consider Match of the Day a shadow of its usual strength when he doesn’t appear on it.

There was a sense of what the flagship would be like without his presence when he was absent due to illness for a week in February. Not a single anchor comes even close. BBC Sport will be a poorer country if his contract is not renewed in about a year’s time.

But Harry Kane came out swinging and took umbrage at the criticism of his team, with Lineker then blaming journalists for creating a row with him and the England stars.

Yet Lineker called England’s performance against Denmark last week exactly what it was

The countless other Lineker controversies? I do not mind. Life is short. Say what you think. I don’t subscribe to the ‘stick to football’ argument. I also find it hard to fulminate when Lineker called England’s performance last week – and Kane’s, as an integral part of it – for exactly what it was.

Kane’s main objections to the criticism were, to paraphrase his nonsense, that everyone is under pressure because England haven’t won anything for years, that the young players are not used to this, that it is very difficult to avoid exposure to it, and that ex-players are not used to this. players ‘have a responsibility’ to be kind.

Excuse me? England’s highly touted, hugely coached stars – supposedly a golden generation this time – sleepwalk their way around a football pitch for 90 minutes and Kane has the audacity to emerge a few days later and pronounce that their youth, vulnerability and the weight of history is the criticism unjustified? Well, God help us if we reach the quarter-finals.

Where along the way have we reached this place where anyone who publicly criticizes England at a tournament is somehow considered disloyal or unpatriotic for that matter? We wear these media accreditations to criticize. Lineker and Shearer should no more be cheerleaders than we are.

Other British players have shown that speaking like an AI bot isn’t the only default response when your team has performed poorly. The restored public optimism ahead of the second match of the tournament in Scotland was partly a result of Andy Robertson speaking from the heart about the ‘fear’ his side had struggled with against the Germans.

Harry Kane’s whining is the real problem here, not Lineker’s honest criticism

Where along the way have we reached this strange place where anyone who publicly criticizes England during a tournament is somehow considered disloyal or unpatriotic anyway?

It was a far cry from the whining of Kane, who England supporters looked to for a sign of optimism and a hint of direction. It was apparently too much to think that England’s 30-year-old captain could, with any genuine depth and intelligence, have explained a desperate performance and offered some reason. This showed that this was much more than a player who took on media duties.

Someone might want to point out to Kane that a touch of humor can do wonders at a time like this. It was the product that Jack Grealish was aiming for when Graeme Souness had argued in these pages last season that he had not improved following his move from Aston Villa to Manchester City. A night out with Grealish would be good, Souness had remarked in passing.

“Let’s do it,” Grealish tweeted. ‘As long as I can get Pogba as +1!’ Grealish, a free and unfettered soul, would be such an excellent man for this England campaign, you think. But that is an other story.