I have yet to see a team of any kind with so many options at right-back like England. Gareth Southgate has a strange problem as he has a case for at least four players to take that position. So far, Southgate has played a sort-of diplomatic role by calling as many as possible and even sending some of his right-backs to the left side. However, as we saw [in his recent comments about Trent Alexander-Arnold], the moment of truth is approaching.

So, who is England's best option at right-back? Well, before we get there, we must take a detour and ask a football that is almost existential in football:

Is the best player necessarily the best option

A few days ago I wrote a post about Real Madrid's Federico Valverde and how despite his versatility, I still thought of his as not among top 5 options in each of the positions he plays. I still stand behind that, however, if you would ask who'd I replace him with, in Real Madrid's current state, I would stay with absolutely no one. There isn't a better option for Real Madrid currently like Federico Valverde.

The reason I mention that is to make an important distinction between the best player overall and the best option for a team.

Manchester United signed Cristiano Ronaldo last season, he ended last season with the most goals scored for Manchester United, he also did the same for Juventus the season before that. You could make a convincing argument that Cristiano Ronaldo was Manchester United's best player, the best attacking player at least, but the fact remains that Manchester United, as a club, was performing much poorer with him.

As evident by Florentino Pérez's Galácticos team in the early 2000s, having the best players in the world doesn't mean having the best team in the world. Even assuming that ego isn't an issue, how many did we look at a UEFA best XI or a FIFA best XI and thought that it looked ridiculous or that it could easily be beaten as it lacks balance?

Cascading Changes

In order for Messi to be the best player in the world, he needed to have a midfield behind him that understood him, full-backs that knew when to move for him, and so on. In order for Xavi's vision to become as extraordinary as it is, he needed players moving around and providing options. For Casimero's physical presence in defense to become useful, he needed Kroos and Modric, and the rest around him to move the ball forward.

Players aren't talented on their own when playing. What made Kante and Pogba work so well amongst themselves and the attacking trio of Giroud, Mbappe, and Griezmann was having Blaise Matuidi filling different positions during transitions. Matuidi's ability on the other hand hand, wouldn't have been as effective without the players mentioned.

With different roles and demands required to each position based on the team and manager, and with England's options for a right-back being from Manchester City, Liverpool, Chelsea, and Newcastle, there's only one conclusion here:

There's no such a thing as England's best right-back

Each of the right-back options has a set of requirements and benefits that come with them:

• Trent Alexander-Arnold comes with a great asset as a playmaker and provides vision and passing abilities that no other options could provide. However, his defensive abilities aren't the best, often requiring a defensive midfielder tasked with covering the space he leaves behind while attacking as well as a dependable center-back to be a solid rock in the back. He is also not that fast.

• Kieran Trippier is more similar to Trent than any of the other options except he doesn't offer the same attacking influence that Trent offers. Still, the Newcastle man requires less coverage in the back as he is more capable defensively than Trent.

• Kyle Walker's heat map shows him becoming closer to being a center-back than a right-back for a reason as he has been quite the rock in the back, a very fast rock that is. He is very shy offensively as he doesn't really have a soft touch on the ball. With Walker, you will require a winger and a midfielder who will cover more space as he stays in the back.

• Reece James is great both offensively and defensively, he is more balanced than Trippier, and also much faster, thus he requires less coverage than both Trippier and Trent. He does require a winger or a midfielder that remains relatively close to him and also coordinates movements with him. His offensive influence is also different from that of Trent as he is less of a playmaker and more like a get-in behind full-back.

Those are England's main options. One who is too offensive and not that defensively aware in Trent Alexander-Arnold. One who is too defensive and not that offensively aware in Kyle Walker. One who is balanced and can do any of the tasks but unfortunately not the best at any besides free kicks in Kieran Trippier. And, finally, someone who can play well offensively and defensively, close enough to be the best at any of the requirements.

So, the question remains:

Who is England's best option at right-back?

Well, as disappointing as this answer sounds, the answer is: it depends. I will cover more on that in my next post, but the best right-back for Southgate and England really depends on the shape of the team, what Southgate expects from the role, and who are the players around the right-back.

In fact, answering this question also means answering the question of who the midfielders and wingers that Southgate should employ in the future.

There is one thing I could say with certainty:

It is not Trent Alexander-Arnold

Trent requires too much maintenance for him to be an option and England's defensive line isn't good enough to have a right-back as absentminded in defense as Trent. Also, he requires a more defensive midfield as well as a higher tempo of play. Too many accommodations are required for him to work and I doubt the result is worth it.