Some football men are born leaders such as Brian Clough or Sir Alex Ferguson. Some have leadership thrust upon them like former Liverpool great Bob Paisley.

With others it is sometimes hard to tell whether they are leading or being led by events.

Sven-Goran Eriksson falls into the latter category. That his leadership qualities should be under scrutiny after the unluckiest of defeats against France and a comfortable 3-0 scoreline against Switzerland might seem strange.

But there is a growing feeling that England's European Championship challenge is being run by player committee, rather than dynamic managerial decision-making.

It seems Eriksson was talked out of playing his preferred midfield diamond formation against the Swiss by a player delegation led by captain David Beckham and Steven Gerrard.

One account suggests Eriksson was as animated as the Swede ever gets, which probably means he clapped twice instead of once, at the training session the day before the match when players appeared confused at their role in the diamond. They voiced their concerns to assistant boss Steve McClaren that night but Eriksson had gone to bed and it was only the next morning, the day of the match, that Eriksson discovered the strength of the players' feelings against the system.

He promptly agreed to revert to a flat midfield.

The internal strife would certainly account for the fact that for a good hour of the game against the Swiss the prime motivation for the men in white shirts seemed to be to get the ball to a man in a red shirt by the shortest possible route.

Precision passing has never been England's long suit but even for the great squanderers of possession that first-half, in particular, was profligate in the extreme.

They wriggled out of what was becoming a tricky situation largely because of the indiscipline of West Brom full-back Bernt Haas, who became the second Swiss player in successive matches to be sent off.

And, of course, because of the natural genius of Wayne Rooney and how fortunate Eriksson is to have inherited the most talented English player of his generation, potentially the most magical of all-time.

But major tournaments are not often won by mixing and matching, listening to all comers, swaying in the breeze of opinion.

They are won by men with a clear vision of where they are going and the means of how to get there. It is how Clive Woodward delivered the World Cup for an England rugby team struggling for their best form in Australia, despite a barrage of criticism which followed just about every match.

No player delegation would sway Woodward from his path if he was convinced his route was the direction to glory and from his unwavering stance the players drew belief.

Not that there is anything wrong with seeking the opinion of senior players, even if it is difficult to imagine Wellington or Napoleon consulting the foot-soldiers on a regular basis before settling on the tactics for battle.

Not so long as when the decision is taken it is the firm conviction of the man in control and not merely appeasement of those around him. England, of course, won against Switzerland and results being everything in international football Eriksson was vindicated.

But on Monday against lively and inventive Croatia the nerves again will be twitching, the game must be drawn at least if England are to progress to the quarter-finals, Eriksson must come up with the right formation. He must convince the players that he and they are on the same wavelength. More importantly, he must be seen to be in charge.

If not then why is he collecting £3.5million-a-year from the Football Association?

If Eriksson is there just to rubber stamp the wishes of his senior players then he reduces his role to that of a Dutch mountain rescue team or the Swiss navy.

Does it really have to be so complicated? Eriksson has repeatedly insisted he has a strong squad of young and vibrant players, including some of world class. And he has. Gerrard, Sol Campbell, Rooney and increasingly Frank Lampard have proved as much already in this tournament.

And while England could still do with more from Beckham and Michael Owen, so often the standard-bearers in the past but some way off the pace in the first two games at Euro 2004, there is a strength and a purpose about their team sheet.

What is wrong, what is so complicated about sending out your best 11 in the formation in which they produce of their best - and letting the opposition worry about you?

It is the way Brazil have always approached the game. Forget fancy diamonds and Christmas trees. Pass the ball precisely, move fluently, let Gerrard surge into positions in which he hurts the opposition most and leave the rest to Rooney and hopefully an Owen whom Eriksson insists is on the cusp of regaining his best form.

That should be Eriksson's thought process, making every player, even poor Paul Scholes having to ply the problematic left-hand midfield berth, secure and comfortable in their role.

Above all be a leader. The rest, as they say, will follow.