Two of our writers debate the merits of the Chelsea and England defender who, rightly or wrongly, cannot seem to avoid scrutiny...
The argument for | Jack Green
For a player supposedly not good enough to play for Chelsea or England, Gary Cahill certainly has impressive staying power.
His 330 Premier League appearances and 48 international caps would attest to that.
That none of Chelsea’s six managers during his time at Stamford Bridge have tried to replace him is also telling.
Not that the accolades end there.
He was a key component of the Premier League’s best defence in 2013/14 and started 36 of Chelsea’s 38 games as they romped to the title a year later.
And, by winning every possible domestic and European honour between 2012 and 2015, he became the fastest Premier League player to earn the clean sweep.
That Chelsea’s nightmare season last year also happened to coincide with him playing fewer than 25 league games for the first time since 2008 also says much for his impact.
Cahill’s achievements are particularly remarkable considering that he was still playing in Sunday league at the age of 15, spent his early years as a professional on loan in the Championship and made his name while fighting relegation with Bolton Wanderers.
For making the very most of his talent, the 30-year-old should be commended rather than chastised.
His England career has, of course, been more disappointing.
But to attribute too much of the blame for the Three Lions’ culture of underperformance to a player who has consistently played above himself would be unjust.
Comparisons with recent celebrated predecessors John Terry, Rio Ferdinand and Sol Campbell are equally unfair, given that they all played their part in major tournament failures despite featuring in far more talented squads.
That golden era of centre-halves also had the luxury of continuity, something that Cahill has not been afforded thanks to sporadic partnerships with Joleon Lescott, Phil Jagielka, Chris Smalling and John Stones.
It is sad that those international struggles have adversely influenced the perception of one of the Premier League’s most consistent defenders.
Critics are now quick to jump on any hint of a mistake, and they were out in force again after he was dispossessed by Leroy Fer on Sunday. It was a foul, though.
And, considering his sheer number of top-flight appearances, Cahill has actually made remarkably few individual errors.
At a time when high-quality central defenders are in short supply, a solid, steady presence like Cahill should be celebrated rather than disparaged.
Many saw Chelsea’s deadline-day acquisition of David Luiz for £32m as further evidence of Cahill’s inadequacy.
In actual fact, though, Luiz’s return should put into focus just how good the Englishman really is.
The argument against | Tom Clee
Gary Cahill’s endearingly angry interview after Chelsea’s draw against Swansea on Sunday captured all of his best qualities.
As a brave and whole-hearted defender who clearly cares deeply about the cause, he is almost the embodiment of the glorified English centre-half.
That he was even being asked for quotes at the Liberty Stadium, though, summed up exactly why he will never quite fit the bill.
Clearly, Cahill was fouled in being dispossessed by Leroy Fer for the Swans’ second goal.
It was his own poor touch, however, that got him into such a tangle that the infringement went unnoticed.
Besides, Chelsea’s generosity in dropping those first points of the season against a side who registered just two shots on target was symbolic of a wider malaise.
Since Cahill signed for the Blues in January 2012, they have conceded 176 goals in 173 Premier League matches.
Little wonder, then, that those four seasons have brought just one, lonely league title.
Great teams worthy of consistently challenging for honours should not have to score twice to stand a chance of winning your average game.
That, clearly, is not all Cahill’s fault.
But at 30 years old and with every club winners’ medal going to his name, he ought by now to be the leader of a defensive unit that also comprises an ageing John Terry, the inexperienced Kurt Zouma and haphazard David Luiz.
The same goes for his England career, with whom he has now been to two tournaments as a first-choice. That both rank among the Three Lions’ very worst is no coincidence.
At Euro 2016, England dominated possession in all four of their games but somehow conspired to keep just one clean sheet.
To be undone by the movement or finishing ability of a high-class international forward would, perhaps, be understandable.
But to lose an ageing opposition centre-half in your own penalty area during stoppage time, or to give a striker – who had mustered just three goals for Nantes in Ligue 1 all season – enough room to deliver the decisive strike in a quarter-final, is unforgivable.
Those mistakes were not an issue of how cultured Cahill is with the ball at his feet – the criticism levelled at him most often – but simple incompetence when it came to the basics of defending.
With an array of honours and approaching a half-century of international caps, Cahill has plenty of reason to be proud.
He should be equally thankful, however, for the continuing charmed existence that has allowed him to do so without competition from any viable alternatives.
