England haven't been perfect - but there are plenty of reasons to be cheerful

There are two ways to look back at England’s narrow 2-1 win over the Democratic Republic of Congo, and indeed at their tournament as a whole thus far: With pessimism, focussing on the jittery defence and the unconvincing scorelines, or with the more optimistic view that England are ultimately winning and outclassing their opponents.

That is, after all, what the Three Lions are doing. Jordan Pickford’s form is suddenly worrying, right-back is proving to be a problem position and the attack has taken too long to get going in almost every match, but England are still winning and still in the tournament – and they did undeniably deserve their win over DR Congo, even if the route that they took to victory was painfully circuitous.

England may not be winning by big margins – but they are winning quite well

There’s a temptation whenever a battling underdog falls to a narrow defeat to suggest that they deserved a result on something resembling moral grounds. DR Congo certainly gave it everything they had. It just wasn’t enough against a team who were fundamentally better in almost every department.

England had the bulk of possession and the ball spent twice as much time in Congolese territory as it did near the England box. England had more than twice as many shots on goal and many more clear-cut chances. Had it not been for a string of fine saves by Lionel Mpasi Nzau, the scoreline would have been considerably more lopsided – but as it was, England scoring twice as many goals as their opponents was an undeniably fair reflection of the flow of the game.

Yes, England took too long to get going in attack - yet again - and were perhaps a little too patient at times, with too many players unwilling to gamble on a killer pass or the chance to beat their man. They can be a little predictable coming forward. But so far, their methods have been effective enough.

Certainly they rely heavily on Harry Kane, and it’s hard to imagine that England would stand the slightest chance of making a deep run at the World Cup if they didn’t have him in the squad – but they do have him, he keeps scoring goals, and England continue to progress.

Having a world-class striker and the capacity to make full use of him is a strength, not a failing, and while it would be nice to see more production from the flanks to ease the pressure on Kane to do all of the heavy lifting, his shoulders are more than broad enough. Nobody criticises Argentina for leaning on Lionel Messi, after all.

England also have an exceptional midfield that provides them with one of the strongest bases for possession of any nation involved, and have consistently controlled games as a result – of the teams left in the tournament, only Spain have enjoyed more time on the ball. Having that ability to win, keep and recycle possession on a routine basis has given England’s slightly sluggish attack the grace it needs to get the job done.

England have been far from perfect – but have still been better than their opponents

There is a caveat to every positive but that’s true of every team in the tournament save perhaps for France, the only team in the World Cup who have found their full flow from the start. Nor can it be fairly said that England haven’t been properly tested – they beat Croatia in impressive fashion in their opening group stage game, after all, and that was a tougher game, on paper, than any that the French have yet faced.

England have demonstrated a distinct weakness against the low block but that will likely become less of a factor as the tournament wears on, assuming that they can battle their way past Mexico in the round of 16 – a big assumption, given that the Mexicans will benefit from a home advantage that will be exaggerated by the altitude of the Estadio Azteca, but sooner or later teams will stop setting up to frustrate England and start allowing more open space in behind.

At that point, Thomas Tuchel’s team should be able to bring their attacking pace to bear more effectively and things may look just a little more fluent up front, as was the case against Croatia. Players like Anthony Gordon and Noni Madueke weren’t built for breaking down deep-set defences, but give them space to exploit and they can be explosive. Stay in the tournament, and the best sides will offer more of that space up.

The summary of England’s tournament so far is that while they haven’t been completely convincing, they have still earned their wins. They deserved to beat Croatia, Panama and DR Congo, and would have deserved to beat Ghana too based on just about any statistical measure of the game. England haven’t been at their best, but have still been dominant enough.

There’s no doubt that the defence needs to tighten up considerably – although Marc Guéhi has been quietly exceptional since he was restored to the starting line-up – and there’s every reason to be nervous about Pickford’s performances given that he probably should have prevented two of the three goals England have conceded. It hasn’t all been roses, and the pessimists have their points. That doesn’t mean that England have been bad as a whole.

It also doesn’t mean that they’ll win the World Cup, and it certainly doesn’t mean that they’ll beat a disciplined and determined Mexican team that are well-adapted to the demands of playing at more than 2,200m above sea level. The tests are about to get tougher, and England need to prove that they can rise to meet them. But this is a team that has been better, stronger and fitter than its opponents so far. It’s a team that’s winning matches. For now, the optimists probably have the right idea – but whether that’s still the case after Sunday’s trip to Mexico City is another question.