As this will be my last blog before Christmas, I could, of course, harp on about the World Cup voting fiasco - but I won’t. It’s probably all been said already and I wrote an article a fortnight ago about the clear dislike for England at FIFA. It’s no surprise..
In addition, I could talk about Chris Hughton’s sacking at Newcastle. But similar to the events in Zurich last Thursday, it was, once again, all so predictable. It is only really the timing of the decision that I find a little odd.
So, instead of the usual rant, I’ve decided to create four alternative line up’s of players, both from the current eras and the past. This idea (for those who care) was, in fact, brought on by some drunken discussions with my friends over the weekend.
Judging by the teams, you will soon realise the hair colour of one of those friends’. And his team acted as a catalyst for the other three I have created. Look what happens once you get started…
All four of the sides' will contain a 4-4-2 formation and include a captain. In addition, there will be five substitutes, a manager and an assistant manager.
Naturally, some sides are easier to select than others, and the players are decided upon by a mixture of prowess on the pitch and also the ability to appropriately fit into the correct criteria.
To begin with then, here is my all time best ' FOLLICLY CHALLENGED ELEVEN ‘
Bruce Grobbelaar (Zimbabwe)
Geremi (Cameroon)
Alan Wright (England)
Jaap Stam (Netherlands)
Frank Lebeouf (France)
Zinadine Zidane (France)
Bobby Charlton (England)
Gary McAllister (Scotland)
Attilio Lombardo (Italy)
Wayne Rooney (England)
Gianluca Vialli (Italy) (c)
SUBS:
Esteban Cambiasso (Argentina)
Yordan Letchkov (Bulgaria)
Pepe Reina (Spain)
Jan Koeller (Czech Republic)
Claude Makelele (France)
Manager: Arrigo Sacchi (Italy)
Assistant: Rafael Benitez (Spain) .
AESTHETICALLY CHALLENGED ELEVEN (Remember it's just for fun!)
Steve Ogrizovic (England)
Andy O’Brien (Ireland)
Phillip Neville (England) (c)
Trevor Peake (England)
Trifon Ivanov (Bulgaria)
Luke Chadwick (England)
Thomas Graveson (Denmark)
Nobby Stiles (England)
Franck Ribery (France)
Iain Dowie (Northern Ireland)
Peter Beardsley (England)
SUBS:
Oliver Kahn (Germany)
Paul Merson (England)
Sasa Curcic (Serbia)
Gennaro Gattuso (Italy)
Dirk Kuyt (Netherlands)
NB… It’s a great quality bench isn’t it?
Manager: Steve Bruce (England)
Assistant: Phil Thompson (England)
AESTHETICALLY BLESSED ELEVEN
Victor Baia (Portugal)
Glen Johnson (England)
Paolo Maldini (Italy) (c)
Alessandro Nesta (Italy)
Robert Ayala (Argentina)
David Beckham (England)
Leonardo (Brazil)
Jamie Redknapp (England)
Patrik Berger (Czech Republic)
Thierry Henry (England)
Fernando Torres (Spain)
SUBS:
Andy Carroll (England)
Marcel Desailly (France)
Dimitar Berbatov (Bulgaria)
David James (England)
Freddie Ljungberg (Sweden)
Manager: Jose Mourinho (Portugal)
Assistant: Roberto Mancini (Italy)
BEST EVER GINGER ELEVEN
Steven Pears (England)
Steve Nicol (Scotland)
John Arne Riise (Norway)
Mark Wright (England)
Alexi Lalas (USA)
Alan Ball (England)
Paul Scholes (England)
Nicky Butt (England)
Gordon Strachan (Scotland) (c)
John Hartson (Wales)
David Fairclough (England)
SUBS:
Gary Doherty (Ireland)
Mark Pembridge (Wales)
Mikael Forssell (Finland)
Perry Groves (England)
Andy Campbell (England)
Manager: Neil Lennon (Northern Ireland)
Assistant: Steve Staunton (Ireland)
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
ARE ENGLAND DISCRIMINATED AGAINST?
Although this article may, at first glance, appear a little jingoistic, it is certainly not meant to be. And, initially, the statement I put forward in the title could be perceived as sour grapes, arrogance or twisted logic. Call it what you will...
But I firmly believe, with some justification, that England and English football are - more than any other major footballing nation - discriminated against during major tournaments or crucial matches.
Whether this discrimination comes directly from the football authorities or from the officials themselves, I really couldn't say. But nobody in their right mind can deny it happens surprisingly (or indeed unsurprisingly) and suspiciously frequently.
You only need to look at the current World Cup debacle, where FIFA are unscrupulous enough to blame the British media for attempting to expose corruption within FIFA. Shouldn't they be thanking England and the UK for exposing such rotten eggs? Instead they appear, at every opportunity to be vilifying the UK media. It is just another example of the vendetta that exists against English football. And although people are scared to say it openly, it is clear as pie.
The question I would like to ask the readers is... Is there really any other nation who has a history of so many bad decisions against them during major tournaments? To some, this may seem a little 'off-topic' but this is something I have felt for a long time, as I am sure many other England supporters have too.
I need to point out that I didn't want to write about this during an emotional storm (for example after a World Cup defeat). The argument at that stage may appear to lack logic and perceived as a bitter and twisted rant.
For example, if I had written this article in the aftermath of the World Cup defeat to Germany last summer, then it would be written off by many as just me being quote 'lost in the moment'. So I have waited until the calm after the storm to voice my frustration, and I truly believe that many other countries' fans who are ardent football followers, would, if they are honest, probably agree with me - to some extent anyway.
An alternative argument some may use, is that in reality, England are just not good enough on the world stage. That may well be the case, but that is not the argument I am trying to make..
In 2002, for instance, this was clearly the case and the quarter final performance against Brazil in Japan that year, when playing against ten men, is the poorest I have ever seen England have play (and that is saying something). The Brazilians were reduced to ten men that night, not England. This is actually one of the rare occasions where decisions actually went England's way in a major tournament, and they couldn't take advantage.
But if we look through the recent record books, there are several examples of stunningly bad decisions going against the Three Lions at crucial moments in crucial matches.
The 1994 World Cup qualifier in Rotterdam was the first of a long line of bizarre refereeing decisions that have gone against England during my lifetime. Norway were winning the group, while England and the Netherlands had drawn 2-2 at Wembley the previous April. The game in October 1993 was, quite literally, a play off for second spot in the group and a place at USA 1994.
Half way through the second half, with the score at 0-0 and with England on top, David Platt, the then England skipper, raced onto a long pass and found himself one on one with the Dutch keeper - Ed De Goey. Platt had initially beaten Ronald Koeman to the ball and was subsequently and very clearly pulled down by the Barcelona defender. It was the clearest professional foul you are ever likely to see.
At first, the referee, Karl-Josef Assenmacher, awarded a penalty, but then changed his mind. Well.. we all thought, at least this will be a red card. It wasn't. It was yellow.
Minutes later, Holland were awarded a free kick just outside the box. The first one was charged down, fairly enough, by Paul Ince, but a retake was strangely given for encroachment. To add insult to an already excruciatingly painful metaphoric injury, that same man (Koeman) so memorably involved minutes earlier, clipped the ball past David Seaman and it was the beginning of the end for England.. Agony and anger...
The whole of the footballing world, even Dutch fans, knew that the blond haired set piece specialist should have been back inside the changing room taking an early bath. It was truly unbelievable!
A draw that night, would have left England in pole position to qualify. But they didn't, and the Netherlands went on to lose a narrow quarter final to eventual champions Brazil the following year. England and the 'hapless' and probably unfairly maligned Graham Taylor (remember the Cutting Edge programme?) parted company. But very few people remember just how well England played that autumn night. It was a 'travesty' in every sense of the (football related) word..
It is not only that dismal referring performance that haunts England fans. In addition, there was, of course, Maradona's hand of God. But that has been recreated enough times to make a Hollywood documentary about it, so I won't delve into that one.
There is however, the 1998 World Cup in France. Nobody can ever try to persuade me that David Beckham's red card wasn't a harsh one. And if you look back on it objectively (without getting angry with young David as we all very much did back then) the initial challenge by Diego Simone is far worse than the childish and petulant kick that the English man handed out to the Argentine seconds later. The way Simone fell and the fact it was 'David Beckham' meant the referee was only going to give one decision.
During the World Cup semi final between Germany and Spain this year, I noticed Lukas Podolski do a similar thing to Sergio Ramos. It was away from the core of the action, but was still quite easy to spot. But the players were immediately separated, told to calm down and the referee cooled the situation. No action was taken against either man,, but this was because the Spanish full back (Ramos) had not exaggerated the incident.
Couldn't the notorious Kim Milton have done the same thing back in St Etienne and not been fooled by Simone's antics? The answer of course, is no. He wanted to be remembered as the man who sent off David Beckham in the World Cup. And despite refereeing the 2004 Champions League final, we will all remember him for that far more, won't we. What a celebrity... I even heard him on Talk Sport today. He's still around.
Later in the same match, Sol Campell had a perfectly legitimate goal disallowed, as he did in Euro 2004, although in truth, the latter 'goal' is probably more open to debate. I'm surprised the Danish referee didn't find a fault with Michael Owen's wonder goal that night twelve years ago. He managed to scrape together an issue with everything else England did ( I know I sound so bitter, but it is justified)
In 2006 meanwhile, I remember thinking prior to the contest, why is an Argentinian referee in charge of England versus Portugal?
Now, of course, I have nothing against the Argentinian people generally, and this is not meant to be a racialist argument in any way. This article is football related and nothing else. But everyone knows that Argentina and England are arch enemies when it comes to football. Surely a less controversial choice would have sufficed for such a huge match.
Isn't it leaving the highest footballing authorities open to criticism and suspicion when they appoint a referee from a rival nation? Maybe FIFA enjoy the attention it brings. Who knows?
The referee that night (Horacio Erizondo) made some particularly dubious decisions not consistent with others he made during the tournament. Aside from the Wayne Rooney sending off - when the official had previously failed to penalise the constant kicking and abuse the England forward had received from the Portuguese defenders throughout the match - in addition, Aaron Lennon was hacked down in the box during the last minute of normal time.
The South American official awarded no penalty, but in the final of the competition in Berlin, that same referee awarded an even more dubious penalty to France when Florent Malouda clearly dived. Why? Where is the consistency?
There are other examples. In Euro 2004, when Michael Silvestre brought down Wayne Rooney for a penalty (which David Beckham missed), wasn't the Everton man actually through on goal? The French defender was only booked...
Then of course, the one still active in most people's minds - Bloemfontein 2010. We all know Frank Lampard's chip was two feet over the line and most of us could see it at the time. And, although England played very poorly during the tournament, who knows what would have happened to German heads had the goal been given. As we all saw in the London derby on Saturday, when a team gives away a two goal lead, the psychology and the outlook of the whole occasion changes completely. This is especially the case in a high pressure showdown during the World Cup.
I am not completely blinkered of course. Opposition fans can point to the Euro 96 quarter final at Wembley, when Spain had a legitimate foal chalked off against England for offside. It clearly wasn't, but it was a very marginal decision.
It must also be remembered, that there have been endless examples of these narrow offside decisions going against the attacker in thousands of games down the years. Although it doesn't make it right, there is, in my view, an excuse for these type of human errors. Lampard's 'goal' or Koeman's 'sending off that never was' are just ridiculous and puzzling acts of incompetency.
We are all fully aware that England are more than capable of shooting themselves in the foot, whether the gods appear against them or not. But haven't the team paid enough for 1966 now? Geoff Hurst's shot was probably not fully over the line, but you can't hold a grudge forever, it was 1966 after all. The Beatles were just about to release Revolver and the Walker Brothers had just been ousted from the top of the charts - yes, that's how long ago it was! But there there is far less excuse for making such errors in this day and age.
Besides, surely Maradona's 'hand of god' goal in 1986 was the karma the football world required to exercise the injustice of Sir Geoff's 'goal'.
If there is any other country that has had so experienced so many high profile, controversial decisions at nearly every major tournament in living memory, I would like to know who they are.
And while Fabio Capello's current England are not playing well, and deserve all the criticism they are getting, when it comes to major tournaments, please let us at least lose for just being plain rubbish, instead of having our media and excuse to constantly paper over the cracks by harping on (annoying so) about incompetent refereeing decisions and vendetta's against our national team
The 2nd of December now looms large and it is certainly all set to be a fascinating day. Personally, my money is on Russia getting the nod for the 2018 World Cup. But I really do hope I'm wrong.
Hopefully England, for once, will get the correct decision in their favour. Somehow though, I sincerely doubt it!
But I firmly believe, with some justification, that England and English football are - more than any other major footballing nation - discriminated against during major tournaments or crucial matches.
Whether this discrimination comes directly from the football authorities or from the officials themselves, I really couldn't say. But nobody in their right mind can deny it happens surprisingly (or indeed unsurprisingly) and suspiciously frequently.
You only need to look at the current World Cup debacle, where FIFA are unscrupulous enough to blame the British media for attempting to expose corruption within FIFA. Shouldn't they be thanking England and the UK for exposing such rotten eggs? Instead they appear, at every opportunity to be vilifying the UK media. It is just another example of the vendetta that exists against English football. And although people are scared to say it openly, it is clear as pie.
The question I would like to ask the readers is... Is there really any other nation who has a history of so many bad decisions against them during major tournaments? To some, this may seem a little 'off-topic' but this is something I have felt for a long time, as I am sure many other England supporters have too.
I need to point out that I didn't want to write about this during an emotional storm (for example after a World Cup defeat). The argument at that stage may appear to lack logic and perceived as a bitter and twisted rant.
For example, if I had written this article in the aftermath of the World Cup defeat to Germany last summer, then it would be written off by many as just me being quote 'lost in the moment'. So I have waited until the calm after the storm to voice my frustration, and I truly believe that many other countries' fans who are ardent football followers, would, if they are honest, probably agree with me - to some extent anyway.
An alternative argument some may use, is that in reality, England are just not good enough on the world stage. That may well be the case, but that is not the argument I am trying to make..
In 2002, for instance, this was clearly the case and the quarter final performance against Brazil in Japan that year, when playing against ten men, is the poorest I have ever seen England have play (and that is saying something). The Brazilians were reduced to ten men that night, not England. This is actually one of the rare occasions where decisions actually went England's way in a major tournament, and they couldn't take advantage.
But if we look through the recent record books, there are several examples of stunningly bad decisions going against the Three Lions at crucial moments in crucial matches.
The 1994 World Cup qualifier in Rotterdam was the first of a long line of bizarre refereeing decisions that have gone against England during my lifetime. Norway were winning the group, while England and the Netherlands had drawn 2-2 at Wembley the previous April. The game in October 1993 was, quite literally, a play off for second spot in the group and a place at USA 1994.
Half way through the second half, with the score at 0-0 and with England on top, David Platt, the then England skipper, raced onto a long pass and found himself one on one with the Dutch keeper - Ed De Goey. Platt had initially beaten Ronald Koeman to the ball and was subsequently and very clearly pulled down by the Barcelona defender. It was the clearest professional foul you are ever likely to see.
At first, the referee, Karl-Josef Assenmacher, awarded a penalty, but then changed his mind. Well.. we all thought, at least this will be a red card. It wasn't. It was yellow.
Minutes later, Holland were awarded a free kick just outside the box. The first one was charged down, fairly enough, by Paul Ince, but a retake was strangely given for encroachment. To add insult to an already excruciatingly painful metaphoric injury, that same man (Koeman) so memorably involved minutes earlier, clipped the ball past David Seaman and it was the beginning of the end for England.. Agony and anger...
The whole of the footballing world, even Dutch fans, knew that the blond haired set piece specialist should have been back inside the changing room taking an early bath. It was truly unbelievable!
A draw that night, would have left England in pole position to qualify. But they didn't, and the Netherlands went on to lose a narrow quarter final to eventual champions Brazil the following year. England and the 'hapless' and probably unfairly maligned Graham Taylor (remember the Cutting Edge programme?) parted company. But very few people remember just how well England played that autumn night. It was a 'travesty' in every sense of the (football related) word..
It is not only that dismal referring performance that haunts England fans. In addition, there was, of course, Maradona's hand of God. But that has been recreated enough times to make a Hollywood documentary about it, so I won't delve into that one.
There is however, the 1998 World Cup in France. Nobody can ever try to persuade me that David Beckham's red card wasn't a harsh one. And if you look back on it objectively (without getting angry with young David as we all very much did back then) the initial challenge by Diego Simone is far worse than the childish and petulant kick that the English man handed out to the Argentine seconds later. The way Simone fell and the fact it was 'David Beckham' meant the referee was only going to give one decision.
During the World Cup semi final between Germany and Spain this year, I noticed Lukas Podolski do a similar thing to Sergio Ramos. It was away from the core of the action, but was still quite easy to spot. But the players were immediately separated, told to calm down and the referee cooled the situation. No action was taken against either man,, but this was because the Spanish full back (Ramos) had not exaggerated the incident.
Couldn't the notorious Kim Milton have done the same thing back in St Etienne and not been fooled by Simone's antics? The answer of course, is no. He wanted to be remembered as the man who sent off David Beckham in the World Cup. And despite refereeing the 2004 Champions League final, we will all remember him for that far more, won't we. What a celebrity... I even heard him on Talk Sport today. He's still around.
Later in the same match, Sol Campell had a perfectly legitimate goal disallowed, as he did in Euro 2004, although in truth, the latter 'goal' is probably more open to debate. I'm surprised the Danish referee didn't find a fault with Michael Owen's wonder goal that night twelve years ago. He managed to scrape together an issue with everything else England did ( I know I sound so bitter, but it is justified)
In 2006 meanwhile, I remember thinking prior to the contest, why is an Argentinian referee in charge of England versus Portugal?
Now, of course, I have nothing against the Argentinian people generally, and this is not meant to be a racialist argument in any way. This article is football related and nothing else. But everyone knows that Argentina and England are arch enemies when it comes to football. Surely a less controversial choice would have sufficed for such a huge match.
Isn't it leaving the highest footballing authorities open to criticism and suspicion when they appoint a referee from a rival nation? Maybe FIFA enjoy the attention it brings. Who knows?
The referee that night (Horacio Erizondo) made some particularly dubious decisions not consistent with others he made during the tournament. Aside from the Wayne Rooney sending off - when the official had previously failed to penalise the constant kicking and abuse the England forward had received from the Portuguese defenders throughout the match - in addition, Aaron Lennon was hacked down in the box during the last minute of normal time.
The South American official awarded no penalty, but in the final of the competition in Berlin, that same referee awarded an even more dubious penalty to France when Florent Malouda clearly dived. Why? Where is the consistency?
There are other examples. In Euro 2004, when Michael Silvestre brought down Wayne Rooney for a penalty (which David Beckham missed), wasn't the Everton man actually through on goal? The French defender was only booked...
Then of course, the one still active in most people's minds - Bloemfontein 2010. We all know Frank Lampard's chip was two feet over the line and most of us could see it at the time. And, although England played very poorly during the tournament, who knows what would have happened to German heads had the goal been given. As we all saw in the London derby on Saturday, when a team gives away a two goal lead, the psychology and the outlook of the whole occasion changes completely. This is especially the case in a high pressure showdown during the World Cup.
I am not completely blinkered of course. Opposition fans can point to the Euro 96 quarter final at Wembley, when Spain had a legitimate foal chalked off against England for offside. It clearly wasn't, but it was a very marginal decision.
It must also be remembered, that there have been endless examples of these narrow offside decisions going against the attacker in thousands of games down the years. Although it doesn't make it right, there is, in my view, an excuse for these type of human errors. Lampard's 'goal' or Koeman's 'sending off that never was' are just ridiculous and puzzling acts of incompetency.
We are all fully aware that England are more than capable of shooting themselves in the foot, whether the gods appear against them or not. But haven't the team paid enough for 1966 now? Geoff Hurst's shot was probably not fully over the line, but you can't hold a grudge forever, it was 1966 after all. The Beatles were just about to release Revolver and the Walker Brothers had just been ousted from the top of the charts - yes, that's how long ago it was! But there there is far less excuse for making such errors in this day and age.
Besides, surely Maradona's 'hand of god' goal in 1986 was the karma the football world required to exercise the injustice of Sir Geoff's 'goal'.
If there is any other country that has had so experienced so many high profile, controversial decisions at nearly every major tournament in living memory, I would like to know who they are.
And while Fabio Capello's current England are not playing well, and deserve all the criticism they are getting, when it comes to major tournaments, please let us at least lose for just being plain rubbish, instead of having our media and excuse to constantly paper over the cracks by harping on (annoying so) about incompetent refereeing decisions and vendetta's against our national team
The 2nd of December now looms large and it is certainly all set to be a fascinating day. Personally, my money is on Russia getting the nod for the 2018 World Cup. But I really do hope I'm wrong.
Hopefully England, for once, will get the correct decision in their favour. Somehow though, I sincerely doubt it!
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
WHY ARE FOOTBALL AUTHORITIES' STILL SO LAX ON DIVING AND PLAY ACTING?
Last week's thrilling 2-2 between AC Milan and Real Madrid was a wonderful advert for the Champions League. Wonderful except for one thing - Christiano Ronaldo's play acting.
During his early days at Old Trafford, Ronaldo was regularly criticised for his diving and play acting, but he had appeared to have grown out of these antics in recent years.
However, he was back to his old ways in the World Cup group match against the Ivory Coast last summer, and last Wednesday night, his blatant 'cheating' was enough to make any football fan let out a huge sigh of disappointment.
So why does such a gifted player have to act like this? Is Jose Mourinho - his fellow countryman - having a negative influence on him? The ultimate king of gamesmanship in my view, Mourinho is not entirely innocent himself of attempting to use every trick in the book to win, at any cost. The Portuguese boss will do anything it takes, even if it means damaging the integrity of the game.
But, despite this negative outlook, there have been some positive recent developments from some unexpected places. Serie A has, in the past, been a league where diving and play acting have frustratingly become the norm. During the nineties, when all the world's best players played in Italy, I was so often frustrated by the frequent cheating that unfortunately supplemented the terrific football being played by the great Milan and Juventus teams of that era. But last month, Juventus winger Milos Krasic was handed a two match ban for diving against Bologna. While the same punishment was handed out to Fiorentina's Alberto Giladino for a similar offence last season.
They are, refreshingly, clamping down on this cancer of the game, in the league, where in my view, it all started. So why doesn't UEFA deal out the same punishment in the Champions League? Is it because Ronaldo is one of the world's most famous and most gifted players? Is he too important to receive such a punishment in a PR sense. He was, after all, the World and European player of the year in 2008. Are UEFA just scared?
While on this occasion, Ronaldo was not guilty of diving, he was clearly trying to get a fellow proffessional sent off. In my eyes, this is an action which deserves an even greater ban, and the sight of the winger grabbing hold of his face, after barely being touched in the throat was appallng, even by his standards.
The Real Madrid star is not the only offender. There have been many top players whose reputations have been tarnished by their exaggerated theatrics down the years. Jurgen Klinsmann was one, and he even managed to glamourise his diving antics within his goal celebration at Spurs. Hristo Stoichkov was another supremely talented player, who, despite his awesome body strength, also found it difficult to stay on his feet at times.
And of course, there is the famous clip on Rivaldo clutching his face in 'agony' after being hit in the chest by a ball in the 2002 World Cup in Japan.
In addition, modern day stars such as Eduardo and Robert Pires have also sadly managed to tarnish their reputations due to carying out what can only be described as outrageous dives.
But diving has always been in the game, and not only on the continent. It is a false and unfair stereotype because this form of cheating is very much imbedded in our domestic game too. Francis Lee was a so-called artist of the 'theatrical dive' during the 1960s and 1970s, But the question that interests me is, is it really actually that easy to define what is and what is not a dive?
In my view, a dive is only really a dive when a player falls over forward after no contact from an opponent. This is not, in my view, in any way ambiguous.
However, if a player is barely touched and goes down, it is difficult to penalise them for diving because the contact, however slight, is still there for all to see. It may be annoying, but it is a grey area that is difficult to define objectively in that situation.
Players such as Steven Gerrard, Wayne Rooney and Michael Owen have all been accused of going down too easily in the penalty area. But they very rarely go down after no contact. I am not only saying this because they are English players. On the contrary, if they dive after no form of contact, they deserve to be punished as much as anyone else.
There is, however, another more sinister issue here, and it is something that I have been concerned about for a while. In fact, both Sid Lowe of the Guardian and the BBC's John Motson have pointed the issue out in recent months.. And that is the recklessness of goalkeepers in the modern game.
Victor Valdes' clattering of the FC Copenhagen striker - Dane N'Doye- last week was not punished at all by the referee. But it should have been a straight red card. It brought back horrible memories of Harold Schumacher's shocking challenge on Patrick Battiston in the 1982 World Cup semi final.
This is not though, a new phenomenon that has just crept (back) into the game. Pepe Reina , I think, is often guilty of rushing out of his box with his feet raised, as is Edwin Van de Sar.
At times it almost feels like goalkeepers believe it is their right to challenge an opposing player recklessly, in the same way that a forward does. Commentators will often say 'ooh that's a forward's tackle' when a striker makes a late tackle, and maybe goalkeepers feel they can also get away with such crudity.
On the other hand however, if a forward even brushes a goalkeeper in the six yard box, a foul is given. It all seems a little unfair to me, and goalkeepers really do get too much protection these days.
And, despite my criticism of Eduado's dive against Celtic last year (and it was a form of cheating) the nature of the goalkeeper's antics cannot be overlooked. I can (somewhat contradicting what I have written before) in some ways understand Eduardo's reasoning.
Artur Borac (Celtic's goalkeeper at that time) certainly did race out of his box in a particularly reckless fashion. And Eduardo was, probably understandably, a little afraid. He has, after all, already had one career threatening injury and probably didn't want another.
But the Brazillian born Croat did not want to appear cowardly by merely just avoiding the Polish keeper, so he went down instead. It may have looked quite bad at the time (and I was as bigger critic as any), but in hindsight it actually makes a little more sense. Nothing is clear cut in football is it?
Some players are, in nature, just blatant cheats, and that needs to be stamped out. But when a dive also involves a goalkeeper racing out in a clearly reckless fashion, it becomes yet another grey area in my view.
It is another thing FIFA, UEFA and the FA etc need to clamp down on fast. Valdes should have been punished and wasn't. Is this because he plays for Barcelona? I would suggest maybe it is.
There are so many different areas of the game that need addressing and it is impossible to cover them all in one blog. But away from the drama of the imminent World Cup 2018 decision in December, there are also quite a few disturbing on field issues that are beginning to develop within the beautiful game.
If things continue the way they are, association football could well become the 'ugly' game. And wouldn't that be such a shame for all of us millions of fans around the world who live and breath this sport. Please UEFA, FIFA and the rest.. sort it out, before it's too late!
During his early days at Old Trafford, Ronaldo was regularly criticised for his diving and play acting, but he had appeared to have grown out of these antics in recent years.
However, he was back to his old ways in the World Cup group match against the Ivory Coast last summer, and last Wednesday night, his blatant 'cheating' was enough to make any football fan let out a huge sigh of disappointment.
So why does such a gifted player have to act like this? Is Jose Mourinho - his fellow countryman - having a negative influence on him? The ultimate king of gamesmanship in my view, Mourinho is not entirely innocent himself of attempting to use every trick in the book to win, at any cost. The Portuguese boss will do anything it takes, even if it means damaging the integrity of the game.
But, despite this negative outlook, there have been some positive recent developments from some unexpected places. Serie A has, in the past, been a league where diving and play acting have frustratingly become the norm. During the nineties, when all the world's best players played in Italy, I was so often frustrated by the frequent cheating that unfortunately supplemented the terrific football being played by the great Milan and Juventus teams of that era. But last month, Juventus winger Milos Krasic was handed a two match ban for diving against Bologna. While the same punishment was handed out to Fiorentina's Alberto Giladino for a similar offence last season.
They are, refreshingly, clamping down on this cancer of the game, in the league, where in my view, it all started. So why doesn't UEFA deal out the same punishment in the Champions League? Is it because Ronaldo is one of the world's most famous and most gifted players? Is he too important to receive such a punishment in a PR sense. He was, after all, the World and European player of the year in 2008. Are UEFA just scared?
While on this occasion, Ronaldo was not guilty of diving, he was clearly trying to get a fellow proffessional sent off. In my eyes, this is an action which deserves an even greater ban, and the sight of the winger grabbing hold of his face, after barely being touched in the throat was appallng, even by his standards.
The Real Madrid star is not the only offender. There have been many top players whose reputations have been tarnished by their exaggerated theatrics down the years. Jurgen Klinsmann was one, and he even managed to glamourise his diving antics within his goal celebration at Spurs. Hristo Stoichkov was another supremely talented player, who, despite his awesome body strength, also found it difficult to stay on his feet at times.
And of course, there is the famous clip on Rivaldo clutching his face in 'agony' after being hit in the chest by a ball in the 2002 World Cup in Japan.
In addition, modern day stars such as Eduardo and Robert Pires have also sadly managed to tarnish their reputations due to carying out what can only be described as outrageous dives.
But diving has always been in the game, and not only on the continent. It is a false and unfair stereotype because this form of cheating is very much imbedded in our domestic game too. Francis Lee was a so-called artist of the 'theatrical dive' during the 1960s and 1970s, But the question that interests me is, is it really actually that easy to define what is and what is not a dive?
In my view, a dive is only really a dive when a player falls over forward after no contact from an opponent. This is not, in my view, in any way ambiguous.
However, if a player is barely touched and goes down, it is difficult to penalise them for diving because the contact, however slight, is still there for all to see. It may be annoying, but it is a grey area that is difficult to define objectively in that situation.
Players such as Steven Gerrard, Wayne Rooney and Michael Owen have all been accused of going down too easily in the penalty area. But they very rarely go down after no contact. I am not only saying this because they are English players. On the contrary, if they dive after no form of contact, they deserve to be punished as much as anyone else.
There is, however, another more sinister issue here, and it is something that I have been concerned about for a while. In fact, both Sid Lowe of the Guardian and the BBC's John Motson have pointed the issue out in recent months.. And that is the recklessness of goalkeepers in the modern game.
Victor Valdes' clattering of the FC Copenhagen striker - Dane N'Doye- last week was not punished at all by the referee. But it should have been a straight red card. It brought back horrible memories of Harold Schumacher's shocking challenge on Patrick Battiston in the 1982 World Cup semi final.
This is not though, a new phenomenon that has just crept (back) into the game. Pepe Reina , I think, is often guilty of rushing out of his box with his feet raised, as is Edwin Van de Sar.
At times it almost feels like goalkeepers believe it is their right to challenge an opposing player recklessly, in the same way that a forward does. Commentators will often say 'ooh that's a forward's tackle' when a striker makes a late tackle, and maybe goalkeepers feel they can also get away with such crudity.
On the other hand however, if a forward even brushes a goalkeeper in the six yard box, a foul is given. It all seems a little unfair to me, and goalkeepers really do get too much protection these days.
And, despite my criticism of Eduado's dive against Celtic last year (and it was a form of cheating) the nature of the goalkeeper's antics cannot be overlooked. I can (somewhat contradicting what I have written before) in some ways understand Eduardo's reasoning.
Artur Borac (Celtic's goalkeeper at that time) certainly did race out of his box in a particularly reckless fashion. And Eduardo was, probably understandably, a little afraid. He has, after all, already had one career threatening injury and probably didn't want another.
But the Brazillian born Croat did not want to appear cowardly by merely just avoiding the Polish keeper, so he went down instead. It may have looked quite bad at the time (and I was as bigger critic as any), but in hindsight it actually makes a little more sense. Nothing is clear cut in football is it?
Some players are, in nature, just blatant cheats, and that needs to be stamped out. But when a dive also involves a goalkeeper racing out in a clearly reckless fashion, it becomes yet another grey area in my view.
It is another thing FIFA, UEFA and the FA etc need to clamp down on fast. Valdes should have been punished and wasn't. Is this because he plays for Barcelona? I would suggest maybe it is.
There are so many different areas of the game that need addressing and it is impossible to cover them all in one blog. But away from the drama of the imminent World Cup 2018 decision in December, there are also quite a few disturbing on field issues that are beginning to develop within the beautiful game.
If things continue the way they are, association football could well become the 'ugly' game. And wouldn't that be such a shame for all of us millions of fans around the world who live and breath this sport. Please UEFA, FIFA and the rest.. sort it out, before it's too late!
Monday, October 25, 2010
WAS ROONEY RIGHT TO REQUEST A TRANSFER?
The story on everyone's lips this week has been the dramatic events unfolding at Old Trafford. But was it really of much as a surprise as people think?
It is important to remember that Rooney has achieved pretty much everything he can at Manchester United. In six seasons at the club he has won three league titles, three League Cups and played in two Champions League final's (winning one of them).
While he has not won the FA Cup, he has played in two finals and has experienced a cup final with United at Wembley. Is there really anything more he needs to prove behind the theatre of dreams?
The England striker - who turns 25 today, is in a different position from what some of his team mates have been in previously. Paul Scholes, Gary Neville and Ryan Giggs have been at the club since they were barely out of primary school. But Rooney doesn't share the emotional attachment with United that players who have come through the youth set up understandably do.
He also, quite openly, doesn't 'bleed the red of Manchester' like a David Beckham or a Darren Fletcher. Rooney is still very much an Everton fanatic and less than two years ago, in fact, it is reported that Rooney was at Wembley supporting his former club being narrowly defeated by Chelsea in the FA Cup final.
Despite being quoted in the very recent past, stating that he categorically wished to remain at Old Trafford for the rest of his career, maybe he actually meant Manchester - the city of Manchester. A big money move to Manchester City in the new year is still a possibility in my view, despite 'our Wayne' signing a new contract today. And despite, what appears on the surface as ruthless case of brinkmanship, I still believe all is not well with the forward, both on and off the pitch.
Rooney has probably (and quite understandably, considering his profile) become disillusioned watching every major star leave the once hallowed environment of the prawn sandwich brigade's club. In the last 18 months, he has seen Ronaldo and Carlos Tevez depart Old Trafford within days of each other. And he has underwhelmingly seen them replaced with Bebe, an ageing and still injury prone Michael Owen, and a talented, but very raw Javier Hernandez.
Of course, we have seen this before from Ferguson and his almost un-parellelled ability to nurture raw, young players into damn good team players or even world superstars. But have we actually, in reality, seen it as much in recent years?
Ferguson's development of youngsters has nearly always been supplemented with a major big money signing. However, who was the last really major signing the club actually made. Does Owen Hargreaves count? And he hasn't played for over two years.
There been other mixed bags. Anderson has clearly not lived up to his early potential, and Michael Carrick - while still only 29- seems to have completely gone off the boil. There is Nani, who, after a really poor first couple of seasons, has been in terrific form over the last six months,. But will the Portuguese winger really go on to become a world beater? Will Darren Gibson go to become another Roy Keane?
Another question that needs to be asked is will Antonio Valencia recover sufficiently well enough from his serious knee injury to continue his very impressive and rapid progress? And then there is the goalkeeper. As good as Edwin Van de Sar has been and still is (most of the time, 40 is a watershed age for a keeper, and he has reached it. Who is going to replace him? Ben Foster was a disaster and their doesn't appear to be any obvious candidates waiting in the wings,
They are all un-answered questions, but obviously issues that Rooney fears (or feared) will continue to stagnate the club's progress without new investment.
Maybe the Liverpool born player fears that Sir Alex will not be around at the club to over-look the development of these talents. Or maybe he just wanted the chance - as most of us anticipated - to earn the really huge money he is able to before his body (already beginning to show the effects of him bursting onto the scene at such a young age) declines in front of his own and our eyes.
I've heard some people suggest, foolishly perhaps, that Fergie is over the hill, and is beginning to lose touch with the modern footballer. This is certainly not something I would accuse the great man of. After all, he has dealt with Eric Cantona, Roy Keane, David Beckham and Christiano Ronaldo in the past, and dealt with them brilliantly. Beckham and Ronaldo in particular, are/were the ultimate breed of modern footballer and Sir Alex certainly guided them through some of their greatest triumphs.
But despite Rooney's change of heart, it is plain to see that the United manager is unable to exert such influence over both his players and the overall running of the club that he used to. The club are in serious debt, through no fault of his own of course, and he is probably unable to make the sort of cut throat decisions that he has become renowned for.
The Scot probably has to run over every decision with the Glazers across the pond first, and by then the whole kudos and ethos of the decision has probably been lost. He certainly appeared more downcast about this particular saga then at any other time I've seen him. Even the Eric Cantona kung fu episode back in 1995 didn't seem to leave him with such a negative view.
Roman Abramovich altered the whole dynamic of English football when he took over the reigns at Chelsea in the summer of 2003. The Russian created an un-precedented snowball effect of hugely rich foreign businessmen investing into the Premier League market. Who would have thought, even three years ago, that Manchester City would be able to offer players such as Wayne Rooney three or four times the salary they would be able to get at Old Trafford. It's actually quite surreal when you think about it.
Sir Alex will turn 70 next December and this may well turn out to be the last straw, despite Rooney's change of heart. At his age, it may just be beyond him to build another great side.
And despite the surprise u-turn, the tide certainly appears to be turning towards the blue side of Manchester as we begin a new decade.
The wages Chelsea were offering back in 2003 were one thing, but the Manchester City owners from Abu Dhabi have an endless pit of funds even within the face of a fierce financial crisis. Maybe Fergie should call it a day now, or all of his quarter century of hardwork may well be lost in the blue mist of Eastlands.
Watch this space. January could be an interesting month..
It is important to remember that Rooney has achieved pretty much everything he can at Manchester United. In six seasons at the club he has won three league titles, three League Cups and played in two Champions League final's (winning one of them).
While he has not won the FA Cup, he has played in two finals and has experienced a cup final with United at Wembley. Is there really anything more he needs to prove behind the theatre of dreams?
The England striker - who turns 25 today, is in a different position from what some of his team mates have been in previously. Paul Scholes, Gary Neville and Ryan Giggs have been at the club since they were barely out of primary school. But Rooney doesn't share the emotional attachment with United that players who have come through the youth set up understandably do.
He also, quite openly, doesn't 'bleed the red of Manchester' like a David Beckham or a Darren Fletcher. Rooney is still very much an Everton fanatic and less than two years ago, in fact, it is reported that Rooney was at Wembley supporting his former club being narrowly defeated by Chelsea in the FA Cup final.
Despite being quoted in the very recent past, stating that he categorically wished to remain at Old Trafford for the rest of his career, maybe he actually meant Manchester - the city of Manchester. A big money move to Manchester City in the new year is still a possibility in my view, despite 'our Wayne' signing a new contract today. And despite, what appears on the surface as ruthless case of brinkmanship, I still believe all is not well with the forward, both on and off the pitch.
Rooney has probably (and quite understandably, considering his profile) become disillusioned watching every major star leave the once hallowed environment of the prawn sandwich brigade's club. In the last 18 months, he has seen Ronaldo and Carlos Tevez depart Old Trafford within days of each other. And he has underwhelmingly seen them replaced with Bebe, an ageing and still injury prone Michael Owen, and a talented, but very raw Javier Hernandez.
Of course, we have seen this before from Ferguson and his almost un-parellelled ability to nurture raw, young players into damn good team players or even world superstars. But have we actually, in reality, seen it as much in recent years?
Ferguson's development of youngsters has nearly always been supplemented with a major big money signing. However, who was the last really major signing the club actually made. Does Owen Hargreaves count? And he hasn't played for over two years.
There been other mixed bags. Anderson has clearly not lived up to his early potential, and Michael Carrick - while still only 29- seems to have completely gone off the boil. There is Nani, who, after a really poor first couple of seasons, has been in terrific form over the last six months,. But will the Portuguese winger really go on to become a world beater? Will Darren Gibson go to become another Roy Keane?
Another question that needs to be asked is will Antonio Valencia recover sufficiently well enough from his serious knee injury to continue his very impressive and rapid progress? And then there is the goalkeeper. As good as Edwin Van de Sar has been and still is (most of the time, 40 is a watershed age for a keeper, and he has reached it. Who is going to replace him? Ben Foster was a disaster and their doesn't appear to be any obvious candidates waiting in the wings,
They are all un-answered questions, but obviously issues that Rooney fears (or feared) will continue to stagnate the club's progress without new investment.
Maybe the Liverpool born player fears that Sir Alex will not be around at the club to over-look the development of these talents. Or maybe he just wanted the chance - as most of us anticipated - to earn the really huge money he is able to before his body (already beginning to show the effects of him bursting onto the scene at such a young age) declines in front of his own and our eyes.
I've heard some people suggest, foolishly perhaps, that Fergie is over the hill, and is beginning to lose touch with the modern footballer. This is certainly not something I would accuse the great man of. After all, he has dealt with Eric Cantona, Roy Keane, David Beckham and Christiano Ronaldo in the past, and dealt with them brilliantly. Beckham and Ronaldo in particular, are/were the ultimate breed of modern footballer and Sir Alex certainly guided them through some of their greatest triumphs.
But despite Rooney's change of heart, it is plain to see that the United manager is unable to exert such influence over both his players and the overall running of the club that he used to. The club are in serious debt, through no fault of his own of course, and he is probably unable to make the sort of cut throat decisions that he has become renowned for.
The Scot probably has to run over every decision with the Glazers across the pond first, and by then the whole kudos and ethos of the decision has probably been lost. He certainly appeared more downcast about this particular saga then at any other time I've seen him. Even the Eric Cantona kung fu episode back in 1995 didn't seem to leave him with such a negative view.
Roman Abramovich altered the whole dynamic of English football when he took over the reigns at Chelsea in the summer of 2003. The Russian created an un-precedented snowball effect of hugely rich foreign businessmen investing into the Premier League market. Who would have thought, even three years ago, that Manchester City would be able to offer players such as Wayne Rooney three or four times the salary they would be able to get at Old Trafford. It's actually quite surreal when you think about it.
Sir Alex will turn 70 next December and this may well turn out to be the last straw, despite Rooney's change of heart. At his age, it may just be beyond him to build another great side.
And despite the surprise u-turn, the tide certainly appears to be turning towards the blue side of Manchester as we begin a new decade.
The wages Chelsea were offering back in 2003 were one thing, but the Manchester City owners from Abu Dhabi have an endless pit of funds even within the face of a fierce financial crisis. Maybe Fergie should call it a day now, or all of his quarter century of hardwork may well be lost in the blue mist of Eastlands.
Watch this space. January could be an interesting month..
Thursday, September 23, 2010
JAMIE CARRAGER, A TRUE LEGEND - BUT IS IT TIME HE WAS GIVEN AN EXTENDED BREAK?
Several weeks ago I suggested Frank Lampard should be dropped from the England team. The Chelsea star is now a veteran at 32 years old, and so to is the player at the forefront of this week's article - Jamie Carrager.
Unlike his Chelsea contemporary, Carrager's international career is officially over, but he remains an integral part of his club side. However, I feel he is living off past reputation rather than being in the team due to his current form.
The Bootle born star has been a magnificant servant at Anfield for well over a decade, and his performance when up against Didier Drogba in the second leg of the Champions League semi final in 2007 was one of the best I've ever seen from a defender.
The Chelsea star barely got a kick during both the 90 minutes and extra time and Carrager was fair but firm throughout. Even Drogba acknowledged this during the game and the lack of play acting we have become accustomed to from the Ivory Coast star during that game demonstrated the high regard he gave to Carrager's performance.
Carrager has never been a quick player, and although he is no slouch (recent games aside) his determination and anticipation are his key assets.
His ability to quickly recover from mistakes has also been a key element of his game down the years, but this trait has also appeared to have dwindled rapidly in the last year or so.
Early last season, the little known youngster, Zavon Hines, destroyed Carrager while playing for West Ham at Upton Park. It was a sign of things to come, and although Carrager's form improved as the season went on, his performances early on, most notably away to Fulham where he was sent off, contributed emphatically to Liverpool's awful season and their eventual, dismal 7th place finish.
Carrager though, has always had a habit of rising to the occasion. Last season, despite under-par performances at some of the teams in the lower echelons of the Premier League, he was superb in fixtures such as the two Merseyside derbies, at home to Manchester United and Tottenham and the away game at Arsenal.
But even this seems to no longer be the case. During last week's game at Old Trafford he was beaten to a header by Dimitar Berbatov for the winning goal - hardly a player remowned for his heading abiilty - and generally looked shaky throughout.
In additon, both last season and this, not to mention during the World Cup finals, Carrager has developed an annoying and quite obvious habit of shirt pulling and fouling players who do him for pace.
In years gone by he would probably haver either sheparded the opposing player away from goal or not have been so badly positioned in the first place. Either way, it is a clear sign of his ageing legs. In South Africa the Liverpool star was booked for bad fouls in both group games that he played. Not many players can say that can they? And on both occasions it was down to him being beaten for pace.
There was a time when Carrager should have been in the England team as first choice centre back. Between 2004 and 2008 he was superb for Liverpool and was arguably the most consistent defender in the top flight.
Despite being a virtually ever present member of the squad during this period, he was very rarely handed the opportunity to play in his preferred positon of centre half. He felt this was unjust and this consequently contributed to his decision to retire from international football at 29 in 2007.
At that time, it was perhaps a fair assessment. During the Champions League campaigns of 2005, 2007 and 2008 he was able to hold off and combat some of the world's finest centre forwards, and was twice voted one of the best defenders' in the competition.
He was at the peak of his powers back then, but this is no longer 2008. These days, Carrager is a far cry from the world class defender we knew back then and the question really has to be asked, is he really any better than the other central defenders at Anfield?
He should, in most people's view, still be well ahead of Sotirios Kyrgiakos in the pecking order. But in my opinion, he should now be only third in line.
At this point under Roy Hodgson, and usually under Benitez, Carrager and Martin Skrtel are or were the first choice centre back pairing. But under Benitez, you may argue, this was mainly down to Daniel Agger, in many people's eyes, the most gifted of all the options, having his progress stalled by seemingly endless injury problems during his stint at Anfield.
Now, however, they appear to be behind him and perhaps now is the time for the Dane and Skrtel to be given the chance to develop a partnership together at the back. Both players
are 26 years old. Both, Agger in particular, are class acts and approaching their peak. While both, especially Skrtel, are seasoned internationals and integral parts of their countries' make up.
They appear to also be the perfect combination. One is left footed and one is right footed. And while Skrtel is a brute of a centre half - strong, hard but fair in the tackle and good in the air, Agger complements him superbly. A player in the Franz Beckenbauer mold with a superb long range strike and a supreme ability to dribble the ball out of the defence or spray 50 yard passes.
One thing is for sure, he is not a left back (he has been played there more than once under Hodgson and was roasted by Adam Johnson at Eastlands) as he lacks the pace and crossing abilty, but he is wonderful option at cente half. The fact the AC Milan, Inter Milan and Real Madrid have all shown an interest in recent years reinforces that argument.
Most importantly, Agger can also defend brilliantly and offers more options than an ageing Carrager, who is more similar to Skrtel in stature.
While you can never compensate for the lion hearted, win at all costs, local boy - done good approach of Carrager, if the legs are not up to it, what can you do? It is definely time for a change.
I have heard some fans suggesting the same in recent weeks. But is it the majority of fans at Anfield or are they still so keen to have a local lad orchestrating matters in defence?
The Liverpool fans are not stupid and they will be aware of Carrager's faults and limitations. But he is such a popular figure (demonstrated by the massive crowd who recently attented his testimonial) they will just hope it is just rusty early season form.
It has to be remembered that 32 is not really that old for a defender in this day and age and players such as Tony Adams, Sami Hyppia and Martin Keown demonstrate this.
Roy Hodgson is under pressure, and perhaps the safe option for now would be to keep Carrager in the side. He is expected to be handed a new contract very soon, which suggests he is bound to stay in the first eleven and is still a first choice player for a while yet. However, a boss of Hodgson's experience will surely begin to see the gaps in Carrager's armour appearing and you would think at his age he will not be afraid of making big decisions.
But Carrager is such a legend at Anfield and is one of the all time greats. It is a difficult call. But in Liverpool's current situation, is there really any room for senitment?
The fact he wasn't in the side during the mid-week League Cup defeat to Northampton will surely aid his case to stay in the side. But the Scouser is a great professional, and if he is dropped from the side in the coming weeks, I am sure he will accept it with grace and continue to fight for his place.
There are some big decisions for Hodgson to make, and I this is probably the biggest and most sensitive of the lot. Dropping Carrager from Liverpool, unthinkable surely?? But in my view, it has been coming for a while. And it's about time that a wonderful player, virually ever present since 1998 is given an extended break. If not just to see how he reacts.
Unlike other areas of the pitch, Liverpool are not short of options at centre back. It's important that Hodgson acknowledges this and does what he is paid to do, make big decisions for the better of the club. Because as we know one player is never bigger than the club, even Jamie Carrager (although he comes damn close).
Unlike his Chelsea contemporary, Carrager's international career is officially over, but he remains an integral part of his club side. However, I feel he is living off past reputation rather than being in the team due to his current form.
The Bootle born star has been a magnificant servant at Anfield for well over a decade, and his performance when up against Didier Drogba in the second leg of the Champions League semi final in 2007 was one of the best I've ever seen from a defender.
The Chelsea star barely got a kick during both the 90 minutes and extra time and Carrager was fair but firm throughout. Even Drogba acknowledged this during the game and the lack of play acting we have become accustomed to from the Ivory Coast star during that game demonstrated the high regard he gave to Carrager's performance.
Carrager has never been a quick player, and although he is no slouch (recent games aside) his determination and anticipation are his key assets.
His ability to quickly recover from mistakes has also been a key element of his game down the years, but this trait has also appeared to have dwindled rapidly in the last year or so.
Early last season, the little known youngster, Zavon Hines, destroyed Carrager while playing for West Ham at Upton Park. It was a sign of things to come, and although Carrager's form improved as the season went on, his performances early on, most notably away to Fulham where he was sent off, contributed emphatically to Liverpool's awful season and their eventual, dismal 7th place finish.
Carrager though, has always had a habit of rising to the occasion. Last season, despite under-par performances at some of the teams in the lower echelons of the Premier League, he was superb in fixtures such as the two Merseyside derbies, at home to Manchester United and Tottenham and the away game at Arsenal.
But even this seems to no longer be the case. During last week's game at Old Trafford he was beaten to a header by Dimitar Berbatov for the winning goal - hardly a player remowned for his heading abiilty - and generally looked shaky throughout.
In additon, both last season and this, not to mention during the World Cup finals, Carrager has developed an annoying and quite obvious habit of shirt pulling and fouling players who do him for pace.
In years gone by he would probably haver either sheparded the opposing player away from goal or not have been so badly positioned in the first place. Either way, it is a clear sign of his ageing legs. In South Africa the Liverpool star was booked for bad fouls in both group games that he played. Not many players can say that can they? And on both occasions it was down to him being beaten for pace.
There was a time when Carrager should have been in the England team as first choice centre back. Between 2004 and 2008 he was superb for Liverpool and was arguably the most consistent defender in the top flight.
Despite being a virtually ever present member of the squad during this period, he was very rarely handed the opportunity to play in his preferred positon of centre half. He felt this was unjust and this consequently contributed to his decision to retire from international football at 29 in 2007.
At that time, it was perhaps a fair assessment. During the Champions League campaigns of 2005, 2007 and 2008 he was able to hold off and combat some of the world's finest centre forwards, and was twice voted one of the best defenders' in the competition.
He was at the peak of his powers back then, but this is no longer 2008. These days, Carrager is a far cry from the world class defender we knew back then and the question really has to be asked, is he really any better than the other central defenders at Anfield?
He should, in most people's view, still be well ahead of Sotirios Kyrgiakos in the pecking order. But in my opinion, he should now be only third in line.
At this point under Roy Hodgson, and usually under Benitez, Carrager and Martin Skrtel are or were the first choice centre back pairing. But under Benitez, you may argue, this was mainly down to Daniel Agger, in many people's eyes, the most gifted of all the options, having his progress stalled by seemingly endless injury problems during his stint at Anfield.
Now, however, they appear to be behind him and perhaps now is the time for the Dane and Skrtel to be given the chance to develop a partnership together at the back. Both players
are 26 years old. Both, Agger in particular, are class acts and approaching their peak. While both, especially Skrtel, are seasoned internationals and integral parts of their countries' make up.
They appear to also be the perfect combination. One is left footed and one is right footed. And while Skrtel is a brute of a centre half - strong, hard but fair in the tackle and good in the air, Agger complements him superbly. A player in the Franz Beckenbauer mold with a superb long range strike and a supreme ability to dribble the ball out of the defence or spray 50 yard passes.
One thing is for sure, he is not a left back (he has been played there more than once under Hodgson and was roasted by Adam Johnson at Eastlands) as he lacks the pace and crossing abilty, but he is wonderful option at cente half. The fact the AC Milan, Inter Milan and Real Madrid have all shown an interest in recent years reinforces that argument.
Most importantly, Agger can also defend brilliantly and offers more options than an ageing Carrager, who is more similar to Skrtel in stature.
While you can never compensate for the lion hearted, win at all costs, local boy - done good approach of Carrager, if the legs are not up to it, what can you do? It is definely time for a change.
I have heard some fans suggesting the same in recent weeks. But is it the majority of fans at Anfield or are they still so keen to have a local lad orchestrating matters in defence?
The Liverpool fans are not stupid and they will be aware of Carrager's faults and limitations. But he is such a popular figure (demonstrated by the massive crowd who recently attented his testimonial) they will just hope it is just rusty early season form.
It has to be remembered that 32 is not really that old for a defender in this day and age and players such as Tony Adams, Sami Hyppia and Martin Keown demonstrate this.
Roy Hodgson is under pressure, and perhaps the safe option for now would be to keep Carrager in the side. He is expected to be handed a new contract very soon, which suggests he is bound to stay in the first eleven and is still a first choice player for a while yet. However, a boss of Hodgson's experience will surely begin to see the gaps in Carrager's armour appearing and you would think at his age he will not be afraid of making big decisions.
But Carrager is such a legend at Anfield and is one of the all time greats. It is a difficult call. But in Liverpool's current situation, is there really any room for senitment?
The fact he wasn't in the side during the mid-week League Cup defeat to Northampton will surely aid his case to stay in the side. But the Scouser is a great professional, and if he is dropped from the side in the coming weeks, I am sure he will accept it with grace and continue to fight for his place.
There are some big decisions for Hodgson to make, and I this is probably the biggest and most sensitive of the lot. Dropping Carrager from Liverpool, unthinkable surely?? But in my view, it has been coming for a while. And it's about time that a wonderful player, virually ever present since 1998 is given an extended break. If not just to see how he reacts.
Unlike other areas of the pitch, Liverpool are not short of options at centre back. It's important that Hodgson acknowledges this and does what he is paid to do, make big decisions for the better of the club. Because as we know one player is never bigger than the club, even Jamie Carrager (although he comes damn close).
Saturday, September 11, 2010
HAS THE TIME COME TO PULL THE PLUG ON FRANK LAMPARD'S ENGLAND CAREER?
It is a question that has been on a few journalists’ lips this week. Has the Chelsea star still got another major tournament left in him?
Lampard is now 32. And although he is still banging in the goals from midfield for Chelsea he is just not the same player for England. Hasn’t he been given enough playing time? I believe he has. He has not delivered in the three lions shirt for many years.
People will suggest you could say the same about Steven Gerrard, but there some important differentials to be made.
Firstly, Lampard has, bar the very odd and rare occasion, been played in his natural position of central midfield. Whether it has been along side Gerrard, Owen Hargreaves, Michael Carrick or Gareth Barry, he has not been really been asked to play in a position somewhat un-familiar to him.
Gerrard is a different case. His superior ability and versatility has (paradoxically) often been a hindrance. Such a gifted player in a number of positions, he has been stuck on the right of defence and midfield under McClaren, often played on the left side of midfield under Capello, located up front under Eriksson and even played in a defensive midfield role under Keegan.
Only in the first dozen or so of his 87 caps has the Liverpool skipper played centrally or behind the front man, where he is so effective for his club side.
Lest us not forget, Gerrard has been voted in UEFA’s team of the year on five occasions in the last seven year. He is a wonderfully gifted individual, but needs to be played centrally.
As possibly the finest contemporary exponent of the late run into the box, Lampard has probably deserved his numerous opportunities in central midfield. His marvelous record at Chelsea over the past seven seasons, where he has scored over 20 goals a season on numerous occasions is phenomenal. But it doesn’t make him ‘un-droppable’ for the national team.
Gerrard, two years younger than his England team-mate, should now be sole owner of the advanced midfield role alongside either a Gareth Barry or a fit Owen Hargreaves (unlikely I know). And his outstanding performances as captain over the last three games suggest he should now also be installed as permanent skipper. Can we really rely on Rio Ferdinand to be fit often enough?
In his defence, during his early days for England, Lampard was a revelation. Three goals in four matches at Euro 2004 appeared to be sign of things to come. His performances in the qualifying matches for the 2006 World Cup were also outstanding. He scored five goals in ten matches, but then, somewhere along the line, it all seemed to go wrong.
Having entered the tournament as runner up in both the World and European player of the year awards the previous year, he under performed dramatically. Despite having 25 shots during the tournament (more than any other player) he failed to score in any of his five matches.
Steven Gerrard, although not outstanding, and appearing to be playing the less advanced of the two, scored two goals in four matches and was a far more potent and reliable threat.
At this year’s World Cup finals, hopes were high again. Lampard entered the tournament on the back of his most outstanding season to date, having scored 27 goals in all competitions.
In South Africa, however, he was once again a major flop, failing to score in the group stages. Like every other England player, he was abysmal in the second group match against Algeria. But at Chelsea, Lampard is renowned for his ability to score goals in drab low scoring games, so why can’t he do the same for England? Surely games such as these are tailor made for him to demonstrate his un-doubted talents.
It would of course be unfair to single Lampard out as the only poor performer in that game, but I’m sure you all get where I am coming from and he is supposed to be one of the star players'.
The Romford born boy will for ever be remembered as the man who ‘scored but didn’t' against Germany in Bloemfontein, and although he also hit the bar in that match, he has now (officially) gone nine World Cup matches without a goal. For a player with Lampard’s reputation and ability, that is clearly not good enough.
Gerrard meanwhile, though not outstanding during his three major tournaments (plus a 20 minute cameo versus Germany in Euro 2000) has scored four goals in three separate tournaments and was probably (in most people’s view) England’s best player at this year’s World Cup. This despite being stuck out on the left of a four man midfield.
The Liverpool star is, quite simply, a far more effective and dynamic option who offers so much more to the team than Lampard, who, if he not scoring, offers very little else to the team.
He certainly doesn’t’ offer any more than Gerrard does if he not scoring goals, and Gerrard’s delivery from free kicks and set pieces is equal to, if not better than the Chelsea man.
Certain statistics also make for some interesting reading. Lampard has played 83 times for England and scored 20 goals, while Gerrard has four more caps and scored 19 goals. This surely goes against my argument you may suggest?
No. Lampard has been England’s regular penalty taker since 2004 and has scored five penalties for the national team (while also missing a couple as). He can’t even score regularly from 12 yards these days for England.
Another interesting statistic is their comparative records while playing for England. Lampard has been on the winning side on 49 occasions in his 83 matches, while Gerrard has won 59 of his 87 matches while in the side. The Liverpool man has also only lost 10 of those 87 games, while Lampard has been on the losing side 16 times.
Of course, there are ten other players in the team and these figures can be attributed to a number of reasons. But I still believe they make for some significant viewing and definitely strike the right note in the Gerrard side of the argument.
This is not supposed to be an anti Frank Lampard rant (although it may appear to be). I am a fan of his, and agree that his performances at club level have made it nye on impossible to leave him out of the England side. This, even when he is not performing to his best at international level.
He has been a wonderful player for Chelsea and has probably been a more consistent performer at club level than his Liverpool counterpart. All the international bosses he has played for have probably been right to persevere with him.
But the stats and the performances, not to mention his age, suggest that Lampard’s time in the centre of England’s midfield is surely coming to an end. After all, Steven Gerrard is the captain and will not be dropped, meaning Fabio Capello has an interesting selection headache for the next game.
Theo Walcott is injured and James Milner is suspended, so will Fabio bring back Lampard and stick Gerrard back out wide. Wouldn’t it be a step backwards?
Maybe Lampard can be stuck out on the wing this time. He has had long enough in the centre and perhaps he can do a ‘Gerrard’ if it is so important for him to be accommodated.
Adam Johnson really has to play after his dynamic performances over the past week and there is no doubt in my mind and many others watching, that Gerrard looked like a different player without Lampard in the side. The current skipper appeared liberated, so what will the Italian manager do?
Lampard fans who are reading this may point to the fact that against Croatia two years ago, Lampard played in the 4-1 win in Zagreb, while Gerrard was back in England nursing an injury.
It was similar circumstances to the win in Switzerland this week. However, that was two years ago and England need to look forward now. Lampard will be 34 in 2012 and 36 come the next World Cup in Brazil. He has scored only nine goals for England since October 2005 and four of those have been penalties.
Gerrard may only be two years younger, but I would suggest there is a big difference between 32 and 34 years old, and as captain and in his most fruitful role of central midfield he can certainly lead the team to Ukraine and Poland.
There are some big decisions for Capello to make, but is he brave enough to make them? If he is not (and I fear he he isn't), we will all back to square one once again with the ‘Gerrard-Lampard’ debate. It's just so tedious.
Only when he played with Ledley King at defensive midfield did any manager (Sven Goran Eriksson) attempt to accommodate both Lampard and Gerrard in attacking midfield positions. I remember in a 3-2 win against Argentina in Switzerland in 2005 they were both outstanding. But at that time David Beckham also had to play which meant Gerrard was still stuck out on the left.
The idea petered out, and was rarely attempted again. And why that is, only the managers involved will know. It may have been that Gerrard was not comfortable playing that position on a regular basis or perhaps foreign managers' on the whole, don’t believe English players are flexible enough to play anything other than 4-4-2.
You can counter that by saying many play in these formations at club level (all be it with foreigners around them), but it certainly appears to be the case with the current manager.
Whatever the formation, the days of playing both Lampard and Gerrard – probably the finest duo of midfield players England have possibly ever had during the same generation - have to come to an end sometime.
As I suggested before, is time to look forward for England, and the performances of Joe Hart, Theo Walcott, Adam Johnson, James Milner and even Andy Carrol over the past few weeks suggest the future may be brighter than we had hoped.
Unfortunately for him (in the first eleven anyway) that future, in my view, no longer requires the services of Frank Lampard.
Lampard is now 32. And although he is still banging in the goals from midfield for Chelsea he is just not the same player for England. Hasn’t he been given enough playing time? I believe he has. He has not delivered in the three lions shirt for many years.
People will suggest you could say the same about Steven Gerrard, but there some important differentials to be made.
Firstly, Lampard has, bar the very odd and rare occasion, been played in his natural position of central midfield. Whether it has been along side Gerrard, Owen Hargreaves, Michael Carrick or Gareth Barry, he has not been really been asked to play in a position somewhat un-familiar to him.
Gerrard is a different case. His superior ability and versatility has (paradoxically) often been a hindrance. Such a gifted player in a number of positions, he has been stuck on the right of defence and midfield under McClaren, often played on the left side of midfield under Capello, located up front under Eriksson and even played in a defensive midfield role under Keegan.
Only in the first dozen or so of his 87 caps has the Liverpool skipper played centrally or behind the front man, where he is so effective for his club side.
Lest us not forget, Gerrard has been voted in UEFA’s team of the year on five occasions in the last seven year. He is a wonderfully gifted individual, but needs to be played centrally.
As possibly the finest contemporary exponent of the late run into the box, Lampard has probably deserved his numerous opportunities in central midfield. His marvelous record at Chelsea over the past seven seasons, where he has scored over 20 goals a season on numerous occasions is phenomenal. But it doesn’t make him ‘un-droppable’ for the national team.
Gerrard, two years younger than his England team-mate, should now be sole owner of the advanced midfield role alongside either a Gareth Barry or a fit Owen Hargreaves (unlikely I know). And his outstanding performances as captain over the last three games suggest he should now also be installed as permanent skipper. Can we really rely on Rio Ferdinand to be fit often enough?
In his defence, during his early days for England, Lampard was a revelation. Three goals in four matches at Euro 2004 appeared to be sign of things to come. His performances in the qualifying matches for the 2006 World Cup were also outstanding. He scored five goals in ten matches, but then, somewhere along the line, it all seemed to go wrong.
Having entered the tournament as runner up in both the World and European player of the year awards the previous year, he under performed dramatically. Despite having 25 shots during the tournament (more than any other player) he failed to score in any of his five matches.
Steven Gerrard, although not outstanding, and appearing to be playing the less advanced of the two, scored two goals in four matches and was a far more potent and reliable threat.
At this year’s World Cup finals, hopes were high again. Lampard entered the tournament on the back of his most outstanding season to date, having scored 27 goals in all competitions.
In South Africa, however, he was once again a major flop, failing to score in the group stages. Like every other England player, he was abysmal in the second group match against Algeria. But at Chelsea, Lampard is renowned for his ability to score goals in drab low scoring games, so why can’t he do the same for England? Surely games such as these are tailor made for him to demonstrate his un-doubted talents.
It would of course be unfair to single Lampard out as the only poor performer in that game, but I’m sure you all get where I am coming from and he is supposed to be one of the star players'.
The Romford born boy will for ever be remembered as the man who ‘scored but didn’t' against Germany in Bloemfontein, and although he also hit the bar in that match, he has now (officially) gone nine World Cup matches without a goal. For a player with Lampard’s reputation and ability, that is clearly not good enough.
Gerrard meanwhile, though not outstanding during his three major tournaments (plus a 20 minute cameo versus Germany in Euro 2000) has scored four goals in three separate tournaments and was probably (in most people’s view) England’s best player at this year’s World Cup. This despite being stuck out on the left of a four man midfield.
The Liverpool star is, quite simply, a far more effective and dynamic option who offers so much more to the team than Lampard, who, if he not scoring, offers very little else to the team.
He certainly doesn’t’ offer any more than Gerrard does if he not scoring goals, and Gerrard’s delivery from free kicks and set pieces is equal to, if not better than the Chelsea man.
Certain statistics also make for some interesting reading. Lampard has played 83 times for England and scored 20 goals, while Gerrard has four more caps and scored 19 goals. This surely goes against my argument you may suggest?
No. Lampard has been England’s regular penalty taker since 2004 and has scored five penalties for the national team (while also missing a couple as). He can’t even score regularly from 12 yards these days for England.
Another interesting statistic is their comparative records while playing for England. Lampard has been on the winning side on 49 occasions in his 83 matches, while Gerrard has won 59 of his 87 matches while in the side. The Liverpool man has also only lost 10 of those 87 games, while Lampard has been on the losing side 16 times.
Of course, there are ten other players in the team and these figures can be attributed to a number of reasons. But I still believe they make for some significant viewing and definitely strike the right note in the Gerrard side of the argument.
This is not supposed to be an anti Frank Lampard rant (although it may appear to be). I am a fan of his, and agree that his performances at club level have made it nye on impossible to leave him out of the England side. This, even when he is not performing to his best at international level.
He has been a wonderful player for Chelsea and has probably been a more consistent performer at club level than his Liverpool counterpart. All the international bosses he has played for have probably been right to persevere with him.
But the stats and the performances, not to mention his age, suggest that Lampard’s time in the centre of England’s midfield is surely coming to an end. After all, Steven Gerrard is the captain and will not be dropped, meaning Fabio Capello has an interesting selection headache for the next game.
Theo Walcott is injured and James Milner is suspended, so will Fabio bring back Lampard and stick Gerrard back out wide. Wouldn’t it be a step backwards?
Maybe Lampard can be stuck out on the wing this time. He has had long enough in the centre and perhaps he can do a ‘Gerrard’ if it is so important for him to be accommodated.
Adam Johnson really has to play after his dynamic performances over the past week and there is no doubt in my mind and many others watching, that Gerrard looked like a different player without Lampard in the side. The current skipper appeared liberated, so what will the Italian manager do?
Lampard fans who are reading this may point to the fact that against Croatia two years ago, Lampard played in the 4-1 win in Zagreb, while Gerrard was back in England nursing an injury.
It was similar circumstances to the win in Switzerland this week. However, that was two years ago and England need to look forward now. Lampard will be 34 in 2012 and 36 come the next World Cup in Brazil. He has scored only nine goals for England since October 2005 and four of those have been penalties.
Gerrard may only be two years younger, but I would suggest there is a big difference between 32 and 34 years old, and as captain and in his most fruitful role of central midfield he can certainly lead the team to Ukraine and Poland.
There are some big decisions for Capello to make, but is he brave enough to make them? If he is not (and I fear he he isn't), we will all back to square one once again with the ‘Gerrard-Lampard’ debate. It's just so tedious.
Only when he played with Ledley King at defensive midfield did any manager (Sven Goran Eriksson) attempt to accommodate both Lampard and Gerrard in attacking midfield positions. I remember in a 3-2 win against Argentina in Switzerland in 2005 they were both outstanding. But at that time David Beckham also had to play which meant Gerrard was still stuck out on the left.
The idea petered out, and was rarely attempted again. And why that is, only the managers involved will know. It may have been that Gerrard was not comfortable playing that position on a regular basis or perhaps foreign managers' on the whole, don’t believe English players are flexible enough to play anything other than 4-4-2.
You can counter that by saying many play in these formations at club level (all be it with foreigners around them), but it certainly appears to be the case with the current manager.
Whatever the formation, the days of playing both Lampard and Gerrard – probably the finest duo of midfield players England have possibly ever had during the same generation - have to come to an end sometime.
As I suggested before, is time to look forward for England, and the performances of Joe Hart, Theo Walcott, Adam Johnson, James Milner and even Andy Carrol over the past few weeks suggest the future may be brighter than we had hoped.
Unfortunately for him (in the first eleven anyway) that future, in my view, no longer requires the services of Frank Lampard.
Saturday, August 28, 2010
WHO WOULD BE IN YOUR WORLD ELEVEN?
During the 'thrilling' Champions League draw on Thursday there were also the presentations of the (Inter Milan dominated)UEFA players of the year awards. It got me to thinking, which players would currently be in a world eleven constructed by me.
With the World Cup still fresh in all our thoughts (unfortunately), it’s obvious that the players who performed well in South Africa would have to be at the forefront of any team. Rightly so as well, this, after all is the pinnacle of the sport, despite the fact that the Premier League and the Champions League are probably a hell of a lot more entertaining.
Who would be in your current world eleven? Kaka, Ronaldo, Lampard, Drogba, Rooney, Gerrard, Torres, Asharvin, Milito????
Many of the domestic global stars had very poor tournament's in South Africa for several reasons. Some lacklustre performances could be attributed to injury, some to a lack of form. But either way, they cannot really justify a place in my side if they failed to perform on the biggest stage. I think most critics would agree.
So... In a slightly left field blog this week, here is my current 'August 2010 World Eleven'.
Goalkeeper: Iker Casillas (Real Madrid and Spain)
It may seem like a simple choice, but I do actually believe there are better goalkeepers out there. Gianluca Buffon is a fantastic keeper, but has recently become very injury prone, while Peter Cech was probably better than Casillas is now, pre 2007.
The Brazillian and Inter stopper - Julio Cesar - should really be winning this award, but he tarnished his reputation with a horror show against the Netherlands in South Africa.
In contrast, Casillas barely put a foot wrong during the World Cup and any keeper that can keep Pepe Reina (opening weekend error aside) out of a team (and also someone who can be so candid in front of his girlfriend on live television) is good enough for my elite group of stars.
Right back: Maicon (Internazionale and Brazil)
This was a close call. Philip Lahm certainly performed better during the World Cup and also (in opposition to Maicon at Bayern) played in the Champions League final this year.
The German is probably better defensively, but lacks the dynamicism of the Brazillian. He is also not capable of scoring such a spectacular array of goals.
So Maicon gets the nod, but it’s touch and go and this was probably the most difficult of all the positions to decide on.
Left back: Ashley Cole (Chelsea and England ‘hater’)
This is not a vintage period for the left back position. There is no Paolo Maldini or Roberto Carlos around these days. Brazil don’t even have an out and out left back.
But Ashley Cole is a prolific medal winner and a terrific all round full back.
He can defend well and attack with vigor and despite his well publicised social life, he is a supreme athlete and a fantastic professional.
Cole may be a little mouthy on the pitch, but Jose Mourinho stil coverts him and that is probably enough to get him the nod.
The former Arsenal star is always one of England’s better performers and the best of a bad bunch.
Centre half: Gerard Pique (Barcelona and Spain)
It has to be said that letting Pique leave Old Trafford was not one of the better decisions Sir Alex made. Credit where it’s due for noticing the Spaniard's gifts as a youngster, but to shift him out of Old Trafford just when Rio Ferdinand's injuries were really beginning to hamper him was a lack of judgment not usually associated with the great man.
Pique, meanwhile, has gone from strength to strength at a stunning rate of progress.
After picking up a league title and Champions League winners medal at Old Trafford, but barely featuring in 2008, in the subsequent two years he has won a treble with Barcelona, another league title and capped it all off by adding a World Cup winners medal to his tally in July.
For me, the best defender in South Africa, his inclusion is an easy one.
Centre half and Skipper: Lucio (Internazionale and Brazil)
A World Cup winner eight years ago, a European Champions League winners medal this year was the icing on the cake for a player who was in the Bayer Leverkusen side defeated way back in 2002 (remember Klaus Toppmoller anyone?)
Lucio had a good World Cup up to the Holland match where he (along with the rest of his team mates) was poor in the second half. However, this cannot disguise his superb season at Inter where he was the rock of all rocks in their miserly defence.
There is arguably no better ball playing defender in world football, and in addition the Brazillian is a superb leader.
Despite a frustrating amount of play acting during many games, his bravery is also second to none.
A fantastic leader and my choice as captain.
Defensive midfield: Bastian Schweinsteiger (Bayern Munich and Germany)
Finally came of age this year, and although still only 25, has been a potentially brilliant player for many years.
The German used to be a right midfielder, but has discovered his true niche in front of the back four.
Schweinsteiger was magnificent for Bayern in the second half of last season and during the World Cup, in my view, there was no midfielder who could rival him for consistency throughout the competition.
At his age, what price Schweinsteiger? If James Milner is 26 million?????....
An easy choice, a wonderful year, and he can only get better.
Midfield: Michael Essien (Chelsea and Ghana)
This may sound crazy, but I believe Ghana may well have reached the World Cup final with Essien in their team.
He was cruelly ruled out of the World Cup, but the African side were still only a penalty kick away from the semi finals. No one could possibly suggest that the Ghanians would have been inferior with the colossus that is Essien in midfield.
A supreme athlete, Chelsea can also only be stronger this season with him in their side if he can steer clear of injury. He was injured for much of the last campaign.
The former Lyon star can pass accurately, he can shoot from anywhere, has a supreme engine and he can finish like a forward.
Michael Essien is the ultimate midfielder.
What a player!
Midfield: Wesley Schniejder (Internazionale and the Netherlands)
Bizarrely, I don’t actually think Sneijder played that well in South Africa, but he just kept on scoring and ended up as joint top scorer.
However, he is obviously a standout match winner who has a magnificent shot and a wonderful range of passing. Real Madrid should be ashamed they let him go so cheaply.
There are not many players on Sneijder’s level when it comes to technique and for someone who is not very big he can also hold his own physically against much bigger players.
Along with his fellow Dutchman, Arjen Robben, the shaven headed playmaker was arguably the best player in last year’s Champions League.
But the fact he missed out on World Cup glory and did not play particularly well in the final may count against him come the end of the year awards.
A fantastic year though, and a true superstar of the game.
Midfield: Andres Iniesta
The Barcelona star is probably (along with Sneijder) the main contender for the Ballon d’Or and World Player of the year. The scorer of the winning goal in South Africa, the little genius was fantastic during the knockout stages and really performed when it mattered.
He can pass brilliantly, both long and short, while his first touch is magical. He can also dribble and is able to use both feet comfortably.
Considering Iniesta was injured for much of last season and was a doubt coming into the World Cup, his performances should be given even more kudos.
Iniesta is arguably the world’s best player right now and deserves every ounce of praise he receives, despite the presence of the next player in my team.
Attacking Midfield/Forward: Lionel Messi (Barcelona and Argentina)
It was tough to leave Arjen Robben out of the side, but Messi is a better team player and plays more games.
The little Argentine however, does not deserve to retain his World and European Player awards from last year as he did not have an effective World Cup, despite a promising start. He was way below par and for such a prolific player at club level to score no goals was very disappointing.
Messi appeared to tire during the knockout stages, but did perform the best out of the so called ‘big three’ coming into the tournament, of himself, Wayne Rooney and Christiano Ronaldo.
His supreme performances for Barcelona mean he has to be in the side. But South Africa proved he still has some way to go before he can compare himself to Maradona.
Striker: David Villa (Barcelona and Spain)
I still have to admit I am not his greatest fan. He is a great finisher, but I believe he is a little too selfish and still needs to prove himself on the really big occasion.
This may sound ridiculous considering what he has just achieved and no one (including me) can deny his ability to win games.
And, while Villa was certainly crucial to Spain in South Africa where he often played as a left sided attacker cutting in, he will probably play as central striker at Barcelona, where I don't consider him to be so effective.
In fact, with the service he will have coming from behind him at the Nou Camp he should really score over forty goals this season. But I don't think this will be the case.
While Fernando Torres’ lack of fitness meant that Villa dramatically outshone him in Spain, Torres is arguably a more effective team player and a better lone striker. I may be proved wrong, but I am still not convinced.
Basking in all Spain's glory, it's easy to forget that Villa's performances against the really top sides in South Africa were still a little disappointing, as they were in Euro 2008. He failed to score in both the semi final and the final and was quite subdued on both occasions.
Although you may think I am being churlish, Villa, while being really good player, will never be a ‘true great’ in my eyes.
However (despite reservations about playing Villa as a lone striker), his main compeition for the striker's berth in my team following the World Cup is Diego Forlan, so there is only one winner really isn't there?
For all your qualities Diego, I just can't include in a world eleven of superstars. Sorry.
With the World Cup still fresh in all our thoughts (unfortunately), it’s obvious that the players who performed well in South Africa would have to be at the forefront of any team. Rightly so as well, this, after all is the pinnacle of the sport, despite the fact that the Premier League and the Champions League are probably a hell of a lot more entertaining.
Who would be in your current world eleven? Kaka, Ronaldo, Lampard, Drogba, Rooney, Gerrard, Torres, Asharvin, Milito????
Many of the domestic global stars had very poor tournament's in South Africa for several reasons. Some lacklustre performances could be attributed to injury, some to a lack of form. But either way, they cannot really justify a place in my side if they failed to perform on the biggest stage. I think most critics would agree.
So... In a slightly left field blog this week, here is my current 'August 2010 World Eleven'.
Goalkeeper: Iker Casillas (Real Madrid and Spain)
It may seem like a simple choice, but I do actually believe there are better goalkeepers out there. Gianluca Buffon is a fantastic keeper, but has recently become very injury prone, while Peter Cech was probably better than Casillas is now, pre 2007.
The Brazillian and Inter stopper - Julio Cesar - should really be winning this award, but he tarnished his reputation with a horror show against the Netherlands in South Africa.
In contrast, Casillas barely put a foot wrong during the World Cup and any keeper that can keep Pepe Reina (opening weekend error aside) out of a team (and also someone who can be so candid in front of his girlfriend on live television) is good enough for my elite group of stars.
Right back: Maicon (Internazionale and Brazil)
This was a close call. Philip Lahm certainly performed better during the World Cup and also (in opposition to Maicon at Bayern) played in the Champions League final this year.
The German is probably better defensively, but lacks the dynamicism of the Brazillian. He is also not capable of scoring such a spectacular array of goals.
So Maicon gets the nod, but it’s touch and go and this was probably the most difficult of all the positions to decide on.
Left back: Ashley Cole (Chelsea and England ‘hater’)
This is not a vintage period for the left back position. There is no Paolo Maldini or Roberto Carlos around these days. Brazil don’t even have an out and out left back.
But Ashley Cole is a prolific medal winner and a terrific all round full back.
He can defend well and attack with vigor and despite his well publicised social life, he is a supreme athlete and a fantastic professional.
Cole may be a little mouthy on the pitch, but Jose Mourinho stil coverts him and that is probably enough to get him the nod.
The former Arsenal star is always one of England’s better performers and the best of a bad bunch.
Centre half: Gerard Pique (Barcelona and Spain)
It has to be said that letting Pique leave Old Trafford was not one of the better decisions Sir Alex made. Credit where it’s due for noticing the Spaniard's gifts as a youngster, but to shift him out of Old Trafford just when Rio Ferdinand's injuries were really beginning to hamper him was a lack of judgment not usually associated with the great man.
Pique, meanwhile, has gone from strength to strength at a stunning rate of progress.
After picking up a league title and Champions League winners medal at Old Trafford, but barely featuring in 2008, in the subsequent two years he has won a treble with Barcelona, another league title and capped it all off by adding a World Cup winners medal to his tally in July.
For me, the best defender in South Africa, his inclusion is an easy one.
Centre half and Skipper: Lucio (Internazionale and Brazil)
A World Cup winner eight years ago, a European Champions League winners medal this year was the icing on the cake for a player who was in the Bayer Leverkusen side defeated way back in 2002 (remember Klaus Toppmoller anyone?)
Lucio had a good World Cup up to the Holland match where he (along with the rest of his team mates) was poor in the second half. However, this cannot disguise his superb season at Inter where he was the rock of all rocks in their miserly defence.
There is arguably no better ball playing defender in world football, and in addition the Brazillian is a superb leader.
Despite a frustrating amount of play acting during many games, his bravery is also second to none.
A fantastic leader and my choice as captain.
Defensive midfield: Bastian Schweinsteiger (Bayern Munich and Germany)
Finally came of age this year, and although still only 25, has been a potentially brilliant player for many years.
The German used to be a right midfielder, but has discovered his true niche in front of the back four.
Schweinsteiger was magnificent for Bayern in the second half of last season and during the World Cup, in my view, there was no midfielder who could rival him for consistency throughout the competition.
At his age, what price Schweinsteiger? If James Milner is 26 million?????....
An easy choice, a wonderful year, and he can only get better.
Midfield: Michael Essien (Chelsea and Ghana)
This may sound crazy, but I believe Ghana may well have reached the World Cup final with Essien in their team.
He was cruelly ruled out of the World Cup, but the African side were still only a penalty kick away from the semi finals. No one could possibly suggest that the Ghanians would have been inferior with the colossus that is Essien in midfield.
A supreme athlete, Chelsea can also only be stronger this season with him in their side if he can steer clear of injury. He was injured for much of the last campaign.
The former Lyon star can pass accurately, he can shoot from anywhere, has a supreme engine and he can finish like a forward.
Michael Essien is the ultimate midfielder.
What a player!
Midfield: Wesley Schniejder (Internazionale and the Netherlands)
Bizarrely, I don’t actually think Sneijder played that well in South Africa, but he just kept on scoring and ended up as joint top scorer.
However, he is obviously a standout match winner who has a magnificent shot and a wonderful range of passing. Real Madrid should be ashamed they let him go so cheaply.
There are not many players on Sneijder’s level when it comes to technique and for someone who is not very big he can also hold his own physically against much bigger players.
Along with his fellow Dutchman, Arjen Robben, the shaven headed playmaker was arguably the best player in last year’s Champions League.
But the fact he missed out on World Cup glory and did not play particularly well in the final may count against him come the end of the year awards.
A fantastic year though, and a true superstar of the game.
Midfield: Andres Iniesta
The Barcelona star is probably (along with Sneijder) the main contender for the Ballon d’Or and World Player of the year. The scorer of the winning goal in South Africa, the little genius was fantastic during the knockout stages and really performed when it mattered.
He can pass brilliantly, both long and short, while his first touch is magical. He can also dribble and is able to use both feet comfortably.
Considering Iniesta was injured for much of last season and was a doubt coming into the World Cup, his performances should be given even more kudos.
Iniesta is arguably the world’s best player right now and deserves every ounce of praise he receives, despite the presence of the next player in my team.
Attacking Midfield/Forward: Lionel Messi (Barcelona and Argentina)
It was tough to leave Arjen Robben out of the side, but Messi is a better team player and plays more games.
The little Argentine however, does not deserve to retain his World and European Player awards from last year as he did not have an effective World Cup, despite a promising start. He was way below par and for such a prolific player at club level to score no goals was very disappointing.
Messi appeared to tire during the knockout stages, but did perform the best out of the so called ‘big three’ coming into the tournament, of himself, Wayne Rooney and Christiano Ronaldo.
His supreme performances for Barcelona mean he has to be in the side. But South Africa proved he still has some way to go before he can compare himself to Maradona.
Striker: David Villa (Barcelona and Spain)
I still have to admit I am not his greatest fan. He is a great finisher, but I believe he is a little too selfish and still needs to prove himself on the really big occasion.
This may sound ridiculous considering what he has just achieved and no one (including me) can deny his ability to win games.
And, while Villa was certainly crucial to Spain in South Africa where he often played as a left sided attacker cutting in, he will probably play as central striker at Barcelona, where I don't consider him to be so effective.
In fact, with the service he will have coming from behind him at the Nou Camp he should really score over forty goals this season. But I don't think this will be the case.
While Fernando Torres’ lack of fitness meant that Villa dramatically outshone him in Spain, Torres is arguably a more effective team player and a better lone striker. I may be proved wrong, but I am still not convinced.
Basking in all Spain's glory, it's easy to forget that Villa's performances against the really top sides in South Africa were still a little disappointing, as they were in Euro 2008. He failed to score in both the semi final and the final and was quite subdued on both occasions.
Although you may think I am being churlish, Villa, while being really good player, will never be a ‘true great’ in my eyes.
However (despite reservations about playing Villa as a lone striker), his main compeition for the striker's berth in my team following the World Cup is Diego Forlan, so there is only one winner really isn't there?
For all your qualities Diego, I just can't include in a world eleven of superstars. Sorry.
Friday, August 20, 2010
BENNY'S VALUABLE INFORMATION OF THE WEEK
The final round of Champions League qualifying took place this week.
Watching it made me suddenly consider some Champions League stats from the last 18 years.
Here are a few of them (remember the Champions League began in season 1992/1993. Before this it was the old style, straight knockout European Champions Cup).
Player with the longest period between first final and last final: Paolo Maldini (AC Milan): 14 years 1993-2007
Player(s) with longest period between first and last winners' medal: Edwin Van de Sar* Ajax and Manchester United): 13 years 1995-2008 and Paolo Maldini: 13 years 1994-2007
(NB. Paolo Maldini: first final and winners medal in old European Cup was in 1989; 18 years)
Most Champions League winners medals: Clarence Seedorf: 4 (1995 Ajax, 1998 Real Madrid, 2003,2007 AC Milan)
Most consecutive finals: AC Milan 1993-95, Juventus 1996-98.
Most Wins: AC Milan 3 (1994,2003,2007)
Real Madrid 3 (1998,2000,2002)
Most successful managers: Carlo Ancelotti (AC Milan 2 wins, 1 defeat)
Sir Alex Ferguson (Manchester Utd, 2 wins, 1 defeat)
Jose Mourinho (2 wins, Porto and Inter Milan)
Vincente Del Bosque (2 wins, Real Madrid)
Ottmar Hitzfeld (2 wins, Borussia Dortmund, Bayern Munich, 1 defeat)
Marcello Lippi (Juventus, 1 win, 3 defeats)
Two managers have taken their sides to three successive Champions League finals:
Marcello Lippi (Juventus, 1996-98)
Fabio Capello, yes Fabio Capello (AC Milan) 1993-95.
He was good once you know...
* indicates still playing
Watching it made me suddenly consider some Champions League stats from the last 18 years.
Here are a few of them (remember the Champions League began in season 1992/1993. Before this it was the old style, straight knockout European Champions Cup).
Player with the longest period between first final and last final: Paolo Maldini (AC Milan): 14 years 1993-2007
Player(s) with longest period between first and last winners' medal: Edwin Van de Sar* Ajax and Manchester United): 13 years 1995-2008 and Paolo Maldini: 13 years 1994-2007
(NB. Paolo Maldini: first final and winners medal in old European Cup was in 1989; 18 years)
Most Champions League winners medals: Clarence Seedorf: 4 (1995 Ajax, 1998 Real Madrid, 2003,2007 AC Milan)
Most consecutive finals: AC Milan 1993-95, Juventus 1996-98.
Most Wins: AC Milan 3 (1994,2003,2007)
Real Madrid 3 (1998,2000,2002)
Most successful managers: Carlo Ancelotti (AC Milan 2 wins, 1 defeat)
Sir Alex Ferguson (Manchester Utd, 2 wins, 1 defeat)
Jose Mourinho (2 wins, Porto and Inter Milan)
Vincente Del Bosque (2 wins, Real Madrid)
Ottmar Hitzfeld (2 wins, Borussia Dortmund, Bayern Munich, 1 defeat)
Marcello Lippi (Juventus, 1 win, 3 defeats)
Two managers have taken their sides to three successive Champions League finals:
Marcello Lippi (Juventus, 1996-98)
Fabio Capello, yes Fabio Capello (AC Milan) 1993-95.
He was good once you know...
* indicates still playing
Saturday, August 14, 2010
ENGLAND'S FAILINGS - GRASS ROOTS, TOO MANY FOREIGNERS OR JUST REALITY?
Football is a funny old game game isn’t it? Spain are the team of the moment, but people in football have short memories and forget just how much things can change in such a limited space of time.
Many analysts and pundits are suggesting that the Spanish model of coaching should now be introduced into English football. But there are many questions that should be addressed first.
Are Spain really the right model to follow? Does their history suggest it is right to do so? And do they just happen to be experiencing the fruits of a a cyclical 'golden generation'?
In addition, will this Spanish team keep on winning? Will they even win one of the next two major tournaments?
The answers to all those questions (as the law of averages suggests)are probably not.
Football is, on the whole, both a cyclical and un-forgiving business and in two years time, we will probably all be talking about the next model we should be following.
It is important to remember that the Spaniards also crashed out in the second round of the World Cup four years ago, just like England this time round. They were a side well beaten by an ageing French team and there was no indication then of the world domination that was to follow.
In Euro 2004, they didn’t even progress past the group stages, so is it really the best idea to follow their model of coaching? (whereby they coach children to play the game for fun and not in a competitive manner. The main aim being to keep possession of the ball). In truth, is it actually even the Spanish FA who deserve the credit?
Spain have been fortunate in that they have so many players playing together at club level In many respects much of Spain's current success can be attributed to Frank Rijkkard and Pep Guardiola at Barcelona. Eight of the eleven players who started the World Cup final in South Africa play together at the Nou Camp and the understanding and continuity between them is there for all to see.
Players such as Iniesta, Xavi and Busquets instinctively seem to know where and who each other are. And while it does suggest that this could be the recipe to success, it is still unlikely to transmit itself to England in the near future.
The Premier League is, without doubt, the most cosmopolitan league in the world, and the top clubs such as Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal and Manchester City would do well to field even eight English players between them at the current time.
Even Manchester United regularly field more foreign players than they used to.
Tottenham and Aston Villa possess many English players in their starting line ups, but these are not players who are playing at the very top level of European football week in and week out. Although Tottenham will attempt to show the way this season and be successful in the Champions League, it is highly unlikely that they will advance past the last 16 at best.
What also has to be considered, is that the 'Barca' model is not one that always automatically brings success even at the very highest level. The Liverpool European Cup winning vintage of 1977 consisted of eight Englishmen, two Welshman and one Irishman. But bizarrely, this coincided with probably the most depressing period in English football history.
The national team failed to qualify for both the 1974 and 1978 World Cups, so the argument in this instance (probably the best example concerning a top English side) carries little weight, both in the ideology of top clubs having so many English players in their side or indeed bringing through as many English players as you can from the youth set-up's.
In opposition to the argument concerning clubs having too many foreigners. The Italian national team that travelled to the USA in 1994 are probably the best example. At that time Serie A was by far the most cosmopolitan of all the top European leagues, but it didn't stop the Italians progressing to the World Cup final that year.
In a domestic capacity, there was also the marvellous Dynamo Kiev team of the late 1990s. This was yet another example of a team which was virtually all made up of native Ukranians. However the national team of that period was nowhere near the top of the international football ladder.
On the other side of the coin however there are notable examples of strong club sides clearly aiding their national teams.
The Bayern Munich side of the mid 1970s coincided with perhaps the greatest period of dominance the (West) German team has ever had. While there were also the Ajax teams of the early 1970s who preceded the golden generation of Dutch football, when they reached two consecutive World Cup final's.
As with most things, there are arguments both for and against, but it is certainly not something that is carved in stone. Even though having so many players playing regularly together at club level surely helps, there are not many examples concerning England or English teams which really suggest it makes that much of a difference.
For me, the issues go much deeper. There is something intrinsically defective within the English psyche. There have been so many false dawns, but time and again we put that to one side and always believe that 'this time' it will be different.
Germany and (usually Italy) appear to have that X factor in their psyche that they can perform right up to the very final stages of mosts competitions, time after time. Perhaps this is not the case every four years, but certainly every eight or twelve years they seem to get to at least one major final.
England’s history suggests otherwise and perhaps, reluctantly, we just have to face reality.
These floors could be put down to a number of reasons. Perhaps the players suffer from severe home-sickness, or perhaps they are just a group of players unable to play well enough as a team due to the immense pressure. Maybe even the club issues that cause rifts within the camp are worse than we think. Who knows?
One thing is for sure. The trials and tribulations of the England football team cannot all be attributed to Fabio Capello's lack of English. It didn't seem to be a problem during qualifying did it?
Perhaps it is now the time to take a leaf out of the German's book. They are not afraid to use 'foreigners' who, under citizenship and naturalisation laws, qualify to play for Germany, despite not being born in the country.
Players such as Miroslav Klose and Lukas Podolski are examples of German internationals who have benefited from these laws and have gone on to flouish for their 'adopted' country.
I firmly believe that Mikel Arteta - now eligible for England and unlikely to ever play for Spain - should be brought into the England squad. He is a more mobile, more skilful and younger version of Gareth Barry and is better technically too. He is just what England require to free up the dynamic and under-utilised Steven Gerrard.
It's a must....
It is not all doom and gloom though. England do have promising young players and analysts who harp on about the development (or lack of) of youngsters in this country do not look at all the facts.
England won the European Under 17s title this year, reached the semi final of the Under 19s version and last year, progressed to the final of the Under 21s tournament. If that is not promising, I don’t know what is! Are we supposed to win the lot?
Joe Hart (goalkeeper), Adam Johnson, Jack Wilshere, Keiran Gibbs, Theo Walcott, Jack Rodwell, Tom Huddlestone, Jamie O’Hara and Mark Noble and are all gifted, technically able players.
It may be a cliche, but as I stated at the beginning of this passage, things can change frightningly quickly in football. Just ask the Netherlands...
They didn’t qualify for the World Cup in 2002, went out in the last 16 in 2006, but were only four minutes away from a penalty shoot out in the World Cup final this time round.
If you had read the press reports in South Africa, you would have thought that the Dutch were a far superior football nation to England, but history suggests that this is clearly not the case.
England are in some respects, very similar to the Netherlands in that they have endured endless high’s and low’s in previous tournaments and qualification campaign. In fact the Dutch are possibly even worse at penalty shoot-outs than England are.
Both nations lack the consistency of the Germans, the Italians or the Brazillians and fundamentally just have to wait their turn when it comes round. These nations at the top of the second tier of football require everything to just fall into place at the right time. Remember this was Holland's first final for 32 years. Success does not come easily, no matter who you are.
Maybe it’s just a matter of England having to wait until 2018 to win the damn thing, hopefully on home soil. We’d take that right now, wouldn’t we?...
PREDICTIONS FOR THE COMING SEASON:
For what it’s worth, these are my predictions for the Premiership season ahead:
1 Manchester United
2 Chelsea
3 Manchester City
4 Arsenal
5 Liverpool
6 Everton
7 Tottenham
8 Blackburn
9 Sunderland
10 Aston Villa
11 West Ham
12 Fulham
13 Bolton
14 Stoke
15 Newcastle
16 Birmingham
17 Wolves
18 West Brom
19 Wigan
20 Blackpool
TOP SCORER: Wayne Rooney (Man Utd)
PLAYER OF THE YEAR: Wayne Rooney (It’s bound to happen)
YOUNG PLAYER OF THE YEAR: Adam Johnson (Man City)
FA Cup Winners: Liverpool
League Cup Winners: Manchester City
Champions League Winners: Inter Milan
Many analysts and pundits are suggesting that the Spanish model of coaching should now be introduced into English football. But there are many questions that should be addressed first.
Are Spain really the right model to follow? Does their history suggest it is right to do so? And do they just happen to be experiencing the fruits of a a cyclical 'golden generation'?
In addition, will this Spanish team keep on winning? Will they even win one of the next two major tournaments?
The answers to all those questions (as the law of averages suggests)are probably not.
Football is, on the whole, both a cyclical and un-forgiving business and in two years time, we will probably all be talking about the next model we should be following.
It is important to remember that the Spaniards also crashed out in the second round of the World Cup four years ago, just like England this time round. They were a side well beaten by an ageing French team and there was no indication then of the world domination that was to follow.
In Euro 2004, they didn’t even progress past the group stages, so is it really the best idea to follow their model of coaching? (whereby they coach children to play the game for fun and not in a competitive manner. The main aim being to keep possession of the ball). In truth, is it actually even the Spanish FA who deserve the credit?
Spain have been fortunate in that they have so many players playing together at club level In many respects much of Spain's current success can be attributed to Frank Rijkkard and Pep Guardiola at Barcelona. Eight of the eleven players who started the World Cup final in South Africa play together at the Nou Camp and the understanding and continuity between them is there for all to see.
Players such as Iniesta, Xavi and Busquets instinctively seem to know where and who each other are. And while it does suggest that this could be the recipe to success, it is still unlikely to transmit itself to England in the near future.
The Premier League is, without doubt, the most cosmopolitan league in the world, and the top clubs such as Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal and Manchester City would do well to field even eight English players between them at the current time.
Even Manchester United regularly field more foreign players than they used to.
Tottenham and Aston Villa possess many English players in their starting line ups, but these are not players who are playing at the very top level of European football week in and week out. Although Tottenham will attempt to show the way this season and be successful in the Champions League, it is highly unlikely that they will advance past the last 16 at best.
What also has to be considered, is that the 'Barca' model is not one that always automatically brings success even at the very highest level. The Liverpool European Cup winning vintage of 1977 consisted of eight Englishmen, two Welshman and one Irishman. But bizarrely, this coincided with probably the most depressing period in English football history.
The national team failed to qualify for both the 1974 and 1978 World Cups, so the argument in this instance (probably the best example concerning a top English side) carries little weight, both in the ideology of top clubs having so many English players in their side or indeed bringing through as many English players as you can from the youth set-up's.
In opposition to the argument concerning clubs having too many foreigners. The Italian national team that travelled to the USA in 1994 are probably the best example. At that time Serie A was by far the most cosmopolitan of all the top European leagues, but it didn't stop the Italians progressing to the World Cup final that year.
In a domestic capacity, there was also the marvellous Dynamo Kiev team of the late 1990s. This was yet another example of a team which was virtually all made up of native Ukranians. However the national team of that period was nowhere near the top of the international football ladder.
On the other side of the coin however there are notable examples of strong club sides clearly aiding their national teams.
The Bayern Munich side of the mid 1970s coincided with perhaps the greatest period of dominance the (West) German team has ever had. While there were also the Ajax teams of the early 1970s who preceded the golden generation of Dutch football, when they reached two consecutive World Cup final's.
As with most things, there are arguments both for and against, but it is certainly not something that is carved in stone. Even though having so many players playing regularly together at club level surely helps, there are not many examples concerning England or English teams which really suggest it makes that much of a difference.
For me, the issues go much deeper. There is something intrinsically defective within the English psyche. There have been so many false dawns, but time and again we put that to one side and always believe that 'this time' it will be different.
Germany and (usually Italy) appear to have that X factor in their psyche that they can perform right up to the very final stages of mosts competitions, time after time. Perhaps this is not the case every four years, but certainly every eight or twelve years they seem to get to at least one major final.
England’s history suggests otherwise and perhaps, reluctantly, we just have to face reality.
These floors could be put down to a number of reasons. Perhaps the players suffer from severe home-sickness, or perhaps they are just a group of players unable to play well enough as a team due to the immense pressure. Maybe even the club issues that cause rifts within the camp are worse than we think. Who knows?
One thing is for sure. The trials and tribulations of the England football team cannot all be attributed to Fabio Capello's lack of English. It didn't seem to be a problem during qualifying did it?
Perhaps it is now the time to take a leaf out of the German's book. They are not afraid to use 'foreigners' who, under citizenship and naturalisation laws, qualify to play for Germany, despite not being born in the country.
Players such as Miroslav Klose and Lukas Podolski are examples of German internationals who have benefited from these laws and have gone on to flouish for their 'adopted' country.
I firmly believe that Mikel Arteta - now eligible for England and unlikely to ever play for Spain - should be brought into the England squad. He is a more mobile, more skilful and younger version of Gareth Barry and is better technically too. He is just what England require to free up the dynamic and under-utilised Steven Gerrard.
It's a must....
It is not all doom and gloom though. England do have promising young players and analysts who harp on about the development (or lack of) of youngsters in this country do not look at all the facts.
England won the European Under 17s title this year, reached the semi final of the Under 19s version and last year, progressed to the final of the Under 21s tournament. If that is not promising, I don’t know what is! Are we supposed to win the lot?
Joe Hart (goalkeeper), Adam Johnson, Jack Wilshere, Keiran Gibbs, Theo Walcott, Jack Rodwell, Tom Huddlestone, Jamie O’Hara and Mark Noble and are all gifted, technically able players.
It may be a cliche, but as I stated at the beginning of this passage, things can change frightningly quickly in football. Just ask the Netherlands...
They didn’t qualify for the World Cup in 2002, went out in the last 16 in 2006, but were only four minutes away from a penalty shoot out in the World Cup final this time round.
If you had read the press reports in South Africa, you would have thought that the Dutch were a far superior football nation to England, but history suggests that this is clearly not the case.
England are in some respects, very similar to the Netherlands in that they have endured endless high’s and low’s in previous tournaments and qualification campaign. In fact the Dutch are possibly even worse at penalty shoot-outs than England are.
Both nations lack the consistency of the Germans, the Italians or the Brazillians and fundamentally just have to wait their turn when it comes round. These nations at the top of the second tier of football require everything to just fall into place at the right time. Remember this was Holland's first final for 32 years. Success does not come easily, no matter who you are.
Maybe it’s just a matter of England having to wait until 2018 to win the damn thing, hopefully on home soil. We’d take that right now, wouldn’t we?...
PREDICTIONS FOR THE COMING SEASON:
For what it’s worth, these are my predictions for the Premiership season ahead:
1 Manchester United
2 Chelsea
3 Manchester City
4 Arsenal
5 Liverpool
6 Everton
7 Tottenham
8 Blackburn
9 Sunderland
10 Aston Villa
11 West Ham
12 Fulham
13 Bolton
14 Stoke
15 Newcastle
16 Birmingham
17 Wolves
18 West Brom
19 Wigan
20 Blackpool
TOP SCORER: Wayne Rooney (Man Utd)
PLAYER OF THE YEAR: Wayne Rooney (It’s bound to happen)
YOUNG PLAYER OF THE YEAR: Adam Johnson (Man City)
FA Cup Winners: Liverpool
League Cup Winners: Manchester City
Champions League Winners: Inter Milan
Sunday, July 11, 2010
SPAIN... EXCITING OR BORING?
One of the big talking points over the last few days has been whether or not Spain are an exciting team to watch.
When I saw Barcelona play Arsenal at the Emirates back in April, their slick passing game was indeed a joy to watch. The link up play between Xavi, Messi and co was at times breathtaking.
The Spaniards however, are slightly different. They have a slower, more patient and far less attacking style of play. Perhaps some of their slow build up and pedestrianism could actually be attributed to them lacking a Lionel Messi type player, who knows??.. But I don't feel like jumping of the edge of my seat.
Maybe if Fernando Torres was fully match fit they may well have played with a little more urgency during this competition. But their tactic has involved keeping possession, wearing the opposition down and then banking on conjuring up a goal when the opposition starts to lose concentration in the second half.
In fact, during the knockout stages, Spain have won three games 1-0 and not one goal has been scored before the hour mark. It is a tactic that is obvious, but still extremely difficult to counteract. They also have a very strong defence, which obviously helps.
So, although it is clearly effective, is Spain's style of play actually that exciting?
I witnessed Alan Hansen drawling over their performance after the Germany game. I also heard Ray Parlour and Micky Quinn on Talk Sport suggesting that you could not possibly be a football fan if you didn't find Spain’s style of play invigorating. I have to say I disagree.
Although I admire their astounding ability to keep the ball for long periods of play, there is, to some extent (Andres Iniesta apart) a sense of the ‘catenaccio’ about them, especially in the midfield.
And, while it may not mimic the standard form of 'catenaccio' synonymous with Italian teams of the 1970s and 80s, it must be noted that the phrase did originally stem from defences spraying the ball around to each other in their own half without showing any desire to win the game.
The scenario, therefore, would be that the opposition were virtually bored to death by the middle of the second half and the more negative team were able to pounce.
Is this really the style of football we want from such a talanted team? Of course Spain are not identitical because they want to win the game, but only when it suits them.
While such choice is a wonderful gift to have, I feel their midfield, on several occasions during their World Cup matches, has lacked ambition. It is not entirely dissimilar to 'catenaccio' is it?
I would personally rather watch the current German side play. They may lack the individual ability of the Spanish players but they always attack with purpose and on mass. They also have the talent to retain possession well in the middle of the field, but they certainly show a greater desire to score goals.
Scoring goals are the main objective in football isn't it? Or is it keeping possession? Football is entertainment after all.
Just imagine how good this Germany team could be come Brazil 2014? And although this young side may have been out-passed by the Spanish last Wednesday, I still consider them to be a more exciting team to watch.
Some analysts have suggested that this current Spanish side mimics the Holland teams of 1974 and 1978. But in my opinion, there are some notable differences.
Those Holland teams didn’t just inter-pass, they also interchanged. It was ‘pass and move’ football at its best and was far more fluid because they also played with width. This Spanish side do not play with as much width and do not inter-change with such velocity. It means they often remain static and they rely on their full backs for width.
Perhaps some of you are thinking that I am not pragmatic enough and that I am just too used to the English game, which despite being techincally inferior, is full of passion, speed and excitement. But despite my criticisms, I would obviously be delighted if England could have done what Spain have done in this World Cup, but it doesn't mean they are entertaining.
Or does it alter the fact that in the first half of most of their matches, the Spanish, deliberately or not, have sucked the life out of most of their games and destroyed them as spectacles.
And what makes it even more frustrating is that we know that these players are capable of so much more. Is it down to Vicente Del Bosque being afraid to lose? I can't answer that.
But did Spain really need to play both Busqets and Alonso in midfield against Paraguay? They may have won the game (quite fortunately as it happens), but not in the free scoring style we have come to expect from them in the last two years.
John Ashdown of the Guardian hit the nail on the head. He suggested that the Spanish contingent of Alonso, Xavi, Iniesta, Villa etc are so much better technically than any other side, they can just pass it side to side, very rarely lose possession and gradually wear the opposition down into a state of mental supression. And it will probably be the same story tonight.
But if Marc Van Bommel (the Holland midfielder) continues to bizarrely escape punishment for the endless fouls he commits, perhaps the Netherlands can manage to nick the ball from the Spaniards at the right times and catch them on the counter attack. And with Robin Van Persie and, particularly, Arjen Robben at their disposal, the Dutch are more than capable of causing problems for Spain's defence.
In addition to that, on the flanks, Sergio Ramos and Joan Capdevila (the full backs) are the weak links of the Spanish side. So if both Dirk Kuyt and Robben (again) can be bold and frequently put them under pressure, Spain may well be punished for their ‘Arsenal like’ over indulgence and desire to score the perfect goal. But I doubt it.
While anything is possible when you have players such as Robben and Wesley Sneijder in your side, I still predict either a 2-0 or 2-1 win for Spain.
Aside from their obvious talent, the fact that Spain have seven first team players from Barcelona is probably the clearest explanation on why they are able dominate possession so much in the first place and why they have become such a successful side.
The Spaniards will, in fact, create a record this evening for fielding the most players from one club side (Barcelona) in a World Cup final, if, as expected, Pedro starts the game in place of Torres.
This statitistic alone, surely reinforces the view that English teams should try and develop as many home grown players as they can if they want to be successful at international tournaments (boring or not). But that is can of worms waiting to be opened on another day...
For now, let's just hope I am proved wrong tonight and that it's a match to remember in Soccer City. Unfortunately for football fans around the world, I fear we will all be left feeling disappointed.
MY SOUTH AFRICA 2010 TEAM OF THE TOURNAMENT
As I believe the final will be a low scoring match with no one individual truly standing out, I will (all be it dangerously) select my team/squad of the tournament prior to the final.
Please take a look below and see if you agree...
I have selected a 4-1 3-2 formation with seven substitutes.
GK: Vincent Enymea (Nigeria)
Not a great tournament for goalkeepers, but Enymea was truly outstanding against both Argentina and Greece, despite making an error late in the latter clash. Deserves a move to a bigger club - currently at Maccabi Haifa.
RB: Philipp Lahm (Germany)
He has barely made a mistake and is a superb leader of men. A giant, both defensively and attacking wise. There is no competition as far as I’m concerned.
LB: Giovanni Van Bronkhurst (Holland)
He is 35 and his best days are well behind him. But his leadership qualities are there for all to see and his 40 yard semi final thunderbolt is worth a place in this team all on it’s own.
CB: Gerard Pique (Spain)
The former Manchester United youngster has matured into an outstanding centre back. He can tackle, is good in the air and also so calm in possession. Was superb in the semi final win over Germany.
CB: Jorge Fucile (Uruguay)
Uruguay conceded no goals in the group stages and went on to reach the semi finals. The determination and ability of this man is a major reason for this un-expected run.
DM: Bastian Schwiensteiger (Germany)
Was by far the best defensive midfielder in the competition and was truly awesome during the knockout stages. Comfortable in possession but knows exactly when to ‘sit’ or attack. Frank Lampard should learn a thing or two from the Bayern Munich man, six years his junior. Truly world class.
CM: Keisuke Honda (Japan)
The Spartak Moscow midfielder is superb in possession and is positive and dynamic going forward. He was one of the few central midfield players to truly shine. Is still only 24 and his best years are certainly ahead of him.
CM: Wesley Sneijder (Holland)
I don’t think he has been at his dynamic best during this tournament, but has scored goals when it has really mattered. He has also battled when he has needed to and at times his passing has been nothing short spectacular. What a season for him and Real Madrid are looking a little foolish.
AM: Thomas Mueller (Germany)
The best young player of the tournament and his late runs into the box have been fantastic. He looks a hell of a lot older than his age and has played like he is a seasoned international. Brilliant.
CF: Diego Forlan (Uruguay)
Runs his heart out and scores spectacular goals. Has been a breath of fresh air.
CF: David Villa (Spain)
Has been Spain's match-winner on five occassions and has kept the Spanish in the tournament single-handedly at times. He has certainly proved me wrong. Looks more dangerous when coming in off the left flank.
SUBS:
Alexis Sanchez (Chile)
Andres Iniesta (Spain)
Eduardo (Portugal)
Arjen Robben (Holland)
Bruno Alves (Portugal)
Mesut Ozil (Germany)
Kevin Prince Boateng (Ghana)
When I saw Barcelona play Arsenal at the Emirates back in April, their slick passing game was indeed a joy to watch. The link up play between Xavi, Messi and co was at times breathtaking.
The Spaniards however, are slightly different. They have a slower, more patient and far less attacking style of play. Perhaps some of their slow build up and pedestrianism could actually be attributed to them lacking a Lionel Messi type player, who knows??.. But I don't feel like jumping of the edge of my seat.
Maybe if Fernando Torres was fully match fit they may well have played with a little more urgency during this competition. But their tactic has involved keeping possession, wearing the opposition down and then banking on conjuring up a goal when the opposition starts to lose concentration in the second half.
In fact, during the knockout stages, Spain have won three games 1-0 and not one goal has been scored before the hour mark. It is a tactic that is obvious, but still extremely difficult to counteract. They also have a very strong defence, which obviously helps.
So, although it is clearly effective, is Spain's style of play actually that exciting?
I witnessed Alan Hansen drawling over their performance after the Germany game. I also heard Ray Parlour and Micky Quinn on Talk Sport suggesting that you could not possibly be a football fan if you didn't find Spain’s style of play invigorating. I have to say I disagree.
Although I admire their astounding ability to keep the ball for long periods of play, there is, to some extent (Andres Iniesta apart) a sense of the ‘catenaccio’ about them, especially in the midfield.
And, while it may not mimic the standard form of 'catenaccio' synonymous with Italian teams of the 1970s and 80s, it must be noted that the phrase did originally stem from defences spraying the ball around to each other in their own half without showing any desire to win the game.
The scenario, therefore, would be that the opposition were virtually bored to death by the middle of the second half and the more negative team were able to pounce.
Is this really the style of football we want from such a talanted team? Of course Spain are not identitical because they want to win the game, but only when it suits them.
While such choice is a wonderful gift to have, I feel their midfield, on several occasions during their World Cup matches, has lacked ambition. It is not entirely dissimilar to 'catenaccio' is it?
I would personally rather watch the current German side play. They may lack the individual ability of the Spanish players but they always attack with purpose and on mass. They also have the talent to retain possession well in the middle of the field, but they certainly show a greater desire to score goals.
Scoring goals are the main objective in football isn't it? Or is it keeping possession? Football is entertainment after all.
Just imagine how good this Germany team could be come Brazil 2014? And although this young side may have been out-passed by the Spanish last Wednesday, I still consider them to be a more exciting team to watch.
Some analysts have suggested that this current Spanish side mimics the Holland teams of 1974 and 1978. But in my opinion, there are some notable differences.
Those Holland teams didn’t just inter-pass, they also interchanged. It was ‘pass and move’ football at its best and was far more fluid because they also played with width. This Spanish side do not play with as much width and do not inter-change with such velocity. It means they often remain static and they rely on their full backs for width.
Perhaps some of you are thinking that I am not pragmatic enough and that I am just too used to the English game, which despite being techincally inferior, is full of passion, speed and excitement. But despite my criticisms, I would obviously be delighted if England could have done what Spain have done in this World Cup, but it doesn't mean they are entertaining.
Or does it alter the fact that in the first half of most of their matches, the Spanish, deliberately or not, have sucked the life out of most of their games and destroyed them as spectacles.
And what makes it even more frustrating is that we know that these players are capable of so much more. Is it down to Vicente Del Bosque being afraid to lose? I can't answer that.
But did Spain really need to play both Busqets and Alonso in midfield against Paraguay? They may have won the game (quite fortunately as it happens), but not in the free scoring style we have come to expect from them in the last two years.
John Ashdown of the Guardian hit the nail on the head. He suggested that the Spanish contingent of Alonso, Xavi, Iniesta, Villa etc are so much better technically than any other side, they can just pass it side to side, very rarely lose possession and gradually wear the opposition down into a state of mental supression. And it will probably be the same story tonight.
But if Marc Van Bommel (the Holland midfielder) continues to bizarrely escape punishment for the endless fouls he commits, perhaps the Netherlands can manage to nick the ball from the Spaniards at the right times and catch them on the counter attack. And with Robin Van Persie and, particularly, Arjen Robben at their disposal, the Dutch are more than capable of causing problems for Spain's defence.
In addition to that, on the flanks, Sergio Ramos and Joan Capdevila (the full backs) are the weak links of the Spanish side. So if both Dirk Kuyt and Robben (again) can be bold and frequently put them under pressure, Spain may well be punished for their ‘Arsenal like’ over indulgence and desire to score the perfect goal. But I doubt it.
While anything is possible when you have players such as Robben and Wesley Sneijder in your side, I still predict either a 2-0 or 2-1 win for Spain.
Aside from their obvious talent, the fact that Spain have seven first team players from Barcelona is probably the clearest explanation on why they are able dominate possession so much in the first place and why they have become such a successful side.
The Spaniards will, in fact, create a record this evening for fielding the most players from one club side (Barcelona) in a World Cup final, if, as expected, Pedro starts the game in place of Torres.
This statitistic alone, surely reinforces the view that English teams should try and develop as many home grown players as they can if they want to be successful at international tournaments (boring or not). But that is can of worms waiting to be opened on another day...
For now, let's just hope I am proved wrong tonight and that it's a match to remember in Soccer City. Unfortunately for football fans around the world, I fear we will all be left feeling disappointed.
MY SOUTH AFRICA 2010 TEAM OF THE TOURNAMENT
As I believe the final will be a low scoring match with no one individual truly standing out, I will (all be it dangerously) select my team/squad of the tournament prior to the final.
Please take a look below and see if you agree...
I have selected a 4-1 3-2 formation with seven substitutes.
GK: Vincent Enymea (Nigeria)
Not a great tournament for goalkeepers, but Enymea was truly outstanding against both Argentina and Greece, despite making an error late in the latter clash. Deserves a move to a bigger club - currently at Maccabi Haifa.
RB: Philipp Lahm (Germany)
He has barely made a mistake and is a superb leader of men. A giant, both defensively and attacking wise. There is no competition as far as I’m concerned.
LB: Giovanni Van Bronkhurst (Holland)
He is 35 and his best days are well behind him. But his leadership qualities are there for all to see and his 40 yard semi final thunderbolt is worth a place in this team all on it’s own.
CB: Gerard Pique (Spain)
The former Manchester United youngster has matured into an outstanding centre back. He can tackle, is good in the air and also so calm in possession. Was superb in the semi final win over Germany.
CB: Jorge Fucile (Uruguay)
Uruguay conceded no goals in the group stages and went on to reach the semi finals. The determination and ability of this man is a major reason for this un-expected run.
DM: Bastian Schwiensteiger (Germany)
Was by far the best defensive midfielder in the competition and was truly awesome during the knockout stages. Comfortable in possession but knows exactly when to ‘sit’ or attack. Frank Lampard should learn a thing or two from the Bayern Munich man, six years his junior. Truly world class.
CM: Keisuke Honda (Japan)
The Spartak Moscow midfielder is superb in possession and is positive and dynamic going forward. He was one of the few central midfield players to truly shine. Is still only 24 and his best years are certainly ahead of him.
CM: Wesley Sneijder (Holland)
I don’t think he has been at his dynamic best during this tournament, but has scored goals when it has really mattered. He has also battled when he has needed to and at times his passing has been nothing short spectacular. What a season for him and Real Madrid are looking a little foolish.
AM: Thomas Mueller (Germany)
The best young player of the tournament and his late runs into the box have been fantastic. He looks a hell of a lot older than his age and has played like he is a seasoned international. Brilliant.
CF: Diego Forlan (Uruguay)
Runs his heart out and scores spectacular goals. Has been a breath of fresh air.
CF: David Villa (Spain)
Has been Spain's match-winner on five occassions and has kept the Spanish in the tournament single-handedly at times. He has certainly proved me wrong. Looks more dangerous when coming in off the left flank.
SUBS:
Alexis Sanchez (Chile)
Andres Iniesta (Spain)
Eduardo (Portugal)
Arjen Robben (Holland)
Bruno Alves (Portugal)
Mesut Ozil (Germany)
Kevin Prince Boateng (Ghana)
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
FORLAN IS HAVING A LAUGH. ISN'T HE??..
So the first of the World Cup semi final clashes takes place in Cape Town tonight. But the question I want to ask is, are this quartet really the best four teams in world football ?
Germany are certainly there on merit and probably so to are Holland. But are Uruguay really one of the four best teams out there, or have they made it this far mainly due to the luck of the draw?
Prior to the World Cup, Spain would clearly have been selected by nearly everyone as one of the four best teams, but have they honestly been better than Argentina, Brazil, Ghana or even Japan during this tournament? They were fortunate to beat ten-man Chile and were very poor against both Switzerland and Paraguay.
The European Champions' only decent performance came in the second half against Portugal. But maybe this suggests that they can raise their game against the so called ‘stronger’ teams. We shall see tomorrow night.
I am debating this point because of something Diego Forlan blurted out, and it made me think. Forlan was interviewed by ITV immediately after the shoot out win over Ghana (this may explain his outrageous statement) and he suggested that Uruguay are now one of the four best teams in the world. Are they really? They are according the record books.
Of course Luis Suarez – by handling on the goal-line- did what any member of any team would have done. And this event was especially high profile and given abnormally wide coverage because it was done in the last minute of a World Cup quarter final when the scores were level.
If it had been in the 15th minute, no one would really have remembered it. But the fact remains that the Ajax striker did cheat, and that’s why Forlan’s statement left me a feeling a little ill at ease.
Holland (or the Netherlands, let’s not be pedantic here..) meanwhile, remind of me a lot of France in 1998. They are more functional than the fluent passing team we often associate with the Dutch and they possess hard working and willing runners ready to do the so-called -dirty work'.
Players such as Marc Van Bommel, Dirk Kuyt and Nigel de Jong are far from the ‘total football’ type Dutch players were are used to enjoying, but they are proving to be effective.
The combination of those players and, in addition, two or three fantastically gifted flair players is doing the trick for Holland. And just like the French in 1998, they are winning without performing at their best and by very narrow margins.
In addition, the twice beaten finalists have an excellent goalkeeper in Maarten Stekelenburg and an extremely organised defence – something many of us thought would be their downfall. Make no mistake, they have been lucky at times, but you need that to win this competition.
We must also remember however, that the Dutch have been very unfortunate in tournaments gone by, so maybe now is their time. It is clear that Suarez is a huge loss to Uruguay and I expect another narrow win for the Netherlands tonight. Wesley Sneijder will probably once again prove to be the difference.
Holland's defeat of Brazil was mainly down to the Brazilian’s uncharacteristic errors and lack of discipline. Dunga’s side should really have killed that game off before the break when they were totally in the ascendancy. Previous Brazil teams would have done that, but this team lacks a certain cutting edge.
The five times winners were disappointing throughout their campaign. And though I didn’t expect them to display a lot of flair during the tournament, I did expect their defence to be tighter. It was much vaunted prior to the competition.
They do however lack the graceful, exhilarating players of the past, and you have to question Dunga’s decision to leave both Pato and Ronaldinho out of his squad. Of this crop of players, Robinho is inconsistent (this tournament was almost like a miniature version of his Manchester City spell) while Fabiano can frequently go missing and get frustrated. Kaka looked short of match fitness throughout and appeared to have the whole world on his shoulders at times.
But in four years time, despite the pressure of being the host nation, you wouldn’t bet against them would you? This last eight years have been a blip in their colourful World Cup history, but 12 years is nothing really, try 44…!!!
The outstanding team of the tournament so far has been Germany. It is no coincidence that both England and Argentina – two fancied sides – capitulated against the swift counter attacking of Joachim Loew’s young outfit.
Much of the credit has to go to the coach, who pin-pointed the weaknesses of both teams perfectly. With England he pinpointed their lack of mobility in the centre of the pitch and against Argentina, Loew noted how little the front three of Tevez, Higuain (especially) and Messi track back past the half way line. The Germans punished both this flaw and the lack of creativity of the Argentines in the middle of the park and his tactics worked brilliantly.
Maradona probably regrets not playing Juan Veron in the middle, but quite honestly with that defence his team would still have been comfortably beaten. As Alan Hansen pointed out on the BBC – three of the German goals were from about three yards out!
Even if a team, such as Argentina, have a brilliant front three of four, you cannot have an average back seven and win the World Cup and there were just too many flaws, Messi or not.
I think the quarter finals were as good as the Argentines could have expected, and Maradona has had a decent first World Cup as boss. It will probably also be his last, but he can leave South Africa with his head held high (although that still wouldn’t be very high would it? And ironically his side was defeated by Loew...)
Bastian Schweinsteiger was the player of the quarter finals and has probably been the player of the World Cup so far. He keeps possession brilliantly, but being a natural right winger, is also not short of skill, as he demonstrated by his weaving run to create Germany’s third goal. Louis Van Gaal switched him to central midfield at Bayern Munich earlier in the season and must be given a huge amount of credit for identifying Schweinsteiger’s more natural gifts.
On Saturday, he was majestic and his performance was reinforced even further by the sound of his catchy German name. I don’t think I’ve ever heard a commentator mention one single player’s name as much as Schweinsteiger’s was said on Saturday. Or maybe Steve Wilson - the BBC commentator - just over did it for the effect. Either way it was an outstanding performance from the 25 year old.
Schweinsteiger’s central midfield partner, Sami Khedeira, has also been outstanding although in a less eye catching manner. And it just goes to show how teamwork and a clear understanding of the basics can defy age barriers when it comes to performance. England should take note.
Germany have revolutionised the traditional thinking of football analysts in this World Cup, and have been an absolute joy to watch. Would Michael Ballack have even made a difference had he been fit? It’s hard to imagine them playing any better.
Saying that, the Spanish will not present such as easy obstacle in the German’s next match, and I predict either a narrow Spanish win or a penalty shoot out in the second semi final in Durban.
It is a repeat of the Euro 2008 final when Spain were comfortable winners and I feel their passing game may just wear out the Germans this time round. The Spanish are more creative in midfield than both England and Argentina and have very few weaknesses. They give little away at the back and I believe the German’s counter-attacking game may actually be nullified by the similar style of the Spanish.
I am also predicting a Fernando Torres goal as I feel the Spanish (also remarkably reminiscent of France in 1998. Although minus Zidane, they have better attacking players) will finally come to life and show the world what they are capable of tomorrow evening.
While Spain were average against an organised, but functional Paraguay side, they should have had another stone wall penalty and just about deserved to win. I think the fact that the team are still in South Africa when they probably shouldn’t be will inspire them.
Expect a much better performance from Del Bosque’s side and one thing’s for sure, it certainly won’t be a three or four goal German victory, mark my words!
Finally a small mention has to go to everyone’s second team – Ghana. While they were average in the early group stages, against Germany in the last match of Group D they began to show signs of their potential.
The heroes of Africa undoubtedly grew as the tournament progressed and it was genuinely heart-breaking to see them crash out on Friday night in such dramatic fashion.
In both the last 16 game against the USA and in the quarter finals the Ghanaians were terrific. The team - who were without Michael Essien remember? – worked tirelessly, passed fluently and played some of the best football of the competition in extra time against the Uruguayans.
Kevin Prince Boateng’s stock must have risen three fold during this tournament and unlike so many African teams of the past, Ghana were very organised at the back and kept their discipline in midfield. Also, despite them only playing one up front, they were still invigorating to watch in the true African style. And let’s face it, without meaning any disrespect to Uruguay, Ghana deserved a semi final place.
Just imagine how good they could have been if Essien had been fit? We will never know, but I felt almost as disappointed for Ghana - and especially their Rennes striker – Asamoah Gyan - as I did when England lost to Germany. At least the Ghanaians gave everything.
Hopefully other African nations can be inspired by the performances of Ghana and begin to produce several teams of a similar stature in the near future. We have all been waiting for that African domination but it has never come close to happening. Maybe this could be a turning point.
Congratulations to Ghana for their sterling contribution in South Africa. They have been a shining light in a tournament that, in all honesty, has been quite disappointing.
Now let’s hope it produces two memorable semi final matches over the next two days. And I for one cannot wait for the Germany-Spain clash tomorrow night.
Many people are craving for a repeat of the 1974 final between the then West Germans and Holland, when the ‘boring’ Germans defeated the Johan Cruyff inspired, ‘total football’ Dutch side. This time it could be classed as roles reversed if the two countries meet on July 11th, but I don’t think this will happen.
I fully expect it to be a Netherlands v Spain final on Sunday night in Johannesburg. Watch this space...
Germany are certainly there on merit and probably so to are Holland. But are Uruguay really one of the four best teams out there, or have they made it this far mainly due to the luck of the draw?
Prior to the World Cup, Spain would clearly have been selected by nearly everyone as one of the four best teams, but have they honestly been better than Argentina, Brazil, Ghana or even Japan during this tournament? They were fortunate to beat ten-man Chile and were very poor against both Switzerland and Paraguay.
The European Champions' only decent performance came in the second half against Portugal. But maybe this suggests that they can raise their game against the so called ‘stronger’ teams. We shall see tomorrow night.
I am debating this point because of something Diego Forlan blurted out, and it made me think. Forlan was interviewed by ITV immediately after the shoot out win over Ghana (this may explain his outrageous statement) and he suggested that Uruguay are now one of the four best teams in the world. Are they really? They are according the record books.
Of course Luis Suarez – by handling on the goal-line- did what any member of any team would have done. And this event was especially high profile and given abnormally wide coverage because it was done in the last minute of a World Cup quarter final when the scores were level.
If it had been in the 15th minute, no one would really have remembered it. But the fact remains that the Ajax striker did cheat, and that’s why Forlan’s statement left me a feeling a little ill at ease.
Holland (or the Netherlands, let’s not be pedantic here..) meanwhile, remind of me a lot of France in 1998. They are more functional than the fluent passing team we often associate with the Dutch and they possess hard working and willing runners ready to do the so-called -dirty work'.
Players such as Marc Van Bommel, Dirk Kuyt and Nigel de Jong are far from the ‘total football’ type Dutch players were are used to enjoying, but they are proving to be effective.
The combination of those players and, in addition, two or three fantastically gifted flair players is doing the trick for Holland. And just like the French in 1998, they are winning without performing at their best and by very narrow margins.
In addition, the twice beaten finalists have an excellent goalkeeper in Maarten Stekelenburg and an extremely organised defence – something many of us thought would be their downfall. Make no mistake, they have been lucky at times, but you need that to win this competition.
We must also remember however, that the Dutch have been very unfortunate in tournaments gone by, so maybe now is their time. It is clear that Suarez is a huge loss to Uruguay and I expect another narrow win for the Netherlands tonight. Wesley Sneijder will probably once again prove to be the difference.
Holland's defeat of Brazil was mainly down to the Brazilian’s uncharacteristic errors and lack of discipline. Dunga’s side should really have killed that game off before the break when they were totally in the ascendancy. Previous Brazil teams would have done that, but this team lacks a certain cutting edge.
The five times winners were disappointing throughout their campaign. And though I didn’t expect them to display a lot of flair during the tournament, I did expect their defence to be tighter. It was much vaunted prior to the competition.
They do however lack the graceful, exhilarating players of the past, and you have to question Dunga’s decision to leave both Pato and Ronaldinho out of his squad. Of this crop of players, Robinho is inconsistent (this tournament was almost like a miniature version of his Manchester City spell) while Fabiano can frequently go missing and get frustrated. Kaka looked short of match fitness throughout and appeared to have the whole world on his shoulders at times.
But in four years time, despite the pressure of being the host nation, you wouldn’t bet against them would you? This last eight years have been a blip in their colourful World Cup history, but 12 years is nothing really, try 44…!!!
The outstanding team of the tournament so far has been Germany. It is no coincidence that both England and Argentina – two fancied sides – capitulated against the swift counter attacking of Joachim Loew’s young outfit.
Much of the credit has to go to the coach, who pin-pointed the weaknesses of both teams perfectly. With England he pinpointed their lack of mobility in the centre of the pitch and against Argentina, Loew noted how little the front three of Tevez, Higuain (especially) and Messi track back past the half way line. The Germans punished both this flaw and the lack of creativity of the Argentines in the middle of the park and his tactics worked brilliantly.
Maradona probably regrets not playing Juan Veron in the middle, but quite honestly with that defence his team would still have been comfortably beaten. As Alan Hansen pointed out on the BBC – three of the German goals were from about three yards out!
Even if a team, such as Argentina, have a brilliant front three of four, you cannot have an average back seven and win the World Cup and there were just too many flaws, Messi or not.
I think the quarter finals were as good as the Argentines could have expected, and Maradona has had a decent first World Cup as boss. It will probably also be his last, but he can leave South Africa with his head held high (although that still wouldn’t be very high would it? And ironically his side was defeated by Loew...)
Bastian Schweinsteiger was the player of the quarter finals and has probably been the player of the World Cup so far. He keeps possession brilliantly, but being a natural right winger, is also not short of skill, as he demonstrated by his weaving run to create Germany’s third goal. Louis Van Gaal switched him to central midfield at Bayern Munich earlier in the season and must be given a huge amount of credit for identifying Schweinsteiger’s more natural gifts.
On Saturday, he was majestic and his performance was reinforced even further by the sound of his catchy German name. I don’t think I’ve ever heard a commentator mention one single player’s name as much as Schweinsteiger’s was said on Saturday. Or maybe Steve Wilson - the BBC commentator - just over did it for the effect. Either way it was an outstanding performance from the 25 year old.
Schweinsteiger’s central midfield partner, Sami Khedeira, has also been outstanding although in a less eye catching manner. And it just goes to show how teamwork and a clear understanding of the basics can defy age barriers when it comes to performance. England should take note.
Germany have revolutionised the traditional thinking of football analysts in this World Cup, and have been an absolute joy to watch. Would Michael Ballack have even made a difference had he been fit? It’s hard to imagine them playing any better.
Saying that, the Spanish will not present such as easy obstacle in the German’s next match, and I predict either a narrow Spanish win or a penalty shoot out in the second semi final in Durban.
It is a repeat of the Euro 2008 final when Spain were comfortable winners and I feel their passing game may just wear out the Germans this time round. The Spanish are more creative in midfield than both England and Argentina and have very few weaknesses. They give little away at the back and I believe the German’s counter-attacking game may actually be nullified by the similar style of the Spanish.
I am also predicting a Fernando Torres goal as I feel the Spanish (also remarkably reminiscent of France in 1998. Although minus Zidane, they have better attacking players) will finally come to life and show the world what they are capable of tomorrow evening.
While Spain were average against an organised, but functional Paraguay side, they should have had another stone wall penalty and just about deserved to win. I think the fact that the team are still in South Africa when they probably shouldn’t be will inspire them.
Expect a much better performance from Del Bosque’s side and one thing’s for sure, it certainly won’t be a three or four goal German victory, mark my words!
Finally a small mention has to go to everyone’s second team – Ghana. While they were average in the early group stages, against Germany in the last match of Group D they began to show signs of their potential.
The heroes of Africa undoubtedly grew as the tournament progressed and it was genuinely heart-breaking to see them crash out on Friday night in such dramatic fashion.
In both the last 16 game against the USA and in the quarter finals the Ghanaians were terrific. The team - who were without Michael Essien remember? – worked tirelessly, passed fluently and played some of the best football of the competition in extra time against the Uruguayans.
Kevin Prince Boateng’s stock must have risen three fold during this tournament and unlike so many African teams of the past, Ghana were very organised at the back and kept their discipline in midfield. Also, despite them only playing one up front, they were still invigorating to watch in the true African style. And let’s face it, without meaning any disrespect to Uruguay, Ghana deserved a semi final place.
Just imagine how good they could have been if Essien had been fit? We will never know, but I felt almost as disappointed for Ghana - and especially their Rennes striker – Asamoah Gyan - as I did when England lost to Germany. At least the Ghanaians gave everything.
Hopefully other African nations can be inspired by the performances of Ghana and begin to produce several teams of a similar stature in the near future. We have all been waiting for that African domination but it has never come close to happening. Maybe this could be a turning point.
Congratulations to Ghana for their sterling contribution in South Africa. They have been a shining light in a tournament that, in all honesty, has been quite disappointing.
Now let’s hope it produces two memorable semi final matches over the next two days. And I for one cannot wait for the Germany-Spain clash tomorrow night.
Many people are craving for a repeat of the 1974 final between the then West Germans and Holland, when the ‘boring’ Germans defeated the Johan Cruyff inspired, ‘total football’ Dutch side. This time it could be classed as roles reversed if the two countries meet on July 11th, but I don’t think this will happen.
I fully expect it to be a Netherlands v Spain final on Sunday night in Johannesburg. Watch this space...
Saturday, July 3, 2010
ROY HODGSON FINALLY GETS HIS CHANCE AT A MAJOR ENGLISH CLUB... BUT IS HE THE RIGHT CHOICE?
There has been no action in South Africa over the last three days, but the biggest domestic news story of the summer was one we have seen coming for a while.
In Tuesday’s article I suggested that Roy Hodgson would be an excellent choice as England manager, but that will not now be the case. The 62 year old is heading to Anfield in a three year deal.
The Croydon born coach surely deserves his chance at a major English club and now has what he calls ‘the biggest job in football’, but I have some doubts about the appointment.
The main issue must be his age. He is old enough for a free bus pass and this is clearly not an appointment with a clear vision of the future. Yes, Sir Alex Ferguson is 68 years old but he been at Old Trafford for 24 years, Hodgson is starting from scratch
In addition, the former Finland and Switzerland boss has no record of winning things in his homeland. Isn’t this what Liverpool fans crave most? - Winning things. Or is it just a matter of stabilising an apparent ‘sinking ship’ and attempting to get the team back into the top four? Is that really enough?
As a Liverpool fan, another thing that would concern me is Hodgson’s status and prestige. Rafa Benitez was a glamour name and was able to attract some of the biggest names in football. Can Hodgson attract stars with the stature of Fernando Torres, Javier Mascherano, Glen Johnson, Maxi Rodriguez and Xavi Alonso to the club. Does he even have the pulling power to attract top young stars such as Ryan Babel and Daniel Agger to Anfield. At the time they were both purchased by Benitez, they were two off the hottest young properties in Europe. The Spaniard did have that knack that not many managers possess.
In his defence, Hodgson can certainly spot a talent when he sees one, and perhaps due to Liverpool’s limited budget and apparent lack of spending power, he is the suitable choice.
The former Fulham boss also has excellent contacts around Europe and is able get the best out of his players.
If Hodgson can manage to keep the majority of his stars and bring that extra ten per cent out of the young, promising players such as Lucas and Emilio Insua, Liverpool could be in business.
I also think Hodgson could be the right man to get the best out of some of Liverpool’s under-used gems. Ryan Babel and Alberto Aquilani are individuals full of supreme talent and in Babel’s case, untold potential. But they were players who were not always fully utilised by a stubborn Benitez.
In fact when you observe how Hodgson has transformed Bobby Zamora and revitalised Danny Murphy’s career, he has certainly demonstrated what an excellent man-manager he is. This is probably the one thing Benitez really lacked and I personally feel Babel is a similar type of character to Zamora who needs to believe in himself more. If Hodgson can help the Dutchman fulfil his potential then I believe there is a real star in the making.
It has already been rumoured that Gilberto Silva and/or Danny Murphy could be signed if Javier Mascherano decides to leave Anfield. Hodgson certainly does like that mix of vast experience and young players in his side and perhaps a calm, experienced head in the centre of the park is what Liverpool have required ever since Alonso’s departure last summer.
Another reason why the Englishman may prove to be a shrewd choice is that he appears to be from the ‘Liverpool school’ of coaching and management. He does have that kind of Bob Paisley or Joe Fagan feel about him in the way that he is fully respectful to others, rarely gets flustered and knows the game inside out, but portrays this knowledge in a quiet, modest manner.
Hodgson is a true gentleman who lacks any form of arrogance, but must also have a tough streak somewhere to have got as far as he has. Maybe just maybe that is exactly what is needed at Liverpool in these uncertain times.
Hodgson actually began his management career at the time when Liverpool were the top club in world football. So I’m sure he is fully aware of the history and expectations at England’s most successful club. This makes him ideal for the job in some ways, and perhaps gives him a greater grasp of the club that another foreign manager may have.
He is also an articulate, clever man who speaks five languages. It is a skill that is obviously an important element in the modern game, but perhaps at such a big English club it is particularly helpful – especially in their current predicament - to have a fluent English speaker at the helm.
As I've stated before, I felt that Benitez was so often a victim of ‘lost in translation’ games conjured up by the English press and frequently appeared to be the victim of a media witch hunt. Hodgson will surely not fall for those tricks and he certainly doesn’t attract them.
It is shrewd appointment by the Anfield board for commercial and emotional reasons as well. Hodgson is not known for being confrontational and could even be perceived as a bit of a ‘yes man’ . It is probably something that the board will appreciate following on from Rafael Benitez.
But ‘our Roy’ is also very likeable, and this makes it difficult for the fans to really turn against him. The Anfield faithful will certainly give him a chance, that’s for sure, and he will certainly not be hated at any point, you can guarantee that.
On the playing side however, there are grave concerns. The London born coach clearly did a terrific job at Fulham, but hey were a club who were only really able to play their best at Craven Cottage. Whilst at the club, Hodgson's side only won nine away games in two and a half seasons.
At Liverpool, the team will always be strong at home, whoever is in charge, but last year they also fared very poorly away from home.
Hodgson will need to alter his style on Merseyside and the Anfield faithful will obviously expect more than what Hodgson offered at Fulham. While I’m sure he is fully aware of this it will probably take a little time for him to stamp his authority on the team and the team's style, but does he have time? He has a three year contract and is approaching 63 years old. This is the concern.
What’s also a little worrying is that Hodgson, although vastly experienced, does lack any long term experience at a truly, globally renowned club. He had two short spells at Inter Milan, but only really as an interim manager with limited success.
The biggest job he has had in England was at Blackburn Rovers, where he had money to spend. But after a good first season he had a disastrous second campaign. The Ewood Park club actually ended up going down that year following Hodgson’s dismissal in December. He will be hoping his second stint in the North West of England is a better one.
Liverpool will not be relegated, but can he get them back into the top four? He says he can, but with only 12-15 million currently available in the transfer market, he’s going to need to use all his persuasive skills and use his full quota of contacts to get this great club back to the top.
As I stated earlier though, good luck to the man. He certainly deserves this chance, whatever happens…..
In Tuesday’s article I suggested that Roy Hodgson would be an excellent choice as England manager, but that will not now be the case. The 62 year old is heading to Anfield in a three year deal.
The Croydon born coach surely deserves his chance at a major English club and now has what he calls ‘the biggest job in football’, but I have some doubts about the appointment.
The main issue must be his age. He is old enough for a free bus pass and this is clearly not an appointment with a clear vision of the future. Yes, Sir Alex Ferguson is 68 years old but he been at Old Trafford for 24 years, Hodgson is starting from scratch
In addition, the former Finland and Switzerland boss has no record of winning things in his homeland. Isn’t this what Liverpool fans crave most? - Winning things. Or is it just a matter of stabilising an apparent ‘sinking ship’ and attempting to get the team back into the top four? Is that really enough?
As a Liverpool fan, another thing that would concern me is Hodgson’s status and prestige. Rafa Benitez was a glamour name and was able to attract some of the biggest names in football. Can Hodgson attract stars with the stature of Fernando Torres, Javier Mascherano, Glen Johnson, Maxi Rodriguez and Xavi Alonso to the club. Does he even have the pulling power to attract top young stars such as Ryan Babel and Daniel Agger to Anfield. At the time they were both purchased by Benitez, they were two off the hottest young properties in Europe. The Spaniard did have that knack that not many managers possess.
In his defence, Hodgson can certainly spot a talent when he sees one, and perhaps due to Liverpool’s limited budget and apparent lack of spending power, he is the suitable choice.
The former Fulham boss also has excellent contacts around Europe and is able get the best out of his players.
If Hodgson can manage to keep the majority of his stars and bring that extra ten per cent out of the young, promising players such as Lucas and Emilio Insua, Liverpool could be in business.
I also think Hodgson could be the right man to get the best out of some of Liverpool’s under-used gems. Ryan Babel and Alberto Aquilani are individuals full of supreme talent and in Babel’s case, untold potential. But they were players who were not always fully utilised by a stubborn Benitez.
In fact when you observe how Hodgson has transformed Bobby Zamora and revitalised Danny Murphy’s career, he has certainly demonstrated what an excellent man-manager he is. This is probably the one thing Benitez really lacked and I personally feel Babel is a similar type of character to Zamora who needs to believe in himself more. If Hodgson can help the Dutchman fulfil his potential then I believe there is a real star in the making.
It has already been rumoured that Gilberto Silva and/or Danny Murphy could be signed if Javier Mascherano decides to leave Anfield. Hodgson certainly does like that mix of vast experience and young players in his side and perhaps a calm, experienced head in the centre of the park is what Liverpool have required ever since Alonso’s departure last summer.
Another reason why the Englishman may prove to be a shrewd choice is that he appears to be from the ‘Liverpool school’ of coaching and management. He does have that kind of Bob Paisley or Joe Fagan feel about him in the way that he is fully respectful to others, rarely gets flustered and knows the game inside out, but portrays this knowledge in a quiet, modest manner.
Hodgson is a true gentleman who lacks any form of arrogance, but must also have a tough streak somewhere to have got as far as he has. Maybe just maybe that is exactly what is needed at Liverpool in these uncertain times.
Hodgson actually began his management career at the time when Liverpool were the top club in world football. So I’m sure he is fully aware of the history and expectations at England’s most successful club. This makes him ideal for the job in some ways, and perhaps gives him a greater grasp of the club that another foreign manager may have.
He is also an articulate, clever man who speaks five languages. It is a skill that is obviously an important element in the modern game, but perhaps at such a big English club it is particularly helpful – especially in their current predicament - to have a fluent English speaker at the helm.
As I've stated before, I felt that Benitez was so often a victim of ‘lost in translation’ games conjured up by the English press and frequently appeared to be the victim of a media witch hunt. Hodgson will surely not fall for those tricks and he certainly doesn’t attract them.
It is shrewd appointment by the Anfield board for commercial and emotional reasons as well. Hodgson is not known for being confrontational and could even be perceived as a bit of a ‘yes man’ . It is probably something that the board will appreciate following on from Rafael Benitez.
But ‘our Roy’ is also very likeable, and this makes it difficult for the fans to really turn against him. The Anfield faithful will certainly give him a chance, that’s for sure, and he will certainly not be hated at any point, you can guarantee that.
On the playing side however, there are grave concerns. The London born coach clearly did a terrific job at Fulham, but hey were a club who were only really able to play their best at Craven Cottage. Whilst at the club, Hodgson's side only won nine away games in two and a half seasons.
At Liverpool, the team will always be strong at home, whoever is in charge, but last year they also fared very poorly away from home.
Hodgson will need to alter his style on Merseyside and the Anfield faithful will obviously expect more than what Hodgson offered at Fulham. While I’m sure he is fully aware of this it will probably take a little time for him to stamp his authority on the team and the team's style, but does he have time? He has a three year contract and is approaching 63 years old. This is the concern.
What’s also a little worrying is that Hodgson, although vastly experienced, does lack any long term experience at a truly, globally renowned club. He had two short spells at Inter Milan, but only really as an interim manager with limited success.
The biggest job he has had in England was at Blackburn Rovers, where he had money to spend. But after a good first season he had a disastrous second campaign. The Ewood Park club actually ended up going down that year following Hodgson’s dismissal in December. He will be hoping his second stint in the North West of England is a better one.
Liverpool will not be relegated, but can he get them back into the top four? He says he can, but with only 12-15 million currently available in the transfer market, he’s going to need to use all his persuasive skills and use his full quota of contacts to get this great club back to the top.
As I stated earlier though, good luck to the man. He certainly deserves this chance, whatever happens…..
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)