What an end to the football season. What a story. Those two injury time goals for Manchester City, as they belatedly snatched the win they needed against Queens Park Rangers to win the Premier League title, was an incredible end to the most captivating football season in years. At that precise moment, the money poured into the club became a mere footnote. The story was bigger than that. It was a reminder the most important thing in football is what happens on the pitch, rather than in boardrooms.
It is for that reason the Newcastle fans have warmed to Alan Pardew, and have less to say about their controversial owner, Mike Ashley, than they once may have. It is for that reason the Blackburn fans despised Steve Kean and wanted him out, then went quiet for a bit when results picked up, before going into meltdown as they saw their Premier League status slip away.
Football is the people's game. It is a never ending story, of which a new chapter has just been completed and another is just starting. With that new chapter, it is also the first time in years that I want the next season to start straight away. Forget the play-off finals. Forget Euro 2012. Forget pre-season friendlies. I cannot wait for season 2012/13. I can only hope it is at least fractionally as good as the last.
Aguero's run which carved up the deep QPR defence, and his strike which won the title, will live in our memories for years. It concluded the closest finish to a top flight-season since 1989, a whole three years before football was officially invented by the FA Premier League in 1992 (yes, football did actually exist before then). 1989 was a bitter-sweet time to follow the game because of a mix of crowd disturbances and disaster with a more tactile and engaging experience as a fan. I never thought I would feel the excitement of a final day of any Premier League season as I did back in 1989.
That day, football was free on (and I am trusting my memory with this part) ITV. Furthermore, (and I am trusting my memory again here) the end of the season fixture between Liverpool and Arsenal was delayed due to Liverpool's piling up of fixtures following the Hillsborough disaster of the same year. English football needed the last day of the season to deliver, and deliver it did. Michael Thomas broke clear of the Liverpool defence to score a last minute goal for Arsenal which sent the title to Highbury.
A whole 23 years later, and the Premier League finally delivered the goods. Manchester City went into the final day of the season only needing to match Manchester United's score to win the title at the expense of their hated local rivals. United faced a tricky away visit to Sunderland. City faced relegation-threatened QPR at home. No surprise then that the United manager, Sir Alex Ferguson, declared City as having "two hands on the title."
It was never going to be as simple as that. QPR themselves needed a result to make absolutely sure of the Premier League survival. United have a habit of succeeding in what Arsene Wenger described as the "money time" - a reference to the endgame when those with the winning mentality step up and triumph. This is equally as applicable to injury time in matches (often known as "Fergie time" due to Manchester United's tendency to get plenty of it in matches and grab winning results in this time) as it is to crucial points of the season.
City on the other hand had developed a losers' mentality during over 40 years of failure. They were the ones with the tendency to lose matches in Fergie time. They were the ones who had been to football's version of hell (League One, in today's money) and back. They were the ones with the uncanny ability to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory. To put it simply, they were the complete opposite to their multi-title winning neighbours from Trafford. Out of this discourse emerges pessimism. This pessimism can on occasions transmit to players, even if they are reluctant to admit it. On the day of the title decider, the impression I got was City fans were cautious about their prospects of finally winning the league.
What they needed was an early goal. It never came. QPR had opted for a strategy where most of the players were not just camped in their own half, but in their own 18-yard box, with the hope that they might just snatch something at the other end during a rare breakaway. This stifled City. The fans' jitters were worsened by news that United had taken the lead at Sunderland. Those jitters were briefly calmed by a rare goal from Pablo Zabaleta in the 39th minute. His fizzy shot proved difficult to handle for QPR goalkeeper, Paddy Kenny, who could only flick it into the net. The news of the goal was transmitted to United support by the Sunderland fans gleefully singing "1-0 to the City boys," to the tune of Go West by The Village People.
The relief was short lived, as QPR regained parity early in the second half. Joleon Lescott did his Euro 2012 prospects no good whatsover with some poor defending which allowed Djibril Cisse to pounce and level the scores. City fans could not believe it. Manchester United fans could not believe it. I could not believe it. What was on paper a straightforward task for City became something altogether more complicated, in keeping with City tradition.
City seemed to get the space they desperately needed when Joey Barton decided to behave as Joey Barton does, by getting himself sent off under provocation from Carlos Tevez. Regardless of how much provocation was involved, punching and kicking anyone in sight is not the way to stay on a football field.
In typical City fashion, they proceeded to make beating a 10-man relegation battling outfit at home look difficult. QPR went further ahead in yet another rare attack, to the incredulity of fans on both sides of Manchester. The title was swinging United's way. Tears and despair started to rain down on Eastlands. As the match went into injury time, I brazenly tweeted my congratulations to United, and how the last day failure was so typically Manchester City and that QPR manager, Mark Hughes, had served his revenge stone cold on the club that sacked him. Then, came the unimaginable.
The two injury time goals by Edin Dzeko and Sergio Aguero formed the late twist that all good stories should have. Despair became delight for the City fans at Eastlands. Manchester City had won the title in the most exciting way imaginable, and won many new friends in the process. Years of negative energy were erased in three glorious minutes. For QPR, it was relief that results elsewhere had gone their way. Again, the news filtered through to United fans through phones, radios and gloating Sunderland supporters. In a show of maturity, Wayne Rooney was the first to acknowledge the terrific support of the United fans.
On one hand, I could not believe what I had witnessed. On the other hand, I was not completely shocked, because of the capability of The Beautiful Game to surprise and enthrall. It was clear then, I was still trying to comprehend the magnificence and the enormity of what had just occurred at Eastlands. Firstly, the anticipation of a new name on the Premier League trophy. Then, the unraveling of City and an indication that United were set to edge things yet again. Finally, the most memorable last five minutes of a football season. Many thanks to the entire cast that made the great show possible.
Showing posts with label Football. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Football. Show all posts
Tuesday, 15 May 2012
Premier League review: Blackburn and Wolves get their desserts
Different clubs, different approaches and different incompetences - Blackburn Rovers and Wolverhampton Wanderers are this season's case studies of how not to run a football club. Both have been deservedly relegated from the Premier League and hopefully will not return any time soon. Football - and more saliently - their own fans, deserve better.
Early results for Wolves were promising, and the club looked set for an unusually comfortable season, without the looking over their shoulders that a typical Wolves season usually entails. Unfortunately, that was August, and by September results had reverted to type, and Wolves slid down the table fast.
The response from the Wolves board was to sack the manager Mick McCarthy, partly as a result of fans' pressure. Despite acting on the disappointment of supporters, the decision to sack McCarthy is now widely regarded as a mistake. Who got the blame? The fans? The players? No, the board got the blame, but rightly so. Fans pay their money to watch football and vent their frustration. The job of a football club's board is to act rationally. The decision by the Wolves board was anything but rational. Wolves were always set for a struggle, but the decision to sack McCarthy was carried out without a sufficient shortlist of replacements in mind.
Following McCarthy's sacking, there followed an embarrassing rigmarole which saw managers lined up for the role, then discounted on a near-daily basis. Steve Bruce was understood to be lined up, but something went wrong and in an act of throwing in the towel, Wolves decided to hand the job to one of the coaches, Terry Connor. As we are constantly reminded, he is 'a nice bloke' and has a good relationship with the players. Wolves have not won since.
As for Blackburn, well where do we start? The club has been a circus ever since it was taken over by 'The Venkys', whoever they may be. The Indian chicken traders who bought the club are even more rarely spotted than actual chickens around Ewood Park these days, such is the poisonous atmosphere that has engulfed the ground.
One of their first acts was to sack the solid - if unspectacular - manager, Sam Allardyce. As was the case with Wolves, they decided to promote an inexperienced number two to the role of manager. Results have been appalling ever since, with the occasional exception which meant that the mutiny around Ewood Park only reached full volume on Monday (7th May) when relegation was finally confirmed.
If the incompetence of the Wolves board was a hasty sacking without considering a replacement, the Blackburn board upstaged it by keeping their manager in charge far longer than plausible. Back in December, the atmosphere at Ewood Park was at its lowest point until this week, as Blackburn lost to local rivals Bolton. I have no doubt that the timing of their otherwise virtuous protests cost Blackburn the three points that day. However, that was also the time for the Blackburn owners to pull the plug on Steve Kean.
Looking back, excellent results that followed, such as the victory against Manchester United at Old Trafford were more about the players declaring what they were capable of if given a fair chance, rather than tacit support for their manager. Although hostilities ceased for a while, when a normalisation of the results returned so did the anger.
The inaction of the Blackburn board is indicative of their seeming lack of actual physical interest in getting involved with the club. The most destructive rumour that circulates is the question of how much they knew about promotion and relegation, and if this means of meritocratic movement in English football was even known to the Venkys.
If they did not know about the existence of relegation, there is some consolation for them - all relegated clubs are awarded a series of 'parachute payments' to ease the crashing fall to status and the finances a relegation can take.
Wolves and Blackburn can be summarised as contrasting styles of how their staff were handled. One club hit the panic button and effectively destroyed its structure; the other fiddled while the structure burned. In Reading and Southampton they will be replaced with two clubs that have built solid foundations on-the-pitch in recent years. This is just as well, because the Premier League is an unforgiving place for clubs that are run ineffectively.
Early results for Wolves were promising, and the club looked set for an unusually comfortable season, without the looking over their shoulders that a typical Wolves season usually entails. Unfortunately, that was August, and by September results had reverted to type, and Wolves slid down the table fast.
The response from the Wolves board was to sack the manager Mick McCarthy, partly as a result of fans' pressure. Despite acting on the disappointment of supporters, the decision to sack McCarthy is now widely regarded as a mistake. Who got the blame? The fans? The players? No, the board got the blame, but rightly so. Fans pay their money to watch football and vent their frustration. The job of a football club's board is to act rationally. The decision by the Wolves board was anything but rational. Wolves were always set for a struggle, but the decision to sack McCarthy was carried out without a sufficient shortlist of replacements in mind.
Following McCarthy's sacking, there followed an embarrassing rigmarole which saw managers lined up for the role, then discounted on a near-daily basis. Steve Bruce was understood to be lined up, but something went wrong and in an act of throwing in the towel, Wolves decided to hand the job to one of the coaches, Terry Connor. As we are constantly reminded, he is 'a nice bloke' and has a good relationship with the players. Wolves have not won since.
As for Blackburn, well where do we start? The club has been a circus ever since it was taken over by 'The Venkys', whoever they may be. The Indian chicken traders who bought the club are even more rarely spotted than actual chickens around Ewood Park these days, such is the poisonous atmosphere that has engulfed the ground.
One of their first acts was to sack the solid - if unspectacular - manager, Sam Allardyce. As was the case with Wolves, they decided to promote an inexperienced number two to the role of manager. Results have been appalling ever since, with the occasional exception which meant that the mutiny around Ewood Park only reached full volume on Monday (7th May) when relegation was finally confirmed.
If the incompetence of the Wolves board was a hasty sacking without considering a replacement, the Blackburn board upstaged it by keeping their manager in charge far longer than plausible. Back in December, the atmosphere at Ewood Park was at its lowest point until this week, as Blackburn lost to local rivals Bolton. I have no doubt that the timing of their otherwise virtuous protests cost Blackburn the three points that day. However, that was also the time for the Blackburn owners to pull the plug on Steve Kean.
Looking back, excellent results that followed, such as the victory against Manchester United at Old Trafford were more about the players declaring what they were capable of if given a fair chance, rather than tacit support for their manager. Although hostilities ceased for a while, when a normalisation of the results returned so did the anger.
The inaction of the Blackburn board is indicative of their seeming lack of actual physical interest in getting involved with the club. The most destructive rumour that circulates is the question of how much they knew about promotion and relegation, and if this means of meritocratic movement in English football was even known to the Venkys.
If they did not know about the existence of relegation, there is some consolation for them - all relegated clubs are awarded a series of 'parachute payments' to ease the crashing fall to status and the finances a relegation can take.
Wolves and Blackburn can be summarised as contrasting styles of how their staff were handled. One club hit the panic button and effectively destroyed its structure; the other fiddled while the structure burned. In Reading and Southampton they will be replaced with two clubs that have built solid foundations on-the-pitch in recent years. This is just as well, because the Premier League is an unforgiving place for clubs that are run ineffectively.
Tuesday, 1 May 2012
Welcome to Roy Hodgson - Good choice for new England manager
The media's favourite for the England manager job, Harry Redknapp, has been overlooked for the role in favour of West Bromwich Albion boss, Roy Hodgson. As a consequence, quite a few toys have been pinging out of prams in some media institutions and in parts of Liverpool.
The depressingly predictable reaction was led by the Liverpudlian critics of the media. BBC Radio Five Live was producing interviews, with 'objective' Merseysiders sought for their opinions. Further noise was being made by the station about Hodgson being good for average teams punching above their weight and little else - perfect for England then!
Hodgson is a risky, but brave choice. As with Harry Redknapp, he has been managing for around three decades, mainly giving the smaller outfits a taste of the big time. Neither have set the world alight, and this parallel not be forgotten. For every one person who remembers how everything went wrong for Hodgson at Liverpool, how many remember Harry Redknapp's tenure at Southampton?
The top candidates were Arsene Wenger (who could do with one last challenge), Jose Mourinho (though now likely to stay at Madrid) and Pep Guardiola (depending on how serious he is about a break from the game). These are managers who have constantly achieved. If England is as great as the implied arrogance wishes us to believe, when people suggest that Hodgson is not right for the job because he is seen to fail with the very best, these are the managers we should be looking towards.
Hodgson is a good enough choice for England, though whether he will be given the chance, or whether (as with at Liverpool) minds are made up already, is anyone's guess. If it is the latter, then I have no desire to watch the miserable unfolding of a self-fulfilling prophecy.
The one reason above all why Hodgson is good enough is because he is not the man the current senior players in the England squad wanted. I cannot say I have a great deal of warmth towards the modern day footballer, and any moment when they do not get their own way is a victory in my eyes. If we have nothing else, we have a manager who will not suck up, nor be intimidated, by the likes of Terry, Lampard, Ferdinand (Rio), Gerrard, Rooney and others, who have done absolutely nothing of note in their England careers.
Good luck as England manager, Roy.
The depressingly predictable reaction was led by the Liverpudlian critics of the media. BBC Radio Five Live was producing interviews, with 'objective' Merseysiders sought for their opinions. Further noise was being made by the station about Hodgson being good for average teams punching above their weight and little else - perfect for England then!
Hodgson is a risky, but brave choice. As with Harry Redknapp, he has been managing for around three decades, mainly giving the smaller outfits a taste of the big time. Neither have set the world alight, and this parallel not be forgotten. For every one person who remembers how everything went wrong for Hodgson at Liverpool, how many remember Harry Redknapp's tenure at Southampton?
The top candidates were Arsene Wenger (who could do with one last challenge), Jose Mourinho (though now likely to stay at Madrid) and Pep Guardiola (depending on how serious he is about a break from the game). These are managers who have constantly achieved. If England is as great as the implied arrogance wishes us to believe, when people suggest that Hodgson is not right for the job because he is seen to fail with the very best, these are the managers we should be looking towards.
Hodgson is a good enough choice for England, though whether he will be given the chance, or whether (as with at Liverpool) minds are made up already, is anyone's guess. If it is the latter, then I have no desire to watch the miserable unfolding of a self-fulfilling prophecy.
The one reason above all why Hodgson is good enough is because he is not the man the current senior players in the England squad wanted. I cannot say I have a great deal of warmth towards the modern day footballer, and any moment when they do not get their own way is a victory in my eyes. If we have nothing else, we have a manager who will not suck up, nor be intimidated, by the likes of Terry, Lampard, Ferdinand (Rio), Gerrard, Rooney and others, who have done absolutely nothing of note in their England careers.
Good luck as England manager, Roy.
Wednesday, 3 August 2011
How much will the new football season cost?
The new football season is approaching and once again the clubs are ripping off fans with admission prices that would make eyes water across continental Europe. Even fans of League Two side Port Vale can expect to pay a minimum upwards of £20 for a ticket.
The BBC website researchers have been hard at work, producing a summary of ticket prices based on information given to them by the clubs in the four top English leagues and the one relevant league in Scotland. I will let you draw your own conclusions about the obvious methodological flaw, but needless to say in 2011 there are still some football clubs attempting to claim their lowest priced tickets are a mere £10, often based on concessions and special offers.
The issue of admission fees is a topical one. Miniature earthquakes could have been caused in west London by the amount of feet stamping by supporters of Queens Park Rangers because of the increase in their ticket prices. They have been raised to a minimum of £47 for an adult ticket. Ouch.
It could be argued the increased fare to climb aboard the QPR Premier League bandwagon comes with the premium product now being offered at Loftus Road. Last season their visitors in the league included Scunthorpe. Next season they will be hosting Manchester United.
The downside of course is the home team is still QPR, so no fixture will have the same appeal as a match between any two of Manchester United, Manchester City, Arsenal, Liverpool or Chelsea. £47 for QPR versus Wigan? You decide.
The price of football continues to rise because we mugs pay above the market value for tickets, and football clubs in turn pay above the market value for players, the latter being the only winners in all this. Some prices, especially £47 to watch a probable relegation battle, is outrageous. The day will come when fans of all clubs cannot do it anymore.
The BBC website researchers have been hard at work, producing a summary of ticket prices based on information given to them by the clubs in the four top English leagues and the one relevant league in Scotland. I will let you draw your own conclusions about the obvious methodological flaw, but needless to say in 2011 there are still some football clubs attempting to claim their lowest priced tickets are a mere £10, often based on concessions and special offers.
The issue of admission fees is a topical one. Miniature earthquakes could have been caused in west London by the amount of feet stamping by supporters of Queens Park Rangers because of the increase in their ticket prices. They have been raised to a minimum of £47 for an adult ticket. Ouch.
It could be argued the increased fare to climb aboard the QPR Premier League bandwagon comes with the premium product now being offered at Loftus Road. Last season their visitors in the league included Scunthorpe. Next season they will be hosting Manchester United.
The downside of course is the home team is still QPR, so no fixture will have the same appeal as a match between any two of Manchester United, Manchester City, Arsenal, Liverpool or Chelsea. £47 for QPR versus Wigan? You decide.
The price of football continues to rise because we mugs pay above the market value for tickets, and football clubs in turn pay above the market value for players, the latter being the only winners in all this. Some prices, especially £47 to watch a probable relegation battle, is outrageous. The day will come when fans of all clubs cannot do it anymore.
Sunday, 22 May 2011
Beware the super-injunction
This week we became not so much legal experts as moral judges. It is strangely reassuring that at a time when there are hyperactive journalists who worry about the moral state of Britain, so much public condemnation has come the way of a footballer who took out a super-injunction to hide his infidelity.
The actions of those who have spent the past few weeks passing on the identity of the culprit on Twitter show that people feel when someone has been 'found out', their behaviour should then be exposed.
The footballer at the centre of the controversy clearly failed to read the situation as well as he can read a game of football. By ramping up his legal activity this week with legal threats to Twitter, he is only serving to further agitate Twitter users angered by his behaviour.
The player in question may be a force to be reckoned with on the pitch, but his mid-life crisis seems to have come very early.
The people who have suffered most are his wife and children. It makes us wonder who the player was keeping the secret from with his little injunction.
The club's fans? Possibly. However, the fans are a forgiving bunch. His team-mates have been forgiven for various atrocities over the years.
The wider public? Most likely. This is backfiring though, because of the easy access of information on the Internet.
Other potential mistresses? Most worryingly, if only for the player, is that other mistresses or opportunists may come forward if and when his identity is finally revealed in the lucrative press.
Wife and children? Most disgraceful if so - nothing else to add.
So what have we learned about this week's protagonists?
"Sir" Fred Goodwin: There is not a lot we did not know already, but a dishonourable mention goes to this banker, who was named in the House of Lords as having taken out an injunction to suppress a story about infidelity. The sceptre of financial and moral bankruptcy is never far away from him.
Imogen Thomas: The lady at the centre of the footballer's super-injunction. Who knows what is true and what are attempts to discredit her and make her appear a sex-crazed gold-digger? All that matters is she is beautiful and a married footballer fell for her charms. We all know that anyone whose name begins with the words "Former Big Brother Contestant" should come with a danger sign. What has happened is the responsibility of the footballer though - not Imogen.
Footballer: Proves what we already know about those who play football at the highest level. The sport would not happen without those who have the talent, but also these players are leeching from the sport. They are overpaid and personify greed. Many of our present top-flight players are a good advertisement for bringing back wage caps.
The actions of those who have spent the past few weeks passing on the identity of the culprit on Twitter show that people feel when someone has been 'found out', their behaviour should then be exposed.
The footballer at the centre of the controversy clearly failed to read the situation as well as he can read a game of football. By ramping up his legal activity this week with legal threats to Twitter, he is only serving to further agitate Twitter users angered by his behaviour.
The player in question may be a force to be reckoned with on the pitch, but his mid-life crisis seems to have come very early.
The people who have suffered most are his wife and children. It makes us wonder who the player was keeping the secret from with his little injunction.
The club's fans? Possibly. However, the fans are a forgiving bunch. His team-mates have been forgiven for various atrocities over the years.
The wider public? Most likely. This is backfiring though, because of the easy access of information on the Internet.
Other potential mistresses? Most worryingly, if only for the player, is that other mistresses or opportunists may come forward if and when his identity is finally revealed in the lucrative press.
Wife and children? Most disgraceful if so - nothing else to add.
So what have we learned about this week's protagonists?
"Sir" Fred Goodwin: There is not a lot we did not know already, but a dishonourable mention goes to this banker, who was named in the House of Lords as having taken out an injunction to suppress a story about infidelity. The sceptre of financial and moral bankruptcy is never far away from him.
Imogen Thomas: The lady at the centre of the footballer's super-injunction. Who knows what is true and what are attempts to discredit her and make her appear a sex-crazed gold-digger? All that matters is she is beautiful and a married footballer fell for her charms. We all know that anyone whose name begins with the words "Former Big Brother Contestant" should come with a danger sign. What has happened is the responsibility of the footballer though - not Imogen.
Footballer: Proves what we already know about those who play football at the highest level. The sport would not happen without those who have the talent, but also these players are leeching from the sport. They are overpaid and personify greed. Many of our present top-flight players are a good advertisement for bringing back wage caps.
Sunday, 15 May 2011
Time to acknowledge Manchester United's classic season
Manchester United's achievements have been grossly understated all season. With the 2011 Premier League title in the bag and a Champions League final to come, will the pundits finally admit Manchester United are having an extraordinary season?
Equally as irritating is the constant 'best club side in the world' tag which is lazily hurled at Barcelona because they have arguably the world's best player, Lionel Messi, on their books and the football they play is a joy to watch.
I look forward to seeing Barcelona play the Premier League champions on the 28th May to see how they fare against England's best football team.
Equally as irritating is the constant 'best club side in the world' tag which is lazily hurled at Barcelona because they have arguably the world's best player, Lionel Messi, on their books and the football they play is a joy to watch.
I look forward to seeing Barcelona play the Premier League champions on the 28th May to see how they fare against England's best football team.
Sunday, 24 April 2011
Celtic v Rangers - The Sunday Supper cure
The historic rivalry between Scotland's biggest two football clubs, Rangers and Celtic, reached new depths this week when it emerged that high-profile figures associated with Celtic, including manager Neil Lennon, were sent parcel bombs through the post. Thankfully the parcels were dealt with accordingly and nobody was hurt.
This latest episode however marks a new low in behaviour which has marred the rivalry between the clubs, which so far this season has included dozens of arrests, public bust-ups between the clubs' management staff and players and rather unhelpful poppy-day protests by the Celtic supporters. Even earlier today, when in light of recent events supporters were on their best behaviour, there were still arrests and others pointlessly walked around parading banners of their symbols of choice, none of which had anything to do with football.
Feeding into this rivalry is the additional fact that the Scottish Premier League is one of the least competitive top-flight competitions in Europe, if not the world. It is effectively about two clubs - Rangers and Celtic. This brings further intensity and relevance to the rivalry. So far this season, league and cups, they have played each other on seven separate occasions. Familiarity really does breed contempt.
The Sunday Supper remedy is to de-legitimise the less savoury aspects of the rivalry, with the potential by-product of a more competitive Scottish Premier League. Here are the suggestions:-
1. The matches between the sides, known as 'Old Firm' matches, should be played behind close doors on one occasion at both grounds in the event of extreme misbehaviour at any match.
2. The matches should be played in front of a reduced capacity crowd if this would be considered to make policing easier.
3. Familiarity breeds contempt. They should play each other less often. A Scottish Premier League with 16 or 18 teams and only two (instead of four) rounds of matches would facilitate this.
4. Fine them heavily when appropriate.
If these ideas were put in place, it would quickly emerge that the idiots are spoiling the game for everyone else. It is time to get tough.
This latest episode however marks a new low in behaviour which has marred the rivalry between the clubs, which so far this season has included dozens of arrests, public bust-ups between the clubs' management staff and players and rather unhelpful poppy-day protests by the Celtic supporters. Even earlier today, when in light of recent events supporters were on their best behaviour, there were still arrests and others pointlessly walked around parading banners of their symbols of choice, none of which had anything to do with football.
Feeding into this rivalry is the additional fact that the Scottish Premier League is one of the least competitive top-flight competitions in Europe, if not the world. It is effectively about two clubs - Rangers and Celtic. This brings further intensity and relevance to the rivalry. So far this season, league and cups, they have played each other on seven separate occasions. Familiarity really does breed contempt.
The Sunday Supper remedy is to de-legitimise the less savoury aspects of the rivalry, with the potential by-product of a more competitive Scottish Premier League. Here are the suggestions:-
1. The matches between the sides, known as 'Old Firm' matches, should be played behind close doors on one occasion at both grounds in the event of extreme misbehaviour at any match.
2. The matches should be played in front of a reduced capacity crowd if this would be considered to make policing easier.
3. Familiarity breeds contempt. They should play each other less often. A Scottish Premier League with 16 or 18 teams and only two (instead of four) rounds of matches would facilitate this.
4. Fine them heavily when appropriate.
If these ideas were put in place, it would quickly emerge that the idiots are spoiling the game for everyone else. It is time to get tough.
Sunday, 27 March 2011
Capello out!
Sunday Supper supported the England football manager, Fabio Capello, even after the dismal World Cup, even after most of the British press had already scapegoated him for England's greater failures. In the past, I have spoken out in support of Capello when the vultures elsewhere circled. No more. England will win nothing with him in charge. Then again, England will not win anything until the retirement of most of the senior members of this present 'golden generation'.
Capello has handled the England captaincy issue with all the thoughtfulness of Basil Fawlty. Firstly, he rightly strips the undeserving John Terry of the captaincy because of his off-field behaviour. Then, the armband is tossed around like it is the central prop in a game of pass-the-parcel, before it is snatched out of the hands of the slightly more deserving Rio Ferdinand and placed back into the hands of Terry.
This episode does nothing to promote the belief that Capello is dealing with the challenges of the England job with rationality. He has gone from an authoritarian figure to someone who does not seem to know where he is anymore. In the meantime, England stumble on towards Euro 2012 qualification (though Montenegro could still have something to say about that) before the inevitable collapse when coming up against better-organised opposition of similar ability in the Euro 2012 finals.
I do not envy Capello. I cannot bring myself to cheer on the likes of John Terry, Ashley Cole and Wayne Rooney (to name three), let alone want to manage them. If I had to choose between Brentford winning League One or England winning Euro 2012, send the League One title to west London now. Despite this, I have come to accept Capello is not doing a very good job, so perhaps now is a good time to put him, and us, out of our collective misery.
Capello has handled the England captaincy issue with all the thoughtfulness of Basil Fawlty. Firstly, he rightly strips the undeserving John Terry of the captaincy because of his off-field behaviour. Then, the armband is tossed around like it is the central prop in a game of pass-the-parcel, before it is snatched out of the hands of the slightly more deserving Rio Ferdinand and placed back into the hands of Terry.
This episode does nothing to promote the belief that Capello is dealing with the challenges of the England job with rationality. He has gone from an authoritarian figure to someone who does not seem to know where he is anymore. In the meantime, England stumble on towards Euro 2012 qualification (though Montenegro could still have something to say about that) before the inevitable collapse when coming up against better-organised opposition of similar ability in the Euro 2012 finals.
I do not envy Capello. I cannot bring myself to cheer on the likes of John Terry, Ashley Cole and Wayne Rooney (to name three), let alone want to manage them. If I had to choose between Brentford winning League One or England winning Euro 2012, send the League One title to west London now. Despite this, I have come to accept Capello is not doing a very good job, so perhaps now is a good time to put him, and us, out of our collective misery.
Sunday, 13 February 2011
This week's 'do as I say' award winner
Football 'pundit' Mark Lawrenson was once again doing his bit for the football managers' union by condemning the sacking of Roberto Di Matteo by West Bromwich Albion.
Admittedly the sacking was a fairly ruthless response to a dip in form of the team Di Matteo had led to the Premier League.
However I would have taken Mark Lawrenson's position a little more seriously if he had not been so emphatic in his view that Roy Hodgson should leave his beloved Liverpool after a difficult start to the campaign, not helped by uncertainty higher up the Liverpool hierarchy.
Of course it always looks different when it is closer to home.
Admittedly the sacking was a fairly ruthless response to a dip in form of the team Di Matteo had led to the Premier League.
However I would have taken Mark Lawrenson's position a little more seriously if he had not been so emphatic in his view that Roy Hodgson should leave his beloved Liverpool after a difficult start to the campaign, not helped by uncertainty higher up the Liverpool hierarchy.
Of course it always looks different when it is closer to home.
Sunday, 6 February 2011
Andy Scott leaves Brentford but who next?
A few eyebrows were raised this week when it was announced Andy Scott had been relieved of his duties as manager of Brentford Football Club. Following twenty-seven years of supporting the League One outfit, nothing surprises me anymore, however in this case I felt his journey had come to an end.
There has been a long-term minority of sceptical Bees fans about Scott's capabilities, but I have to admit I only made my mind up about three weeks ago. I was less optimistic the board at the club would follow suit.
Not that I am happy about it. I am not happy at the expense involved in changing the management team. I am not happy that it ended like this, rather than Scott leaving for a bigger club, like he ought to have done. And I am actually quite sad he has gone and wish him well for the future. He will surely get another chance in a new setting
Scott gave us some good times. The League 2 title was fantastic. Brentford's away trip to Leeds last season was memorable, and we thank him for the superb one-off result against Everton in the League Cup earlier this season.
The success against Everton turned out to be a one-off highlight of a fairly miserable 2010/11 season so far. The quality of the football is said to have diminished. From what I have seen on occasions since 2009 it has never been much different, but it never seems to matter as much when results are acceptable. During the month of January, results plummeted in line with the performances.
After a 4-1 mauling at the hands of a team I would rather not mention on this page for risk of suffering total and utter shame (alright, it was Dagenham and Redbridge) the outcome was inevitable. Fans chanted 'Scott out' at the end of the game, including some who had previously backed him.
That did not stop the comedians from coming out in force. The BBC's Football League Show seemed to be a particular victim of prank e-mails. One comment suggested that Scott had been unfairly dismissed after a month of bad results. Well it must have been the longest month of that person's life.
In August, the first home league match of the season, the Bees managed to lose at home to Walsall. If you wish to know how great that result was, I refer you to the League One table. There have been plenty of disappointments since, with giants Leyton Orient, Rochdale and the MK Franchise all picking our pockets.
Nick Forster, a much-loved Bees player has taken temporary charge, and he will be in with a great chance of being installed permanently if results improve. Other candidates include ex-Bristol City manager Gary Johnson, Dennis Wise and - according to one bookie - Justin Edinburgh (I have no idea either).
For once, there are plenty of interesting unemployed names out there - some probably too pricey for the Bees. Nonetheless, we can excite ourselves with names such as Roy Hodgson, Alan Curbishley and Roberto Di Matteo - at least until reality sets in.
With all the options out there, I cannot make a suggestion this time. All I ask is for the club to not mess it up! The right appointment could take them to the next level.
There has been a long-term minority of sceptical Bees fans about Scott's capabilities, but I have to admit I only made my mind up about three weeks ago. I was less optimistic the board at the club would follow suit.
Not that I am happy about it. I am not happy at the expense involved in changing the management team. I am not happy that it ended like this, rather than Scott leaving for a bigger club, like he ought to have done. And I am actually quite sad he has gone and wish him well for the future. He will surely get another chance in a new setting
Scott gave us some good times. The League 2 title was fantastic. Brentford's away trip to Leeds last season was memorable, and we thank him for the superb one-off result against Everton in the League Cup earlier this season.
The success against Everton turned out to be a one-off highlight of a fairly miserable 2010/11 season so far. The quality of the football is said to have diminished. From what I have seen on occasions since 2009 it has never been much different, but it never seems to matter as much when results are acceptable. During the month of January, results plummeted in line with the performances.
After a 4-1 mauling at the hands of a team I would rather not mention on this page for risk of suffering total and utter shame (alright, it was Dagenham and Redbridge) the outcome was inevitable. Fans chanted 'Scott out' at the end of the game, including some who had previously backed him.
That did not stop the comedians from coming out in force. The BBC's Football League Show seemed to be a particular victim of prank e-mails. One comment suggested that Scott had been unfairly dismissed after a month of bad results. Well it must have been the longest month of that person's life.
In August, the first home league match of the season, the Bees managed to lose at home to Walsall. If you wish to know how great that result was, I refer you to the League One table. There have been plenty of disappointments since, with giants Leyton Orient, Rochdale and the MK Franchise all picking our pockets.
Nick Forster, a much-loved Bees player has taken temporary charge, and he will be in with a great chance of being installed permanently if results improve. Other candidates include ex-Bristol City manager Gary Johnson, Dennis Wise and - according to one bookie - Justin Edinburgh (I have no idea either).
For once, there are plenty of interesting unemployed names out there - some probably too pricey for the Bees. Nonetheless, we can excite ourselves with names such as Roy Hodgson, Alan Curbishley and Roberto Di Matteo - at least until reality sets in.
With all the options out there, I cannot make a suggestion this time. All I ask is for the club to not mess it up! The right appointment could take them to the next level.
Sunday, 30 January 2011
Keys, Gray, Sackings and Hypocrites
In another one of those media-fuelled 'rows' that break out when a prank goes wrong or someone says something out of turn, the now ex-Sky Sports duo of Richard Keys and Andy Gray have been judged to be rotten sexists for questioning the ability of a female to officiate a football match.
The duo were caught on one of the Skycams (being Sky, the cameras are bound to have some name) committing the crime of gross male chauvinism. Since then, a sanctimonious section of the public, have tried them, found them guilty of social incompetence, and like an army of woodpeckers have snapped away at the broadcaster until neither Keys nor Gray were gainfully employed anymore.
In fairness, it was not pleasant. Their off-air behaviour was far from impressive and portrayed neither in a flattering light. They both appeared to forget that when they are no longer on live TV that the rules of the workplace still apply.
The initiator of the media circus that pushed the north African revolutions off the front page was the rather innocuous decision to appoint a female - Sian Massey - to run the line in a football match between Liverpool and Wolverhampton Wanderers.
Strangely apart from mild surprise watching Match of the Day, I was not particularly shocked. In fact, my gut feeling was that if she has been elevated to this level then she must know what she is doing. The thought that she must be more competent than 'ghost goal' referee Stuart Attwell also crossed my mind.
While I felt it was nothing too irregular, the choice of Massey had clearly rattled the cages of Keys and Gray. Both discussed, without a hint of humour, that she would 'drop a big one', whatever that means (it does not sound promising). Gray went on to bark 'Kenny will go potty'.
For those who do not follow football that closely, 'Kenny' refers to Liverpool manager Kenny Dalglish. It represents an overlooked controversy of the whole saga - the elitism of the whole discussion from every angle.
Why would it be just 'Kenny' who would be furious? Why is it assumed that any so-called shocking decision she may have given would go against Liverpool? There were two teams in that fixture. That statement, aside from its rampant sexism, was also disrespectful to Wolves. Ask any casual football supporter and they will tell you that any major refereeing slip-ups usually favour the bigger club.
It was, however, the unpleasant sexism in their conversation which suddenly led to the pitchfork brigade demanding action. Further videos surfaced, with toe-curling images of Gray making lewd remarks to a female broadcaster better known for removing a layer or two of clothing for magazine shoots. Meanwhile Keys was captured engaging in 'lad's banter' with three highly reluctant participants. One of those was Jamie Redknapp, who Keys described as having 'smashed it' with a former female partner. This was despite his first comment about the 'smashing it' being met with little reaction from the lads he uncomfortably tried to impress.
This further evidence prompted Sky, part-owned by News Corporation, to dismiss Gray from his £1.7 million job. When no dismissal for Keys was immediately forthcoming, he resigned the following day, providing ammunition for Gray if he chooses the unfair dismissal route.
If he was to take that up, it would not be the only legal dispute he is involved in. He is also taking legal action against the News of the World, owned by News Corporation over their recent phone-hacking scandal, a news event which is too boring to go into any detail here unless it causes further discomfort to the Murdoch Empire. Have a think about that.
My position is clear. We are discussing a couple of Alan Partridges who are not my idea of drinking buddies. They demonstrated ill-judged behaviour which has caught the attention of their bosses. In the real world, outside the media bubble, they would have both been given a final warning and one last chance to reform their behaviour, with the closest monitoring over a probationary period.
Instead, certain newspapers branded them 'perverts' and would not let the matter drop until the duo were no longer employed. The pervert headline appeared on the front page of The Sun, best known for its semi-naked 'Page 3 Girls' and is also owned by News Corporation. Has it sunk in yet?
Twenty years of continuous service by two professionals is now finished because of sporadic moments of idiocy. They failed to realise that their '70's man' view of the world is outmoded. Britain has moved on.
But it is also claimed that Britain has lost its sense of humour. That is a good point, but one which was made particularly badly in a risible Question Time performance by Katie Hopkins on the BBC last Thursday, where she allowed herself to be defeated in debate by people with highly questionable morals.
As it happens, Britain has not totally lost its sense of humour. It is just not a particularly nice sense of humour at times. How many Brits like to joke at the expense of others, but cannot take it when the heat is on them? Exactly. Britain frequently loses its sense of humour sporadically when it takes offence to a joke, as Russell Brand and Jonathan Ross found out to their cost two years ago in an incident uncannily similar to the Gray and Keys performance. The difference then is that Ross and Brand were at least trying (and failing) to be funny.
Some drama queens (apologies in advance if that is sexist) in the media have likened the actions of Keys and Gray to those of Ron Atkinson, the man who wrecked his own career with a racist off-air rant. The argument is that in the same way we now look at Atkinson and think 'it's old Racist Ron', we would never again be able to look at Keys and Gray without thinking about what filthy little sexists they are. I will use the words that Keys himself used to describe Karren Brady - give me a break.
For all their faults, they are decent broadcasters who have a decent chance of working again. If Ross and Brand recovered, why not Keys and Gray?
In any case, sexism is difficult to directly compare with racism, despite the attempts of the hysterical. Racism is exclusionary, with origins in deep-seated hatred between a distant 'other'. Sexism is closer to home. Men and women engage with each other and have relationships with each other. Boys and girls are brothers and sisters. Mothers and fathers have sons and daughters. Lives are lived under the same roof. The lives of men and women intertwine. This can be awful in a domestic violence setting, but (hopefully) the vast majority of relationships are built on love.
Aggressive and vile forms of sexism do exist though and cannot be ignored. Particularly uncomfortable are issues of harassment, sexual exploitation and those occasional stories of female mutilation that surface. These are the sort of issues people would rather look away from. It is much easier to do celebrity chasing with pitchforks, armed with those copies of The Sun and the Daily Star and forget just for one day that they are normally the ones complaining about 'political correctness gone mad'.
Richard Keys and Andy Gray... some people never change - watch them finally lose control towards the end of the video!
The duo were caught on one of the Skycams (being Sky, the cameras are bound to have some name) committing the crime of gross male chauvinism. Since then, a sanctimonious section of the public, have tried them, found them guilty of social incompetence, and like an army of woodpeckers have snapped away at the broadcaster until neither Keys nor Gray were gainfully employed anymore.
In fairness, it was not pleasant. Their off-air behaviour was far from impressive and portrayed neither in a flattering light. They both appeared to forget that when they are no longer on live TV that the rules of the workplace still apply.
The initiator of the media circus that pushed the north African revolutions off the front page was the rather innocuous decision to appoint a female - Sian Massey - to run the line in a football match between Liverpool and Wolverhampton Wanderers.
Strangely apart from mild surprise watching Match of the Day, I was not particularly shocked. In fact, my gut feeling was that if she has been elevated to this level then she must know what she is doing. The thought that she must be more competent than 'ghost goal' referee Stuart Attwell also crossed my mind.
While I felt it was nothing too irregular, the choice of Massey had clearly rattled the cages of Keys and Gray. Both discussed, without a hint of humour, that she would 'drop a big one', whatever that means (it does not sound promising). Gray went on to bark 'Kenny will go potty'.
For those who do not follow football that closely, 'Kenny' refers to Liverpool manager Kenny Dalglish. It represents an overlooked controversy of the whole saga - the elitism of the whole discussion from every angle.
Why would it be just 'Kenny' who would be furious? Why is it assumed that any so-called shocking decision she may have given would go against Liverpool? There were two teams in that fixture. That statement, aside from its rampant sexism, was also disrespectful to Wolves. Ask any casual football supporter and they will tell you that any major refereeing slip-ups usually favour the bigger club.
It was, however, the unpleasant sexism in their conversation which suddenly led to the pitchfork brigade demanding action. Further videos surfaced, with toe-curling images of Gray making lewd remarks to a female broadcaster better known for removing a layer or two of clothing for magazine shoots. Meanwhile Keys was captured engaging in 'lad's banter' with three highly reluctant participants. One of those was Jamie Redknapp, who Keys described as having 'smashed it' with a former female partner. This was despite his first comment about the 'smashing it' being met with little reaction from the lads he uncomfortably tried to impress.
This further evidence prompted Sky, part-owned by News Corporation, to dismiss Gray from his £1.7 million job. When no dismissal for Keys was immediately forthcoming, he resigned the following day, providing ammunition for Gray if he chooses the unfair dismissal route.
If he was to take that up, it would not be the only legal dispute he is involved in. He is also taking legal action against the News of the World, owned by News Corporation over their recent phone-hacking scandal, a news event which is too boring to go into any detail here unless it causes further discomfort to the Murdoch Empire. Have a think about that.
My position is clear. We are discussing a couple of Alan Partridges who are not my idea of drinking buddies. They demonstrated ill-judged behaviour which has caught the attention of their bosses. In the real world, outside the media bubble, they would have both been given a final warning and one last chance to reform their behaviour, with the closest monitoring over a probationary period.
Instead, certain newspapers branded them 'perverts' and would not let the matter drop until the duo were no longer employed. The pervert headline appeared on the front page of The Sun, best known for its semi-naked 'Page 3 Girls' and is also owned by News Corporation. Has it sunk in yet?
Twenty years of continuous service by two professionals is now finished because of sporadic moments of idiocy. They failed to realise that their '70's man' view of the world is outmoded. Britain has moved on.
But it is also claimed that Britain has lost its sense of humour. That is a good point, but one which was made particularly badly in a risible Question Time performance by Katie Hopkins on the BBC last Thursday, where she allowed herself to be defeated in debate by people with highly questionable morals.
As it happens, Britain has not totally lost its sense of humour. It is just not a particularly nice sense of humour at times. How many Brits like to joke at the expense of others, but cannot take it when the heat is on them? Exactly. Britain frequently loses its sense of humour sporadically when it takes offence to a joke, as Russell Brand and Jonathan Ross found out to their cost two years ago in an incident uncannily similar to the Gray and Keys performance. The difference then is that Ross and Brand were at least trying (and failing) to be funny.
Some drama queens (apologies in advance if that is sexist) in the media have likened the actions of Keys and Gray to those of Ron Atkinson, the man who wrecked his own career with a racist off-air rant. The argument is that in the same way we now look at Atkinson and think 'it's old Racist Ron', we would never again be able to look at Keys and Gray without thinking about what filthy little sexists they are. I will use the words that Keys himself used to describe Karren Brady - give me a break.
For all their faults, they are decent broadcasters who have a decent chance of working again. If Ross and Brand recovered, why not Keys and Gray?
In any case, sexism is difficult to directly compare with racism, despite the attempts of the hysterical. Racism is exclusionary, with origins in deep-seated hatred between a distant 'other'. Sexism is closer to home. Men and women engage with each other and have relationships with each other. Boys and girls are brothers and sisters. Mothers and fathers have sons and daughters. Lives are lived under the same roof. The lives of men and women intertwine. This can be awful in a domestic violence setting, but (hopefully) the vast majority of relationships are built on love.
Aggressive and vile forms of sexism do exist though and cannot be ignored. Particularly uncomfortable are issues of harassment, sexual exploitation and those occasional stories of female mutilation that surface. These are the sort of issues people would rather look away from. It is much easier to do celebrity chasing with pitchforks, armed with those copies of The Sun and the Daily Star and forget just for one day that they are normally the ones complaining about 'political correctness gone mad'.
Richard Keys and Andy Gray... some people never change - watch them finally lose control towards the end of the video!
Monday, 12 July 2010
Spain's Skill Sees Off Luck and Thuggery to Win the World Cup
I remember when England "scored" two goals against Japan in a pre-World Cup friendly and thinking "that's it - we've used up all of our luck already, before the tournament even begins."
Of course, there is no mathematical logic for that position, in the same way there is no mathematical logic for arguing that because the last coin-toss landed on heads, the next coin-toss is bound to land on tails. In theory, we could have lucked our way to the prize, much in the way that Uruguay almost did.
Eventually, the coin will land on tails though if tossed away for long enough. Just like it did for England before the World Cup really got going. Just like it eventually did for Uruguay. At that juncture, Uruguay had been the tournament villains due to the flexibility in which they interpreted the rules to see off Ghana.
Come the final, and a new collective villain had emerged in the shape of Holland. They were industrious rather than dazzling throughout the World Cup, characterised by the aggressive play by Mark van Bommel. By the final, however, the virus of aggression appeared to have spread through the entire team, with the overall strategy relying on borderline violent tactics and seemingly doing their best to ruin the match.
They would have succeeded in their aim were it not for two factors. One, that Spain managed to fend off the brutal attempts to stop them with their more elegant style of play. Two, that the referee, Howard Webb, chose pragmatism over the letter of the law, in an attempt to make an event of the fixture.
He showed a high tolerance, and should have shown a red card in the first 45 minutes in the face of unacceptable Dutch tactics. It might have ended the match as a contest sooner, but he would had more control over it. My blood pressure will not allow me to elaborate further on the disgraceful and unsporting behaviour of the Dutch after the final whistle. Given the generosity of Webb throughout the match, they had a nerve complaining about his officiating. Hopefully a team with this attitude never makes it to a World Cup final again. Alan Hansen was (half) right when he said that "there is no place in football" for a team like this Dutch one. He was referring to the first 45 minutes. In truth, they were a disgrace throughout the tie.
Thankfully, Spain proved that skill, rather than luck or gamesmanship, is required in abundance to win World Cups. And that is the trouble with England. For all the talk of dependency on Rooney before the tournament, Lady Luck is generally the player we rely on most. And when she has an off day, England generally lose. Spain did not need assistance from a player so fickle.
Luck deserted England the moment Rob Green conspired to throw the ball into his own net in the opening game against the United States. It would be a setback that England would never fully recover from, setting off a sequence of events that resulted in England's eventual elimination at the hands of free-scoring Germany.
Luck was nowhere to be seen when England needed to rescue the group campaign against Algeria. She would even prove to have the final say during the finest hour of the campaign, when England emphatically and comprehensively defeated the mighty Slovenia 1-0, and she did that by handing the USA the late goal they needed to avoid the Germans (who really were quite mighty this World Cup and would have been more worthy finalists than the Dutch).
For all the while we continue to rely on a little good fortune, and bemoaning the bad luck -- untimely red cards, penalty shoot-out defeats and unlucky own goals -- we will continue to fail on the main stage. The Dutch will continue to believe that kicking the opposition is 'the way forward'. The truth is, to win the World Cup, all you need to do is play the way Spain did.
Of course, there is no mathematical logic for that position, in the same way there is no mathematical logic for arguing that because the last coin-toss landed on heads, the next coin-toss is bound to land on tails. In theory, we could have lucked our way to the prize, much in the way that Uruguay almost did.
Eventually, the coin will land on tails though if tossed away for long enough. Just like it did for England before the World Cup really got going. Just like it eventually did for Uruguay. At that juncture, Uruguay had been the tournament villains due to the flexibility in which they interpreted the rules to see off Ghana.
Come the final, and a new collective villain had emerged in the shape of Holland. They were industrious rather than dazzling throughout the World Cup, characterised by the aggressive play by Mark van Bommel. By the final, however, the virus of aggression appeared to have spread through the entire team, with the overall strategy relying on borderline violent tactics and seemingly doing their best to ruin the match.
They would have succeeded in their aim were it not for two factors. One, that Spain managed to fend off the brutal attempts to stop them with their more elegant style of play. Two, that the referee, Howard Webb, chose pragmatism over the letter of the law, in an attempt to make an event of the fixture.
He showed a high tolerance, and should have shown a red card in the first 45 minutes in the face of unacceptable Dutch tactics. It might have ended the match as a contest sooner, but he would had more control over it. My blood pressure will not allow me to elaborate further on the disgraceful and unsporting behaviour of the Dutch after the final whistle. Given the generosity of Webb throughout the match, they had a nerve complaining about his officiating. Hopefully a team with this attitude never makes it to a World Cup final again. Alan Hansen was (half) right when he said that "there is no place in football" for a team like this Dutch one. He was referring to the first 45 minutes. In truth, they were a disgrace throughout the tie.
Thankfully, Spain proved that skill, rather than luck or gamesmanship, is required in abundance to win World Cups. And that is the trouble with England. For all the talk of dependency on Rooney before the tournament, Lady Luck is generally the player we rely on most. And when she has an off day, England generally lose. Spain did not need assistance from a player so fickle.
Luck deserted England the moment Rob Green conspired to throw the ball into his own net in the opening game against the United States. It would be a setback that England would never fully recover from, setting off a sequence of events that resulted in England's eventual elimination at the hands of free-scoring Germany.
Luck was nowhere to be seen when England needed to rescue the group campaign against Algeria. She would even prove to have the final say during the finest hour of the campaign, when England emphatically and comprehensively defeated the mighty Slovenia 1-0, and she did that by handing the USA the late goal they needed to avoid the Germans (who really were quite mighty this World Cup and would have been more worthy finalists than the Dutch).
For all the while we continue to rely on a little good fortune, and bemoaning the bad luck -- untimely red cards, penalty shoot-out defeats and unlucky own goals -- we will continue to fail on the main stage. The Dutch will continue to believe that kicking the opposition is 'the way forward'. The truth is, to win the World Cup, all you need to do is play the way Spain did.
Wednesday, 30 June 2010
Fabio Still Fab - Look Elsewhere for the Losers
So the World Cup has reached its natural conclusion. No, not just the inevitable dismal England exit - written from the same script as the one in France 1998. But the predictable press indulging in their usual game of sack the manager on behalf of the FA.
This is not a game of devil's advocate. Let me make it clear that I have previous on this. A more infantile version of me me sang the same tune as the rest of the media during the dying days of Graham Taylor's tenure in the hotseat.
And there was consensus that Sven Eriksson had taken England as far as he could before handing over to Steve McClaren. Oh yes, McClaren, what became of him? Having been dismissed as the 'wally with the brolley' he left England on the first plane to manage an unfashionable Dutch club called FC Twente and learned the local accent in record time. This was much to the hilarity of everyone back home, who understandably thought their judgement of him had been vindicated. Then he went and filled up their trophy cabinet as giants such as Ajax could only watch helplessly.
So among the wreckage of three England managers who have failed to get the best out of this amusingly perceived 'golden generation' of players, is it not time to shine the light solely on the main suspects of England's downfall - the players themselves?
When they cross that white line and enter the field of play, there is only so much the manager can do. He cannot go out there and kick the ball for them.
Once again, too many of the 'stars' failed to shine, and unlike the admittedly better informed journalists out there, I simply cannot buy into the nonsense that the Fabio Capello boot camp was a significant contributing factor to this latest failure.
Perennial under-achievers on the world stage, sadly including the talented Wayne Rooney, complained of being "bored." Why is that? Bored because the beer was not endlessly on tap? Bored because they were not allowed to 'get their leg over'? Surely they had televisions in their rooms, so here is a suggestion: Perhaps they could have used some of their ample downtime to watch some football, perhaps.
At the same time that the feckless micro-scale player protest was gathering steam (or maybe a gentle plume), there were three football matches per day taking place in South Africa. If the lads tuned in, and we all hope they did, then maybe they would have been a little more aware of the challenges they faced. Indeed, they may have witnessed how football was played elsewhere in the world and what was required to succeed. Sadly, apart from some opportunistic photography showing certain England players smirking, the popular press have limited their front page and back page vitriol to the easiest of targets - as usual.
Get rid of the gaffer and all will be well, we are told. The problem is, we have already dumped two managers with this set of players and nothing has changed. We are in danger of becoming the old Manchester City of world football by constantly changing our managers, feeding back into a cycle of inconsistency and underachievement.
And while the players, who apart from the one or two Champions' League winners in the side boast little success outside of our island are being shielded from the blame, here are a few reasons why disposing of Capello would be futile.
Firstly, before the World Cup he signed a £12 million two year-deal with the FA. At the time, he had taken England to the World Cup finals with the minimum of fuss. Five competitive matches ago he was the best thing since sliced bread.
Secondly, in a desperate attempt to direct the blame to Capello, his decisions regarding the use of certain players and formations have been used as ammunition against him. But what manager has not frustrated his supporters at some point with puzzling squad decisions? Even the great Sir Alex Ferguson must have infuriated Manchester United supporters from time to time with the use of players and formations. Just like some may ask why Walcott was not playing for England over the past few weeks, others may ask why the likes of Diego Forlan and Carlos Tevez are not still at Old Trafford. All managers make rash judgements on players, whether based on form or financial prudence.
Thirdly, does a manager really need to be that good anyway? (If not, why are our managers remunerated so handsomely?) Six months ago, Diego Maradona was considered a managerial joke, his antics generating more of that smirking and smugness in the media. Maradona's approach has not changed. He remains erratic and volatile, but also as entertaining as ever. But the results have changed. The difference is that he has players such as Lionel Messi at his disposal.
And that last point takes this debate full circle. If you have a decent enough squad of players, a group which can also play as a team, the job becomes easy. The problem is we do not have the team. We may not even have the quality of individual players we previously thought.
These players have now failed on too many occasions. Taking the easy option of wasting up to £12m paying off a manager, who before turning up to this hellhole boasted a bloated trophy-laden CV, will not change that.
This is not a game of devil's advocate. Let me make it clear that I have previous on this. A more infantile version of me me sang the same tune as the rest of the media during the dying days of Graham Taylor's tenure in the hotseat.
And there was consensus that Sven Eriksson had taken England as far as he could before handing over to Steve McClaren. Oh yes, McClaren, what became of him? Having been dismissed as the 'wally with the brolley' he left England on the first plane to manage an unfashionable Dutch club called FC Twente and learned the local accent in record time. This was much to the hilarity of everyone back home, who understandably thought their judgement of him had been vindicated. Then he went and filled up their trophy cabinet as giants such as Ajax could only watch helplessly.
So among the wreckage of three England managers who have failed to get the best out of this amusingly perceived 'golden generation' of players, is it not time to shine the light solely on the main suspects of England's downfall - the players themselves?
When they cross that white line and enter the field of play, there is only so much the manager can do. He cannot go out there and kick the ball for them.
Once again, too many of the 'stars' failed to shine, and unlike the admittedly better informed journalists out there, I simply cannot buy into the nonsense that the Fabio Capello boot camp was a significant contributing factor to this latest failure.
Perennial under-achievers on the world stage, sadly including the talented Wayne Rooney, complained of being "bored." Why is that? Bored because the beer was not endlessly on tap? Bored because they were not allowed to 'get their leg over'? Surely they had televisions in their rooms, so here is a suggestion: Perhaps they could have used some of their ample downtime to watch some football, perhaps.
At the same time that the feckless micro-scale player protest was gathering steam (or maybe a gentle plume), there were three football matches per day taking place in South Africa. If the lads tuned in, and we all hope they did, then maybe they would have been a little more aware of the challenges they faced. Indeed, they may have witnessed how football was played elsewhere in the world and what was required to succeed. Sadly, apart from some opportunistic photography showing certain England players smirking, the popular press have limited their front page and back page vitriol to the easiest of targets - as usual.
Get rid of the gaffer and all will be well, we are told. The problem is, we have already dumped two managers with this set of players and nothing has changed. We are in danger of becoming the old Manchester City of world football by constantly changing our managers, feeding back into a cycle of inconsistency and underachievement.
And while the players, who apart from the one or two Champions' League winners in the side boast little success outside of our island are being shielded from the blame, here are a few reasons why disposing of Capello would be futile.
Firstly, before the World Cup he signed a £12 million two year-deal with the FA. At the time, he had taken England to the World Cup finals with the minimum of fuss. Five competitive matches ago he was the best thing since sliced bread.
Secondly, in a desperate attempt to direct the blame to Capello, his decisions regarding the use of certain players and formations have been used as ammunition against him. But what manager has not frustrated his supporters at some point with puzzling squad decisions? Even the great Sir Alex Ferguson must have infuriated Manchester United supporters from time to time with the use of players and formations. Just like some may ask why Walcott was not playing for England over the past few weeks, others may ask why the likes of Diego Forlan and Carlos Tevez are not still at Old Trafford. All managers make rash judgements on players, whether based on form or financial prudence.
Thirdly, does a manager really need to be that good anyway? (If not, why are our managers remunerated so handsomely?) Six months ago, Diego Maradona was considered a managerial joke, his antics generating more of that smirking and smugness in the media. Maradona's approach has not changed. He remains erratic and volatile, but also as entertaining as ever. But the results have changed. The difference is that he has players such as Lionel Messi at his disposal.
And that last point takes this debate full circle. If you have a decent enough squad of players, a group which can also play as a team, the job becomes easy. The problem is we do not have the team. We may not even have the quality of individual players we previously thought.
These players have now failed on too many occasions. Taking the easy option of wasting up to £12m paying off a manager, who before turning up to this hellhole boasted a bloated trophy-laden CV, will not change that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)