There’s never a dull moment at Old Trafford, but after a relatively harmonious few days in which Wayne Rooney has re-committed himself to the club - followed by a couple of morale boosting late wins – the soap opera continues on Saturday with the anti-Glazer protest before the clash with Tottenham.
The dissatisfaction with the American ownership has ran deep since day one, and has increasingly grown with every ticket price hike and interest payment since Avi, Joel and Bryan slipped past the police barricades and into the confines of the Boardroom to purchase the club back in May 2005.
Whilst there has always been dissenting noises towards the Glazer family and their methods of business, the volume has been turned up since the start of the year, and will reach a carnivorous crescendo by Saturday evening. Estimations are varying wildly, but depending what and where you read, there could be anywhere up to 50,000 Reds on the move.
At 4pm the proposed anti-Glazer march will depart from the Tollgate Pub – about a mile from the stadium – and wind its way down Sir Matt Busby Way and onto the cheap red plastic seats which now cost on average almost 50% more than they did prior to the Glazers arriving. These will be the same cheap red plastic seats which were some prominent against Wolves on Wednesday night, when United recorded their second lowest attendance since the turn of the century with a turnout of 46,083.
It’s amazing to think that Manchester United’s second lowest crowd of the century, is still more than champions Chelsea pull in on a weekly basis, yet the fact that the Reds are currently playing second fiddle to the Londoners only fuels the dissatisfaction towards the regime.
Although the Rooney saga was eventually brought to a satisfactory conclusion, his comments regarding the club lacking ambition and being unable to sign the world’s top players were brought out on the back of his dialogue with the clubs top brass. The fact Rooney expressed his opinions publicly added further ire towards the Glazers, and did little to quell the much held theory that the crippling debts are having a detrimental effect on field, and will continue to do so as long as vast sums of Manchester United Football Club money finds its way into American investment banks.
Although a protest of this magnitude has been some time in coming - given that Liverpool appeared to have three a week – it was essentially launched on the back of the release of the club’s annual financial figures at the start of the month, which revealed United made a net loss of over £80m despite posting a record turnover. Virtually all of these losses were directly linked to the debt accrued during the takeover, and showed just how much money was being taken out of the club coffers.
The books show United are over £500m in debt, and pay approximately £40m a year back in interest repayments. To put this into context, since the Glazers took over, United’s annual net transfer spend is under £2m. That’s twenty times less on transfers than debts. The average price of a season ticket has risen from £487 prior to takeover, to £722 this season. A price differential worked across 55,000 season ticket holders at almost £13m a year. That’s another £11m a year from the fans pockets which seemingly doesn’t go towards transfers.
Green and gold? The Glazers are lucky they’re not black and blue.
Thursday, 28 October 2010
Tuesday, 26 October 2010
Manchester United Club Focus - Media masterclass from Ferguson
Having since tied down his errant striker to a long term contract and negotiated three points from a tricky assignment to Stoke City, it seems remarkable that just a week ago Sir Alex Ferguson was tasked with sorting out a potentially generation defining moment for the club.
Last Tuesday the press-pack scented blood as Ferguson arrived to field questions about the rumours Wayne Rooney wanted away from Old Trafford. After arriving stage left from behind a red curtain, the Scot delivered an exemplary performance of meticulous calculation and propaganda to get completely his own way. Preparing for the serenity of a League Cup tie against Wolves tonight, reinforces the adage that a week is a long time in football, especially at Manchester United.
Disagreements with his main men are nothing new for the Scot, who has overseen the departures of a number of the Stretford End’s favourite sons, however, this time it was different, and for perhaps the first time during Ferguson’s tenure, it appeared the timing and nature of the transfer was out of his control.
What made the Rooney situation unique was his public declaration that he believed United could no longer attract the world’s best players, and therefore match his own ambitions. The carefully manicured statement produced on behalf of Rooney was a damning indictment of the current status of Manchester United, and raised further questions of the Glazer's ownership, but also the integrity of Ferguson himself, who has constantly belittled stories he has no money to spend. As well as trying to change the mindset of a player who had his mind set, Ferguson had to combine this with once again ridiculing suggestions United are entering a period of deep recession, and painting a picture to both player and punters that all is well aboard the good ship Manchester United.
Had Ferguson got this wrong and Rooney had left, it would have been a critical severance for a club who have been a constant amongst Europe’s absolute elite. After having two of their star turns prized away in the last few seasons, with an ageing squad and lingering doubts over the financial capacity to rebuild it, the lure of Manchester United so irresistible in the past would start to look very resistible to the world’s top players Rooney was preaching about. The departure of the England striker could very easily have sparked a disastrous decline for the Reds.
Quite how Ferguson ended up managing it with such little fuss is a testament to the power and control he overwhelmingly exudes over the whole of one of footballs biggest institutions. However, the manner in which their manager selflessly acted on behalf of the whole club, served as an ominous reminder to the Red Army as to what happens when he does decide to call it a day? Despite the abilities of Messrs Rooney and Ronaldo - or anyone else that’s used the exit doors before Ferguson – they have been replaceable, indirectly or directly, but the same cannot be said for when the omnipotent one needs replacing himself.
When considering potential suitors, there isn’t many that spring to mind that could have achieved what Ferguson did last week. Sparking from one incident, he was wise and weathered enough to hold the prying media off at arm’s length, rebuff Rooney’s suggestions there were problems with the clubs ambition, shift the entire animosity of the supporters from off the club and onto the player, before thrashing out complex contract negotiations in a day, and then exonerating his player from all blame by implying his agent was at fault for the whole affair in the first place. Genius.
Not needing to replace Rooney was a masterstroke; replacing Ferguson will require a miracle.
Last Tuesday the press-pack scented blood as Ferguson arrived to field questions about the rumours Wayne Rooney wanted away from Old Trafford. After arriving stage left from behind a red curtain, the Scot delivered an exemplary performance of meticulous calculation and propaganda to get completely his own way. Preparing for the serenity of a League Cup tie against Wolves tonight, reinforces the adage that a week is a long time in football, especially at Manchester United.
Disagreements with his main men are nothing new for the Scot, who has overseen the departures of a number of the Stretford End’s favourite sons, however, this time it was different, and for perhaps the first time during Ferguson’s tenure, it appeared the timing and nature of the transfer was out of his control.
What made the Rooney situation unique was his public declaration that he believed United could no longer attract the world’s best players, and therefore match his own ambitions. The carefully manicured statement produced on behalf of Rooney was a damning indictment of the current status of Manchester United, and raised further questions of the Glazer's ownership, but also the integrity of Ferguson himself, who has constantly belittled stories he has no money to spend. As well as trying to change the mindset of a player who had his mind set, Ferguson had to combine this with once again ridiculing suggestions United are entering a period of deep recession, and painting a picture to both player and punters that all is well aboard the good ship Manchester United.
Had Ferguson got this wrong and Rooney had left, it would have been a critical severance for a club who have been a constant amongst Europe’s absolute elite. After having two of their star turns prized away in the last few seasons, with an ageing squad and lingering doubts over the financial capacity to rebuild it, the lure of Manchester United so irresistible in the past would start to look very resistible to the world’s top players Rooney was preaching about. The departure of the England striker could very easily have sparked a disastrous decline for the Reds.
Quite how Ferguson ended up managing it with such little fuss is a testament to the power and control he overwhelmingly exudes over the whole of one of footballs biggest institutions. However, the manner in which their manager selflessly acted on behalf of the whole club, served as an ominous reminder to the Red Army as to what happens when he does decide to call it a day? Despite the abilities of Messrs Rooney and Ronaldo - or anyone else that’s used the exit doors before Ferguson – they have been replaceable, indirectly or directly, but the same cannot be said for when the omnipotent one needs replacing himself.
When considering potential suitors, there isn’t many that spring to mind that could have achieved what Ferguson did last week. Sparking from one incident, he was wise and weathered enough to hold the prying media off at arm’s length, rebuff Rooney’s suggestions there were problems with the clubs ambition, shift the entire animosity of the supporters from off the club and onto the player, before thrashing out complex contract negotiations in a day, and then exonerating his player from all blame by implying his agent was at fault for the whole affair in the first place. Genius.
Not needing to replace Rooney was a masterstroke; replacing Ferguson will require a miracle.
Votes don't add up for Ballon d'Or
The shortlist for the FIFA Ballon d’Or has been announced, with some interesting inclusions and omissions. John Baines has a look.
Back in July Sepp Blatter triumphantly declared, ‘a new chapter in football’ was born. Fear not, the eccentric Swiss was not rolling out super-sized goalposts, triangular pitches or a robotic referees, instead, he was merely adding hyperbole to the amalgamation of what was essentially the same award anyway.
France Football’s Ballon d’Or - European Footballer of the Year - and the FIFA World Player of the Year have been merged to become the imaginatively titled FIFA Ballon d’Or. Since 2005, the two honours have always gone to the same player, so with a noble ditching of one glitzy shindig per annum, Blatter and Co have decided once and for all to have a sole award for the player deemed the world’s best for that calendar year.
The separate voting process of the two has also been combined, meaning that International coaches and captains as well as a gathering of the world’s journalists all have a say who now gets the prize. But even with just one gong on offer, and a more simplistic voting system, the shortlist still throws up some curious anomalies.
The official remit is that the nominees are the best players from the year beginning January 1st, always questionable given that all of the 23 man shortlist participate in a league system running from the autumn to spring. The balloting began following the World Cup, meaning the qualification period essentially covers only about half of the year. It’s still a muddled mess, and that shows with some of the names making the cut.
Much has been made of the lack of names from our shores on the list. There are no English players joining the likes of Xavi, Lionel Messi and Wesley Sneijder, and only Didier Drogba and Cesc Fabregas represent the Premier League. 2010 was not a vintage year for English clubs or the national side, and this seems to have tarnished our votes, rather than any significant decline in the individual levels of performance.
To highlight the indifference, Wayne Rooney doesn’t get a mention whereas Miroslav Klose does. From the turn of the year to the end of March, Rooney was unstoppable and had it not been for an untimely injury against Bayern Munich, could have led Manchester United onto a fourth successive Premier League title and a third consecutive Champions League final. Instead, he’s been overlooked in favour of Bayern’s beanpole striker Klose, who, barring four goals at the World Cup has had a bit of an annus horribilis domestically, scoring just six goals in 38 games for the Bavarians and only once en route to the Champions League final. Poor fare compared to Rooney’s 34 strikes in 44 appearances.
Rooney may have not done himself many favours by flunking in South Africa and being off the boil at the start of this season, but Klose has yet to get off the mark in the Bundesliga so far, and appears to have made the draft on the back of a handful of decent showings which were exposed to a wider media glare.
The same could be said of compatriots Mesut Ozil, who shone for the ‘Mannschaft’ but had little clamour before it, and Thomas Muller who enjoyed a decent season with Bayern, but surely gets the nod for winning the Golden Boot – an achievement not to be discounted, but is not reward for annual endeavours over a sustained period of time.
Clearly getting less than a goal every other game in the Ligue 1 is a strong enough testament to justify Asamoah Gyan’s admission, and Dani Alves, apart from earning another La Liga title with Barca, was by his own admission playing below par and was even left out of Pep Guardiola’s team for a spell.
Reflecting on our own omissions, Carlos Tevez must reflect whether he could have done much more than score 29 goals in 42 games in his debut season for a new club, and there can be few midfielders who matched Frank lampard’s 27 goals and a league and cup double. Lampard’s Chelsea team-mates Ashley Cole and Florent Malouda have been widely recognised as peerless in their positions over the past twelve months, whilst Gareth Bale has excelled to the point he terrorised the European champions on their own patch last week.
Just ask Nick Clegg, you can pick up those oh so important extra votes when it’s deemed fashionable to vote a certain way, which unfortunately means the Premier league is so last season.
Back in July Sepp Blatter triumphantly declared, ‘a new chapter in football’ was born. Fear not, the eccentric Swiss was not rolling out super-sized goalposts, triangular pitches or a robotic referees, instead, he was merely adding hyperbole to the amalgamation of what was essentially the same award anyway.
France Football’s Ballon d’Or - European Footballer of the Year - and the FIFA World Player of the Year have been merged to become the imaginatively titled FIFA Ballon d’Or. Since 2005, the two honours have always gone to the same player, so with a noble ditching of one glitzy shindig per annum, Blatter and Co have decided once and for all to have a sole award for the player deemed the world’s best for that calendar year.
The separate voting process of the two has also been combined, meaning that International coaches and captains as well as a gathering of the world’s journalists all have a say who now gets the prize. But even with just one gong on offer, and a more simplistic voting system, the shortlist still throws up some curious anomalies.
The official remit is that the nominees are the best players from the year beginning January 1st, always questionable given that all of the 23 man shortlist participate in a league system running from the autumn to spring. The balloting began following the World Cup, meaning the qualification period essentially covers only about half of the year. It’s still a muddled mess, and that shows with some of the names making the cut.
Much has been made of the lack of names from our shores on the list. There are no English players joining the likes of Xavi, Lionel Messi and Wesley Sneijder, and only Didier Drogba and Cesc Fabregas represent the Premier League. 2010 was not a vintage year for English clubs or the national side, and this seems to have tarnished our votes, rather than any significant decline in the individual levels of performance.
To highlight the indifference, Wayne Rooney doesn’t get a mention whereas Miroslav Klose does. From the turn of the year to the end of March, Rooney was unstoppable and had it not been for an untimely injury against Bayern Munich, could have led Manchester United onto a fourth successive Premier League title and a third consecutive Champions League final. Instead, he’s been overlooked in favour of Bayern’s beanpole striker Klose, who, barring four goals at the World Cup has had a bit of an annus horribilis domestically, scoring just six goals in 38 games for the Bavarians and only once en route to the Champions League final. Poor fare compared to Rooney’s 34 strikes in 44 appearances.
Rooney may have not done himself many favours by flunking in South Africa and being off the boil at the start of this season, but Klose has yet to get off the mark in the Bundesliga so far, and appears to have made the draft on the back of a handful of decent showings which were exposed to a wider media glare.
The same could be said of compatriots Mesut Ozil, who shone for the ‘Mannschaft’ but had little clamour before it, and Thomas Muller who enjoyed a decent season with Bayern, but surely gets the nod for winning the Golden Boot – an achievement not to be discounted, but is not reward for annual endeavours over a sustained period of time.
Clearly getting less than a goal every other game in the Ligue 1 is a strong enough testament to justify Asamoah Gyan’s admission, and Dani Alves, apart from earning another La Liga title with Barca, was by his own admission playing below par and was even left out of Pep Guardiola’s team for a spell.
Reflecting on our own omissions, Carlos Tevez must reflect whether he could have done much more than score 29 goals in 42 games in his debut season for a new club, and there can be few midfielders who matched Frank lampard’s 27 goals and a league and cup double. Lampard’s Chelsea team-mates Ashley Cole and Florent Malouda have been widely recognised as peerless in their positions over the past twelve months, whilst Gareth Bale has excelled to the point he terrorised the European champions on their own patch last week.
Just ask Nick Clegg, you can pick up those oh so important extra votes when it’s deemed fashionable to vote a certain way, which unfortunately means the Premier league is so last season.
Wednesday, 20 October 2010
My Greatest X1 of all-time
To mark the 50th and 70th birthdays of Maradona and Pele, The Guardian are running a ‘Your greatest football X1’.
Never a right or a wrong answer and always open to opinion and conjecture, I am choosing my ‘Greatest X1 of all time’.
As this is ‘your’ greatest X1 of all time, I am choosing from the players I have seen close up, on a regular basis, whom I can judge for myself. So I am only choosing from the players I have seen in my 20odd years of watching the beautiful game, and who I believe are the best players I have ever seen.
I have tried to formulise this somewhat and have stuck them in the modern 4-3-3 formation, roughly compromising of a back four, three central-ish midfielders and three forwards. Again, feel free to alter the formation should you so wish. Here goes…
Goalkeeper - Gianluigi Buffon
Buffon has collected over 100 Azzurri caps and surely must be one of the most decorated keepers ever to play the game. He has two Serie A titles, a Uefa Cup and a World Cup to his name as well as a mountain of individual awards including Serie A Keeper of the Year seven times, Uefa Goalkeeper of the Season three times and in 2006, came second in the European Player of the Year awards, becoming one of only five keepers to be named for the honour in over fifty years of its existence.
A supreme athlete, standing 6ft 3” Buffon resonates that presence which reassures defences and intimidates forwards in equal measure, and is one of the best shot stoppers the game has ever seen. Easily the best keeper of the past decade.
Right-Back – Cafu
Along with his mate Roberto Carlos, the two Brazilians were the pioneers of the modern day flying full-back, combining defensive duties with an enthusiasm to bomb forward to act as an auxiliary winger, creating and scoring as many goals as he kept out.
The Brazilians have long had a tradition of attacking full-backs, but many of these were often culpable defensively. Cafu was not, and when in the opposition third he had the natural ability to beat a man, and cross and shoot as accurately as an attacker.
Cafu was a relative latecomer to the European scene arriving in Zaragoza aged 24 and it was only when he moved to Italy, first with Roma and then Milan, did he gain the recognition he deserved. Two Serie A’s and a European Cup later, Cafu was still marauding down the Rossoneri right flank aged 37. He also has won two World Cups and is Brazils most capped player turning out 142 times.
Left-Back – Andreas Brehme
The complete defender, and a key component of the clinical West German side of the 80’s, Brehme was a regular feature for the ‘Mannschaft’ and appeared in three World Cup finals, missing out in ’82 and ’86, finally getting it right at Italia ’90 where he scored the winning penalty in the final against Argentina.
Hard as nails, and with typical German efficiency, Brehme was resolute at the back and gave nothing away, but it was as an attacking force that Brehme stood out. Genuinely two footed, he took free kicks and corners with his left foot but preferred shooting and taking penalties with his right. At all of his clubs he was a regular goalscorer, both from dead balls and open play, and consistently offered an attacking outlet going forward. Such was Brehme’s potency going forward that during the second round match of Italia 90 against the Netherlands, the Dutch winger Johnny Van't Schip's principal job was to mark him out of the game. The tactic had little effect with Brehme curling home the decisive goal.
Centre-Back – Marcel Desailly
Quick, strong and an excellent reader of the game, Desailly was a colossal figure at the heart of any defence he played, whether that be for Marseille, Milan, Chelsea or France.
After originally starting as a midfielder, Desailly possessed excellent footballing qualities which accompanied him in his defensive role, often starting attacks by bursting out of defence or spraying passes forward. Ghanaian born and French raised, Desailly’s finest hour was during the ’98 World Cup. Forming a formidable pairing with Laurent Blanc, he was imperious throughout the whole tournament as les blues conceded only two goals all tournament on their way to becoming world champions.
Like any true great, Desailly has the silverware to prove it, and as well as the World Cup, he won the European Championships in 2000, two Champions League titles, two Serie A’s and an FA Cup
Centre-Back – Alessandro Nesta
At the peak of his powers there have been fewer better natural defenders than Nesta. After bursting into the talented Lazio side of the mid 90’s, Nesta’s maturity way beyond his years meant he was given the honour of captaining the side aged just 21, and was the figurehead of Sergio Cragnotti’s purpose built side which won the Italian Championship in 2000. He added a second Serie A crown with Milan in 2004, as well as the Champions League in 2007, and the World Cup with Italy in 2006.
Nesta followed in a long line of Italian defenders who were brilliant readers of the game. He appeared almost psychic at times, proactively snuffing out danger before it had happened, but possessing the speed and intuition to react to situations if they had.
A sign of Nesta’s brilliance is that amongst a collection of the best defenders in the world, where defending is considered an art form, he won Serie A Defender of the Year four consecutive times from 2000-2003.
Centre midfield – Lothar Matthaus
There have been few footballers that have as much to their game as Lothar Matthaus. It was said that Matthaus could play anywhere, and invariably he did. Primarily a central midfielder, Matthaus had the lot and was the driving force behind the teams he played. The original all-action, box-to-box midfielder, the German was a regular goalscorer, but was far from an attacking midfielder. He defended and screened his backline but was in no means a defensive midfielder, he could pass, prompt and above all, was a leader of men. Skippering near enough every team he ever played in, including the West German side who won Italia 90.
Matthaus still holds the record for most appearances in the World Cup finals – 25 – spread across five tournaments. In a glittering club career, Matthaus won seven Bundesliga’s, three Uefa Cups and seven domestic cups. He also added the 1980 European Championships to the World Cup he won with Germany, and individually picked the 1990 Ball d’Or and the 1991 World player of the Year.
Centre Midfield – Zinedine Zidane
With the build of a middleweight and the delicacy of a fairy, Zidane was poetry in motion with a poise, grace and balance that few can match, all allied with the subtlest of touches, and the sharpest of football brains, his performances should have been played to classical music scores instead of banal commentary.
Few players had the appreciation and understanding of Zidane to find a pocket of space. He caressed the ball, stroked it like a renaissance painter would do to his canvas, and made the game seem simple, and the world a happier place.
Supremely gifted, Zidane had a flawless technique, the most skilled of feet, peripheral vision and a devastating array of passes. Zidane was not a goalscorer, the secret of his supremeness was that he made the game simpler for everyone else by being simply brilliant. He had some much time to operate, he created time elsewhere, and was simply brilliant, not necessarily unstoppable, but just brilliant.
Only he and Ronaldo have won the FIFA World Player of the Year three times.
Central Midfield – Michael Laudrup
One of the most underrated players of all time. Both Romario and Raul say he was the best they ever played with, Johann Cruyff said, “When Michael plays like a dream no one in the world comes anywhere near his level.” And the most glittering appraisal came from a journeyman Italian defender called Roberto Galia, “I have played against Maradona, Platini and Baggio. But the player I saw do the most indescribable things was Michael Laudrup.”
Laudrup was pure class, one of the most elegant footballers of all time.
A playmaker, he had the lot, pace, amazing dribbling skills, he conducted and created and scored, but the one trait that set him apart from his peers was his ability to play a killer pass. If certain players are blessed with a football brain, then Laudrup must have possessed artificial intelligence, such was the precision, weight and timing of some of his through balls.
Laudrup won three la Liga titles with Barcelona’s ‘Dream Team’ of the early 90’s and in his final season he was instrumental in Barca’s 5-0 hammering of Real Madrid. That summer he transferred to Real, who reclaimed la Liga meaning Laudrup won four titles on the bounce. He was also instrumental in Real’s 5-0 hammering of Barca that season…
Forward – Diego Maradona
In many people’s eyes, the greatest of all time. Certainly few players have won a World Cup single handedly as el Diego did in 1986, and even fewer have gone onto lift a mediocre mid-table side like Napoli onto two Serie A titles and a Uefa Cup.
In his pomp, he was unstoppable. An individual talent that has rarely, if ever, been equaled. Widely daubed as the ‘goal of the century’, Maradona’s effort against England in ’86 epitomised his abilities; that burst of speed, the way he jinked and rode past tackles, brushing away intruders with his short stocky frame, the whole moment happens in just a few short seconds, it must have seemed like a blur as he’s scampering towards goal, bodies trailing, limbs approaching as he progresses, yet in his oft-derided mind he has a vision, premonition like of what to do. It is a vision few players could even imagine, let alone replicate.
A testament of how good Maradona was is that he repeated a once in a lifetime goal a couple of days later in the semi-final against Belgium, slaloming past a handful of harrowed Belgian defenders before lashing the ball home on that beautiful left peg.
Forward – Lionel Messi
Yes, yes he’s only 23 and agreed he’s not done it at a World Cup. But there is something scary about the way Lionel Messi performs on the club scene for Barcelona at the moment, appearing heads and shoulders above anything else in the world.
Since the start of the 2008 season, Messi has played 113 times for Barca, scoring a quite preposterous 93 times. It is a strike rate that ranks with some of the most lethal goal poachers of all time, yet this is only part of the story. That doesn’t begin to tell the story of how many goals he sets up, or the general havoc he wreaks every time he gets the ball.
It’s not only the amount of goals, it’s the quality of them. Time and again, he scores goals only he could score. There aren’t many tap-ins and nearly every goal comes in apparent comical fashion as Messi, cartoon like, zips in from that right touchline, ball glued to his left foot as he ducks and weaves past those unfortunate enough to have to tackle him, before nonchalantly shaping one into the corner or dinking it over the keeper. There haven’t been many players in any era completely unrivalled as the best of that time, but Messi certainly is now.
Forward – Ronaldo
The phenomenal thing about ‘il fenomeno’ is that he was one of the finest goalscorers of all-time, despite rarely being fully fit. 44 goals in 44 games for Cruzeiro, 54 goals in 57 for PSV, 47 in 49 for Barca. These figures are ridiculous. Even in the notoriously stingy Serie A he got 49 goals in 68 league games for Inter before injury curtailed surely what would have been his making as unarguably the finest striker of the modern era, if not all time.
Onto Real Madrid, and we continue, 177 games, 104 goals, he’s got 62 goals in 97 caps for the national team and even got a goal every other game with Milan when he was well past it. He is the World Cups highest goalscorer of all time with another 15 in 19, won the tournament twice, and has too many individual accolades to list. The records speak for themselves.
You dread to think what would have happened if he hadn’t had his knee reconstructed three times, and to see highlights of his goals and performances for Barcelona and Inter prior to injury were scary. He was so fast and powerful, with a ruthless and direct hunger for goals which made him so difficult to stop. A true great, and a true tragedy he was never in prime condition for longer so we could have seen just how good Ronaldo would have been.
Never a right or a wrong answer and always open to opinion and conjecture, I am choosing my ‘Greatest X1 of all time’.
As this is ‘your’ greatest X1 of all time, I am choosing from the players I have seen close up, on a regular basis, whom I can judge for myself. So I am only choosing from the players I have seen in my 20odd years of watching the beautiful game, and who I believe are the best players I have ever seen.
I have tried to formulise this somewhat and have stuck them in the modern 4-3-3 formation, roughly compromising of a back four, three central-ish midfielders and three forwards. Again, feel free to alter the formation should you so wish. Here goes…
Goalkeeper - Gianluigi Buffon
Buffon has collected over 100 Azzurri caps and surely must be one of the most decorated keepers ever to play the game. He has two Serie A titles, a Uefa Cup and a World Cup to his name as well as a mountain of individual awards including Serie A Keeper of the Year seven times, Uefa Goalkeeper of the Season three times and in 2006, came second in the European Player of the Year awards, becoming one of only five keepers to be named for the honour in over fifty years of its existence.
A supreme athlete, standing 6ft 3” Buffon resonates that presence which reassures defences and intimidates forwards in equal measure, and is one of the best shot stoppers the game has ever seen. Easily the best keeper of the past decade.
Right-Back – Cafu
Along with his mate Roberto Carlos, the two Brazilians were the pioneers of the modern day flying full-back, combining defensive duties with an enthusiasm to bomb forward to act as an auxiliary winger, creating and scoring as many goals as he kept out.
The Brazilians have long had a tradition of attacking full-backs, but many of these were often culpable defensively. Cafu was not, and when in the opposition third he had the natural ability to beat a man, and cross and shoot as accurately as an attacker.
Cafu was a relative latecomer to the European scene arriving in Zaragoza aged 24 and it was only when he moved to Italy, first with Roma and then Milan, did he gain the recognition he deserved. Two Serie A’s and a European Cup later, Cafu was still marauding down the Rossoneri right flank aged 37. He also has won two World Cups and is Brazils most capped player turning out 142 times.
Left-Back – Andreas Brehme
The complete defender, and a key component of the clinical West German side of the 80’s, Brehme was a regular feature for the ‘Mannschaft’ and appeared in three World Cup finals, missing out in ’82 and ’86, finally getting it right at Italia ’90 where he scored the winning penalty in the final against Argentina.
Hard as nails, and with typical German efficiency, Brehme was resolute at the back and gave nothing away, but it was as an attacking force that Brehme stood out. Genuinely two footed, he took free kicks and corners with his left foot but preferred shooting and taking penalties with his right. At all of his clubs he was a regular goalscorer, both from dead balls and open play, and consistently offered an attacking outlet going forward. Such was Brehme’s potency going forward that during the second round match of Italia 90 against the Netherlands, the Dutch winger Johnny Van't Schip's principal job was to mark him out of the game. The tactic had little effect with Brehme curling home the decisive goal.
Centre-Back – Marcel Desailly
Quick, strong and an excellent reader of the game, Desailly was a colossal figure at the heart of any defence he played, whether that be for Marseille, Milan, Chelsea or France.
After originally starting as a midfielder, Desailly possessed excellent footballing qualities which accompanied him in his defensive role, often starting attacks by bursting out of defence or spraying passes forward. Ghanaian born and French raised, Desailly’s finest hour was during the ’98 World Cup. Forming a formidable pairing with Laurent Blanc, he was imperious throughout the whole tournament as les blues conceded only two goals all tournament on their way to becoming world champions.
Like any true great, Desailly has the silverware to prove it, and as well as the World Cup, he won the European Championships in 2000, two Champions League titles, two Serie A’s and an FA Cup
Centre-Back – Alessandro Nesta
At the peak of his powers there have been fewer better natural defenders than Nesta. After bursting into the talented Lazio side of the mid 90’s, Nesta’s maturity way beyond his years meant he was given the honour of captaining the side aged just 21, and was the figurehead of Sergio Cragnotti’s purpose built side which won the Italian Championship in 2000. He added a second Serie A crown with Milan in 2004, as well as the Champions League in 2007, and the World Cup with Italy in 2006.
Nesta followed in a long line of Italian defenders who were brilliant readers of the game. He appeared almost psychic at times, proactively snuffing out danger before it had happened, but possessing the speed and intuition to react to situations if they had.
A sign of Nesta’s brilliance is that amongst a collection of the best defenders in the world, where defending is considered an art form, he won Serie A Defender of the Year four consecutive times from 2000-2003.
Centre midfield – Lothar Matthaus
There have been few footballers that have as much to their game as Lothar Matthaus. It was said that Matthaus could play anywhere, and invariably he did. Primarily a central midfielder, Matthaus had the lot and was the driving force behind the teams he played. The original all-action, box-to-box midfielder, the German was a regular goalscorer, but was far from an attacking midfielder. He defended and screened his backline but was in no means a defensive midfielder, he could pass, prompt and above all, was a leader of men. Skippering near enough every team he ever played in, including the West German side who won Italia 90.
Matthaus still holds the record for most appearances in the World Cup finals – 25 – spread across five tournaments. In a glittering club career, Matthaus won seven Bundesliga’s, three Uefa Cups and seven domestic cups. He also added the 1980 European Championships to the World Cup he won with Germany, and individually picked the 1990 Ball d’Or and the 1991 World player of the Year.
Centre Midfield – Zinedine Zidane
With the build of a middleweight and the delicacy of a fairy, Zidane was poetry in motion with a poise, grace and balance that few can match, all allied with the subtlest of touches, and the sharpest of football brains, his performances should have been played to classical music scores instead of banal commentary.
Few players had the appreciation and understanding of Zidane to find a pocket of space. He caressed the ball, stroked it like a renaissance painter would do to his canvas, and made the game seem simple, and the world a happier place.
Supremely gifted, Zidane had a flawless technique, the most skilled of feet, peripheral vision and a devastating array of passes. Zidane was not a goalscorer, the secret of his supremeness was that he made the game simpler for everyone else by being simply brilliant. He had some much time to operate, he created time elsewhere, and was simply brilliant, not necessarily unstoppable, but just brilliant.
Only he and Ronaldo have won the FIFA World Player of the Year three times.
Central Midfield – Michael Laudrup
One of the most underrated players of all time. Both Romario and Raul say he was the best they ever played with, Johann Cruyff said, “When Michael plays like a dream no one in the world comes anywhere near his level.” And the most glittering appraisal came from a journeyman Italian defender called Roberto Galia, “I have played against Maradona, Platini and Baggio. But the player I saw do the most indescribable things was Michael Laudrup.”
Laudrup was pure class, one of the most elegant footballers of all time.
A playmaker, he had the lot, pace, amazing dribbling skills, he conducted and created and scored, but the one trait that set him apart from his peers was his ability to play a killer pass. If certain players are blessed with a football brain, then Laudrup must have possessed artificial intelligence, such was the precision, weight and timing of some of his through balls.
Laudrup won three la Liga titles with Barcelona’s ‘Dream Team’ of the early 90’s and in his final season he was instrumental in Barca’s 5-0 hammering of Real Madrid. That summer he transferred to Real, who reclaimed la Liga meaning Laudrup won four titles on the bounce. He was also instrumental in Real’s 5-0 hammering of Barca that season…
Forward – Diego Maradona
In many people’s eyes, the greatest of all time. Certainly few players have won a World Cup single handedly as el Diego did in 1986, and even fewer have gone onto lift a mediocre mid-table side like Napoli onto two Serie A titles and a Uefa Cup.
In his pomp, he was unstoppable. An individual talent that has rarely, if ever, been equaled. Widely daubed as the ‘goal of the century’, Maradona’s effort against England in ’86 epitomised his abilities; that burst of speed, the way he jinked and rode past tackles, brushing away intruders with his short stocky frame, the whole moment happens in just a few short seconds, it must have seemed like a blur as he’s scampering towards goal, bodies trailing, limbs approaching as he progresses, yet in his oft-derided mind he has a vision, premonition like of what to do. It is a vision few players could even imagine, let alone replicate.
A testament of how good Maradona was is that he repeated a once in a lifetime goal a couple of days later in the semi-final against Belgium, slaloming past a handful of harrowed Belgian defenders before lashing the ball home on that beautiful left peg.
Forward – Lionel Messi
Yes, yes he’s only 23 and agreed he’s not done it at a World Cup. But there is something scary about the way Lionel Messi performs on the club scene for Barcelona at the moment, appearing heads and shoulders above anything else in the world.
Since the start of the 2008 season, Messi has played 113 times for Barca, scoring a quite preposterous 93 times. It is a strike rate that ranks with some of the most lethal goal poachers of all time, yet this is only part of the story. That doesn’t begin to tell the story of how many goals he sets up, or the general havoc he wreaks every time he gets the ball.
It’s not only the amount of goals, it’s the quality of them. Time and again, he scores goals only he could score. There aren’t many tap-ins and nearly every goal comes in apparent comical fashion as Messi, cartoon like, zips in from that right touchline, ball glued to his left foot as he ducks and weaves past those unfortunate enough to have to tackle him, before nonchalantly shaping one into the corner or dinking it over the keeper. There haven’t been many players in any era completely unrivalled as the best of that time, but Messi certainly is now.
Forward – Ronaldo
The phenomenal thing about ‘il fenomeno’ is that he was one of the finest goalscorers of all-time, despite rarely being fully fit. 44 goals in 44 games for Cruzeiro, 54 goals in 57 for PSV, 47 in 49 for Barca. These figures are ridiculous. Even in the notoriously stingy Serie A he got 49 goals in 68 league games for Inter before injury curtailed surely what would have been his making as unarguably the finest striker of the modern era, if not all time.
Onto Real Madrid, and we continue, 177 games, 104 goals, he’s got 62 goals in 97 caps for the national team and even got a goal every other game with Milan when he was well past it. He is the World Cups highest goalscorer of all time with another 15 in 19, won the tournament twice, and has too many individual accolades to list. The records speak for themselves.
You dread to think what would have happened if he hadn’t had his knee reconstructed three times, and to see highlights of his goals and performances for Barcelona and Inter prior to injury were scary. He was so fast and powerful, with a ruthless and direct hunger for goals which made him so difficult to stop. A true great, and a true tragedy he was never in prime condition for longer so we could have seen just how good Ronaldo would have been.
Tuesday, 19 October 2010
Manchester United Club Focus - Rooney 'adamant' he wants to leave
So it has now been confirmed. The amount the press knew and the credibility and collective knowhow said as much, but once Sir Alex Ferguson goes on record saying that Wayne Rooney wants to leave, then he wants to leave.
In his pre-match press conference ahead of the now slightly inconsequential Bursaspor encounter, Ferguson revealed that Rooney’s first inhibitions about staying at Old Trafford were raised during the summer, when initial talks about extending his contract past 2012 hit an impasse.
Although the lid has been relatively kept on the breakdown until recently, the situation is now in the public domain and given Ferguson’s statement that his striker is ‘adamant’ he wants to leave, there seems only one conclusion to the scenario.
What has yet to be fully clarified is what has changed Rooney’s stance since last season when a transfer away from United seemed a very distant proposition. Ferguson went to great lengths to lay the blame squarely on the shoulders of Rooney and his advisors, by saying, “Only months before he was saying he was at the greatest club in the world. I asked to have a meeting with the boy. He reiterated what his agent said, that he wanted to go.”
It appears the issues behind Rooney’s desire to leave run deeper than the financial complexities of a new contract. Although it is commonplace for the various parties to play hardball over contract negotiations, Rooney’s team would have taken a more tactile approach to proceedings had it been his genuine intention to stay. The grim prospect facing Reds fans now is that their best player wants to leave, and it looks like he will be leaving.
The conundrum Sir Alex Ferguson and the club board will have to decide is when they let their man go. There will be no shortage of suitors for the current Premier League Player of the Year, yet unlike previously when United have sold key players such as Cristiano Ronaldo and David Beckham, this transfer will be hard to conclude on their terms.
The balancing act Ferguson and Gill must get right is between selling for the right price, whilst doing the best for team issues. Come the summer Rooney will only have 12 months left to run on his current contract, and commanding anywhere like his full transfer value would be difficult. The fee could potentially be larger in January, but invariably the likes of Chelsea, Real Madrid and Barcelona would prefer a summer transfer where United could instigate a bidding war, but with Manchester City lurking, the timing may be irrelevant.
From a playing perspective, Rooney’s contribution to the United cause this season has been minimal - a penalty against West Ham his solitary strike of the campaign. Apart from the goals, the 24-year-old’s performances have been substandard, and on current form would barely be missed.
The lack of an on form and focused Rooney is one factor to the Reds sluggish start to the season, and given the inevitable media scope against the backdrop of knowing the player wants to leave, the players performances and therefore those of the team are hardly likely to improve. Ferguson has also been reticent in the past to shoulder the burden of players causing problems, and Rooney’s continued involvement with the first team squad could have detrimental effects upon the rest. It is therefore highly unlikely, unless Ferguson can reverse Rooney’s decision, that the famous United number 10 shirt will adorn Rooney’s name into 2011.
What makes the whole affair even more unpalatable for the Red Army is that in pole position to acquire the England striker would be their nearest but not very dearest neighbours. Given the credence of the press reports thus far, comments attributed to Rooney suggesting he is open to a move to the blue half of Manchester should not be taken lightly. City do not want for cash or ambition, and would be in a position to launch a bid at any time, something Barcelona, Real Madrid and Chelsea may not.
An intriguing subplot to this news is how the Glazers respond. A hefty pay increase and reassurances about future investment in the team could appease Rooney’s woes. However, on the back on the recent announcement of net losses of over £80m in the last year, the margins between selling their star player, and shelling out on a bumper contract and world class reinforcements would be impossible to bridge.
It is something that will not go unspoken when United fans congregate for an anti-Glazer march ahead of their next home league fixture with Tottenham on October 30.
In his pre-match press conference ahead of the now slightly inconsequential Bursaspor encounter, Ferguson revealed that Rooney’s first inhibitions about staying at Old Trafford were raised during the summer, when initial talks about extending his contract past 2012 hit an impasse.
Although the lid has been relatively kept on the breakdown until recently, the situation is now in the public domain and given Ferguson’s statement that his striker is ‘adamant’ he wants to leave, there seems only one conclusion to the scenario.
What has yet to be fully clarified is what has changed Rooney’s stance since last season when a transfer away from United seemed a very distant proposition. Ferguson went to great lengths to lay the blame squarely on the shoulders of Rooney and his advisors, by saying, “Only months before he was saying he was at the greatest club in the world. I asked to have a meeting with the boy. He reiterated what his agent said, that he wanted to go.”
It appears the issues behind Rooney’s desire to leave run deeper than the financial complexities of a new contract. Although it is commonplace for the various parties to play hardball over contract negotiations, Rooney’s team would have taken a more tactile approach to proceedings had it been his genuine intention to stay. The grim prospect facing Reds fans now is that their best player wants to leave, and it looks like he will be leaving.
The conundrum Sir Alex Ferguson and the club board will have to decide is when they let their man go. There will be no shortage of suitors for the current Premier League Player of the Year, yet unlike previously when United have sold key players such as Cristiano Ronaldo and David Beckham, this transfer will be hard to conclude on their terms.
The balancing act Ferguson and Gill must get right is between selling for the right price, whilst doing the best for team issues. Come the summer Rooney will only have 12 months left to run on his current contract, and commanding anywhere like his full transfer value would be difficult. The fee could potentially be larger in January, but invariably the likes of Chelsea, Real Madrid and Barcelona would prefer a summer transfer where United could instigate a bidding war, but with Manchester City lurking, the timing may be irrelevant.
From a playing perspective, Rooney’s contribution to the United cause this season has been minimal - a penalty against West Ham his solitary strike of the campaign. Apart from the goals, the 24-year-old’s performances have been substandard, and on current form would barely be missed.
The lack of an on form and focused Rooney is one factor to the Reds sluggish start to the season, and given the inevitable media scope against the backdrop of knowing the player wants to leave, the players performances and therefore those of the team are hardly likely to improve. Ferguson has also been reticent in the past to shoulder the burden of players causing problems, and Rooney’s continued involvement with the first team squad could have detrimental effects upon the rest. It is therefore highly unlikely, unless Ferguson can reverse Rooney’s decision, that the famous United number 10 shirt will adorn Rooney’s name into 2011.
What makes the whole affair even more unpalatable for the Red Army is that in pole position to acquire the England striker would be their nearest but not very dearest neighbours. Given the credence of the press reports thus far, comments attributed to Rooney suggesting he is open to a move to the blue half of Manchester should not be taken lightly. City do not want for cash or ambition, and would be in a position to launch a bid at any time, something Barcelona, Real Madrid and Chelsea may not.
An intriguing subplot to this news is how the Glazers respond. A hefty pay increase and reassurances about future investment in the team could appease Rooney’s woes. However, on the back on the recent announcement of net losses of over £80m in the last year, the margins between selling their star player, and shelling out on a bumper contract and world class reinforcements would be impossible to bridge.
It is something that will not go unspoken when United fans congregate for an anti-Glazer march ahead of their next home league fixture with Tottenham on October 30.
Rooney ruined by the press
The constant haranguing of our top stars could spark mass migration from the Premier League. John Baines believes the tabloid press could send the English game to the gutter.
Just six months ago Wayne Rooney was spearheading Manchester United’s assault on a fourth consecutive Premier League title and a third consecutive Champions League final appearance. To all intents and purposes, he seemed to be the next Old Trafford ‘lifer’, with his status assured as the Reds premiere player.
Whilst he may have fancied catching sunburn on the continent at some point, that seemed more likely to be a swansong, rather than the pinnacle of his career, and certainly a transfer away from United would have been inconceivable during the summer. Yet somehow the situation has evolved, only in the matter of a couple of weeks, to the point that his future with the club is now in serious doubt. So what’s gone on?
Those who claim to be in the know, know too much. Thanks to more leaks than the SS Poseidon, we are being updated through the press via unnamed ‘sources’ close to Rooney that he is unsatisfied with life with the Red Devils, and underwhelmed with the clubs transfer and recruitment policy.
However, those inside the halls of Old Trafford would have been aware of United’s financial position and aims going forward, and that includes the Rooney camp. After all, even after the departures of Cristiano Ronaldo and Carlos Tevez, the Reds hardly broke the bank to replace them. The clubs financial position provides a ready made excuse for Rooney to depart, but it is obvious the real reason for his despondency is his falling out with Sir Alex Ferguson.
The media handling of his perceived ankle injury highlighted the rift with the boss, but the seeds were sewn by the tabloid allegations about Rooney’s private life, with Ferguson less than enamoured with Rooney’s apparent rendezvous with two Manchester escort girls.
Never a scenario to strengthen the relationship between manager and employee, it appears these tabloid tales have been the catalyst in the breakdown of the previous indelible bond between Ferguson and Rooney, to the detriment of the club.
Rooney’s form has dipped and although Ferguson tried to mask it as an ankle injury, the reasons for that were fairly transparent. At the helm of the issue is Rooney’s indiscretions, and the repercussions are now stemming far and wider than the players home life.
Whilst not trying to excuse Rooney’s ‘alleged’ indiscretions, one has to wonder who benefits from the ‘kiss and tell’ expose which is becoming a regular feature of our ‘news’.
Indeed, Rooney is not in the boat on his own, over the past year or so we’ve had John Terry, Peter Crouch, David Beckham (again), Ashley Cole, Jermain Defoe – in fact members of the England squad are in the minority if there hasn’t been some sort of lurid sexual tale told or sold about them. But to what effect?
The problem herein lies with the tabloid press’s exploitation of a vague commandment loosely laid out by the Press Complaints Commission’s (PCC) editorial code of practice, which gives them the right to print ‘in the public interest’. Now, this is an ongoing conundrum, and one which there are few professional or legal guidelines to restrain, and one which is mercilessly flaunted by the press for essentially self gain. After all, what interests the public, is not necessarily in the public interest.
The defence put forward by the press, is that if anybody contradicts an image they purvey to the public, for example, that of a happy family man with a wife and child, they deserve to have that image corrected. In essence it is a fair call, but whom stands to gain from these tales? Really, the only winners are the newspaper publishers who see sales go up, and the implicated girl or girls who get a decent pay-off for the spread – pardon the pun.
What’s more, because of the profitability of such stories, the issue never ends with the initial expose. Referring back to the Rooney story, do we really need ‘The Shame of Wayne: Day Six: ‘I’m a fool, take me back, Col’? As carried in the Mirror almost a week after the story break? Do we really need a Sun reporter stood outside the family home, with updates such as 12.33pm: Coleen arrives at the house. 2.12pm: He arrives home from training. And, following on from the whole debacle, the Sun (surprise suprise) even followed Mrs Rooney and her younger disabled sister to their annual pilgrimage to Lourdes. Is this really in the public interest? Where does it rank in importance alongside the Hutton inquiry and the MP’s expenses scandal?
As long as the newspapers are allowed to print these stories, and at present there seems little in the way to stop them apart from morality, they will continue to do so. Not because they are in the public interest, but because they interest the public, and an interested public means profit. There are few that gain and plenty that lose from such sensationalism and sleaze, and unfortunately our footballers are constantly in the crosshairs of editors and journalists because of their x-factor and marketability.
One such story has turned cracks into fault lines, and we may now be waving off the most talented English player this country has seen for decades. Others may decide to follow suit, and there misdemeanours aside, who could blame them? The issue here is not about defending wrongdoing, it is about not persecuting for profit. We do not want to drive away our top players, we should want our best players over here, playing, and making the Premier League the best in the world.
That is in the public interest, and will interest the public.
Just six months ago Wayne Rooney was spearheading Manchester United’s assault on a fourth consecutive Premier League title and a third consecutive Champions League final appearance. To all intents and purposes, he seemed to be the next Old Trafford ‘lifer’, with his status assured as the Reds premiere player.
Whilst he may have fancied catching sunburn on the continent at some point, that seemed more likely to be a swansong, rather than the pinnacle of his career, and certainly a transfer away from United would have been inconceivable during the summer. Yet somehow the situation has evolved, only in the matter of a couple of weeks, to the point that his future with the club is now in serious doubt. So what’s gone on?
Those who claim to be in the know, know too much. Thanks to more leaks than the SS Poseidon, we are being updated through the press via unnamed ‘sources’ close to Rooney that he is unsatisfied with life with the Red Devils, and underwhelmed with the clubs transfer and recruitment policy.
However, those inside the halls of Old Trafford would have been aware of United’s financial position and aims going forward, and that includes the Rooney camp. After all, even after the departures of Cristiano Ronaldo and Carlos Tevez, the Reds hardly broke the bank to replace them. The clubs financial position provides a ready made excuse for Rooney to depart, but it is obvious the real reason for his despondency is his falling out with Sir Alex Ferguson.
The media handling of his perceived ankle injury highlighted the rift with the boss, but the seeds were sewn by the tabloid allegations about Rooney’s private life, with Ferguson less than enamoured with Rooney’s apparent rendezvous with two Manchester escort girls.
Never a scenario to strengthen the relationship between manager and employee, it appears these tabloid tales have been the catalyst in the breakdown of the previous indelible bond between Ferguson and Rooney, to the detriment of the club.
Rooney’s form has dipped and although Ferguson tried to mask it as an ankle injury, the reasons for that were fairly transparent. At the helm of the issue is Rooney’s indiscretions, and the repercussions are now stemming far and wider than the players home life.
Whilst not trying to excuse Rooney’s ‘alleged’ indiscretions, one has to wonder who benefits from the ‘kiss and tell’ expose which is becoming a regular feature of our ‘news’.
Indeed, Rooney is not in the boat on his own, over the past year or so we’ve had John Terry, Peter Crouch, David Beckham (again), Ashley Cole, Jermain Defoe – in fact members of the England squad are in the minority if there hasn’t been some sort of lurid sexual tale told or sold about them. But to what effect?
The problem herein lies with the tabloid press’s exploitation of a vague commandment loosely laid out by the Press Complaints Commission’s (PCC) editorial code of practice, which gives them the right to print ‘in the public interest’. Now, this is an ongoing conundrum, and one which there are few professional or legal guidelines to restrain, and one which is mercilessly flaunted by the press for essentially self gain. After all, what interests the public, is not necessarily in the public interest.
The defence put forward by the press, is that if anybody contradicts an image they purvey to the public, for example, that of a happy family man with a wife and child, they deserve to have that image corrected. In essence it is a fair call, but whom stands to gain from these tales? Really, the only winners are the newspaper publishers who see sales go up, and the implicated girl or girls who get a decent pay-off for the spread – pardon the pun.
What’s more, because of the profitability of such stories, the issue never ends with the initial expose. Referring back to the Rooney story, do we really need ‘The Shame of Wayne: Day Six: ‘I’m a fool, take me back, Col’? As carried in the Mirror almost a week after the story break? Do we really need a Sun reporter stood outside the family home, with updates such as 12.33pm: Coleen arrives at the house. 2.12pm: He arrives home from training. And, following on from the whole debacle, the Sun (surprise suprise) even followed Mrs Rooney and her younger disabled sister to their annual pilgrimage to Lourdes. Is this really in the public interest? Where does it rank in importance alongside the Hutton inquiry and the MP’s expenses scandal?
As long as the newspapers are allowed to print these stories, and at present there seems little in the way to stop them apart from morality, they will continue to do so. Not because they are in the public interest, but because they interest the public, and an interested public means profit. There are few that gain and plenty that lose from such sensationalism and sleaze, and unfortunately our footballers are constantly in the crosshairs of editors and journalists because of their x-factor and marketability.
One such story has turned cracks into fault lines, and we may now be waving off the most talented English player this country has seen for decades. Others may decide to follow suit, and there misdemeanours aside, who could blame them? The issue here is not about defending wrongdoing, it is about not persecuting for profit. We do not want to drive away our top players, we should want our best players over here, playing, and making the Premier League the best in the world.
That is in the public interest, and will interest the public.
Monday, 18 October 2010
A Different League Player of the Weekend - Charlie Adam
Charles, Charlie and Carlos. Three variations of the same name, three performances worthy of mention after another intriguing weekend of Premier League football.
It was Charles ‘Insomnia’ – or N’Zogbia to give him his respected title – who almost caused many a sleepless night on Tyneside, and whilst it was Carlos Tevez’s double that kept Ian Holloway staring at the bedroom ceiling, A Different League’s Player of the Weekend goes to Charlie Adam, who deserves a good nights kip after an outstanding display for Blackpool against Manchester City.
Billed as the paupers versus the princes, this was arguably the Premier League’s biggest financial mismatch since its inception. Blackpool - built on barely a budget – gave City’s billionaire’s the run around for the majority of yesterdays tussle, with Scottish midfielder Adam delivering a regal performance which shone above any of his more lucrative counterparts.
The Seasider’s top flight adventure is gaining admiration and admirers with every passing week. Last time out they humbled Liverpool at Anfield, and there would have been few arguments had they added Mancini’s millionaire’s to their list of scalps.
From the off Blackpool were faster and more furtive to the ball, but unlike many promoted sides, Holloway’s ragamuffin gathering have expressed a willingness to adorn and appreciate the ball, moving it about with a confidence and conviction which belittles their pre-season status as the league’s whipping boys.
Paramount to this ethos is former Rangers man Adam, who is the lynchpin of the side, and the catalyst for others to play. Decked out in their tangerine strip, there is almost a 1970’s Dutch chic about the way Blackpool play, and the way Adam in particular goes about his business.
All dropped shoulders, shimmies and feints, combined with a deft touch, a visual and varied range of passing, and blessed with a left foot that could sculpt statues, Adam is a throwback to the golden age of the game where finesse overrode fitness as the fundamental of a footballer’s arsenal.
“Get me an athlete and I’ll give you a footballer”, was how Ian Holloway gave credit to Arsene Wenger’s knack of producing precocious young talents. If that was the case, nobody would have delivered Adam to the Frenchman’s door. Scarlet cheeked, wheezing and spluttering through the last rights of Sunday’s unfortunate reverse - shirt untucked, socks withering down his ample calves - Adam had previously dictated virtually the entire game at his pace, on his terms.
Whether he was dropping short to deliver raking cross-field balls, making intricate incisions through a crowded infield or instilling panic with his invention in the final third, it was a glorious exhibition of midfield craft. City’s marathon men may have hustled Chelsea into submission, but were at a loss how to combat the intuitions of a skilled ball-player who used brains rather than brawn to dominate the game.
Throughout the match Adam bossed proceedings, and in the second half his deliciously weighted clip into the channel should have resulted in DJ Campbell putting the tangerines one up after Luke Varney latched onto Adam’s pass. Moments later Gary Taylor-Fletcher was flagged offside after more Adam geometrics dissected the City backline, and after going behind against the run of play, the Scotland international arched a free-kick narrowly passed the post with Joe Hart scrambling, before sending over another wicked set-piece delivery for Marlon Harewood to glance home.
If Adam had the benefit of a Tevez up-front, the points and the plaudits would surely have been his. So too would the post-match bubbly, and one could imagine the player sat in the communal bath, swigging away from the bottle, 70’s style. So nearly Champagne Charlie.
It was Charles ‘Insomnia’ – or N’Zogbia to give him his respected title – who almost caused many a sleepless night on Tyneside, and whilst it was Carlos Tevez’s double that kept Ian Holloway staring at the bedroom ceiling, A Different League’s Player of the Weekend goes to Charlie Adam, who deserves a good nights kip after an outstanding display for Blackpool against Manchester City.
Billed as the paupers versus the princes, this was arguably the Premier League’s biggest financial mismatch since its inception. Blackpool - built on barely a budget – gave City’s billionaire’s the run around for the majority of yesterdays tussle, with Scottish midfielder Adam delivering a regal performance which shone above any of his more lucrative counterparts.
The Seasider’s top flight adventure is gaining admiration and admirers with every passing week. Last time out they humbled Liverpool at Anfield, and there would have been few arguments had they added Mancini’s millionaire’s to their list of scalps.
From the off Blackpool were faster and more furtive to the ball, but unlike many promoted sides, Holloway’s ragamuffin gathering have expressed a willingness to adorn and appreciate the ball, moving it about with a confidence and conviction which belittles their pre-season status as the league’s whipping boys.
Paramount to this ethos is former Rangers man Adam, who is the lynchpin of the side, and the catalyst for others to play. Decked out in their tangerine strip, there is almost a 1970’s Dutch chic about the way Blackpool play, and the way Adam in particular goes about his business.
All dropped shoulders, shimmies and feints, combined with a deft touch, a visual and varied range of passing, and blessed with a left foot that could sculpt statues, Adam is a throwback to the golden age of the game where finesse overrode fitness as the fundamental of a footballer’s arsenal.
“Get me an athlete and I’ll give you a footballer”, was how Ian Holloway gave credit to Arsene Wenger’s knack of producing precocious young talents. If that was the case, nobody would have delivered Adam to the Frenchman’s door. Scarlet cheeked, wheezing and spluttering through the last rights of Sunday’s unfortunate reverse - shirt untucked, socks withering down his ample calves - Adam had previously dictated virtually the entire game at his pace, on his terms.
Whether he was dropping short to deliver raking cross-field balls, making intricate incisions through a crowded infield or instilling panic with his invention in the final third, it was a glorious exhibition of midfield craft. City’s marathon men may have hustled Chelsea into submission, but were at a loss how to combat the intuitions of a skilled ball-player who used brains rather than brawn to dominate the game.
Throughout the match Adam bossed proceedings, and in the second half his deliciously weighted clip into the channel should have resulted in DJ Campbell putting the tangerines one up after Luke Varney latched onto Adam’s pass. Moments later Gary Taylor-Fletcher was flagged offside after more Adam geometrics dissected the City backline, and after going behind against the run of play, the Scotland international arched a free-kick narrowly passed the post with Joe Hart scrambling, before sending over another wicked set-piece delivery for Marlon Harewood to glance home.
If Adam had the benefit of a Tevez up-front, the points and the plaudits would surely have been his. So too would the post-match bubbly, and one could imagine the player sat in the communal bath, swigging away from the bottle, 70’s style. So nearly Champagne Charlie.
Wednesday, 13 October 2010
Too much football in the English game? Nonsense.
Many suggestions were put forward as to England's dismal failure at the World Cup, including the old chestnut about our players playing too much football. John Baines puts that theory to the test.
After watching England labour through their tussle with the mighty Macedonia, you could have been forgiven if you’d drawn back the curtains to check if the light was dimming on a fine summer’s eve. Afraid not. We're in October, and despite the appearance that this game came at the end of a long and toiling season, most of last nights line-up have only played a handful of games since the resumption of play.
The too much football argument is one borne out of little science or substance, but usually comes up when we are trying to explain away another substandard showing at a major international tournament. So, let’s try to put some facts and figures to this theory, and see if it stands up.
Now, this is a fast and loose look at things so the statistics are fairly rugged. These figures are based on the number of games each individual player took part in, not necessarily started or come off the bench, and I’m certainly not working out the individual minutes, distance ran or anything like that. The appearances relate to all club outings, including domestic cup and European competitions.
So, let’s take the Three Lionesses starting X1 from the Germany drubbing and have a look at the amount of games that the outfield players actually played. Only Frank Lampard played 50 games or more. Glen Johnson, Ashley Cole and Matthew Upson - three of the back four that were routinely outstripped by the Germans - played less than 40. In midfield, Steven Gerrard and James Milner played 49 times for their clubs that season, with Gareth Barry turning out 43 times. Up front, Wayne Rooney and Jermain Defoe played 44 and 43 times respectively. The sum total of that then is that between them they played 428 matches, at an average of just short of 43 each.
If you compare that with the Joachim Low’s side - who looked far fitter, fresher and sharper than their old foes - the figures are remarkably similar. In fact, exactly the same. Unbelievably, the German outfield ten also clocked up 428 matches.
What’s more, compare this with the 'Team of the Tournament', objective in anyone's book, but good for the sake of a debate like this. Maicon, Philip Lahm, Bastian Schweinsteiger, Wesley Sneijder and Diego Forlan all ended up playing in that seasons European finals, something none of the English side did, yet still found the legs to stand out amongst a gathering of the worlds best players. Four of the players played over 50 games, none under 40, and collectively racked up 473 games, at an average of nearly four games per man extra than Capello’s men did.
Too much football? There is a perverse counter argument that they aren't playing enough. We'll have to start looking for some more excuses.
After watching England labour through their tussle with the mighty Macedonia, you could have been forgiven if you’d drawn back the curtains to check if the light was dimming on a fine summer’s eve. Afraid not. We're in October, and despite the appearance that this game came at the end of a long and toiling season, most of last nights line-up have only played a handful of games since the resumption of play.
The too much football argument is one borne out of little science or substance, but usually comes up when we are trying to explain away another substandard showing at a major international tournament. So, let’s try to put some facts and figures to this theory, and see if it stands up.
Now, this is a fast and loose look at things so the statistics are fairly rugged. These figures are based on the number of games each individual player took part in, not necessarily started or come off the bench, and I’m certainly not working out the individual minutes, distance ran or anything like that. The appearances relate to all club outings, including domestic cup and European competitions.
So, let’s take the Three Lionesses starting X1 from the Germany drubbing and have a look at the amount of games that the outfield players actually played. Only Frank Lampard played 50 games or more. Glen Johnson, Ashley Cole and Matthew Upson - three of the back four that were routinely outstripped by the Germans - played less than 40. In midfield, Steven Gerrard and James Milner played 49 times for their clubs that season, with Gareth Barry turning out 43 times. Up front, Wayne Rooney and Jermain Defoe played 44 and 43 times respectively. The sum total of that then is that between them they played 428 matches, at an average of just short of 43 each.
If you compare that with the Joachim Low’s side - who looked far fitter, fresher and sharper than their old foes - the figures are remarkably similar. In fact, exactly the same. Unbelievably, the German outfield ten also clocked up 428 matches.
What’s more, compare this with the 'Team of the Tournament', objective in anyone's book, but good for the sake of a debate like this. Maicon, Philip Lahm, Bastian Schweinsteiger, Wesley Sneijder and Diego Forlan all ended up playing in that seasons European finals, something none of the English side did, yet still found the legs to stand out amongst a gathering of the worlds best players. Four of the players played over 50 games, none under 40, and collectively racked up 473 games, at an average of nearly four games per man extra than Capello’s men did.
Too much football? There is a perverse counter argument that they aren't playing enough. We'll have to start looking for some more excuses.
Earn your Cash-pello
On a salary of £6m a year, Fabio Capello is by far the highest paid manager in International football. So, what are we spending this money on?
Similar to Sven, Capello cannot be blamed for the sums the FA put into his offshore account. Similarly to Sven, he can be blamed for questions being raised as to why we are paying him such an amount.
Prior to the World Cup a table emerged showing the figures earned by the various competing coaches in the tournament. It threw up some interesting reading. In top spot - by a distance - was our man Fab, who at the time of being offered the England job had been unemployed for over a year after being sacked and sitting on a lucrative pay-off from Real Madrid.
In second spot, on less than half of Capello, is none other than Marcelo Lippi, currently governing Capello’s motherland, Italy. Lippi took over the Azzurri in 2008, and the sceptic in you may suggest that had our ingenious FA not dived in and offered Capello such an inflated wage to land us the World Cup, he would have been jostling with Lippi to take over from Roberto Donadoni, albeit earning a fraction on life at Soho Square. The numeric’s and how they come to be, only add ire when you digest Tuesday night’s insipid performance over Montenegro.
Now, the World Cup has been and gone and for all of the various failings from all involved, Capello is still at the helm. If we are to move forward, we need a fresh start, a clean sheet - which is just as well given there was little evidence of clean sheets to be found anywhere in Bloemfontein.
The new-ish era got off in good enough fashion with seven goals notched against Bulgaria and Switzerland, yet against a side ranked below Gabon and Burkina Faso, the bland, basic and primitive way England went about dealing with Montenegro meant it was hard not to look back into the black.
32 months and 32 games since he first took charge of the Three Lions, what improvements could we see for a nigh on £15m investment? (not forgetting the money spent on his battalion of hand picked backroom staff and assistants; scouts, coaches, physicians, dieticians, advisors, agents, travel costs, property rental, medical care, insurance premiums and expenses) Not much.
Bar winning the World Cup – better make that the European Championships now – the only other way the FA can justify the money lavished on the Capello project is if there were tangible signs of progress and development under what they triumphantly declared a ‘world class coach’ upon his arrival.
Watching the Montenegro game did not strike me as progress, but instead gave me a harrowing de ja vu experience to the Graham Taylors car crash. A flat back four in a straight line seemingly afraid to have possession of the ball. Two deep midfielders stood next to each other with a phobia of the opposition box. Two wingers ineffectively hugging touchlines but stationed wide at all times to supply a steady trickle of miscued crosses in the vicinity of two strikers woefully isolated by the restrictions imposed on the rest. It was not a good look.
There were too many long balls; the passing wasn’t quick enough, accurate enough, incisive enough or good enough. The formation was too rigid, options too few, ideas too predictable and thus chances too scarce. Any signs of the subtle and intelligent inter-play and inter-changing that hallmarks today’s best club and international sides could not be traced. Neither could any sense of progress.
Most worrying of all was Capello’s myopic view of the whole thing. It was patently obvious, if not before the game then certainly after the opening exchanges, that the Montenegrins had come for a point, and would display very limited attacking intent. Nevertheless a back four remained in place throughout, with the only substitutions being one big target man for another, and the replacement of one flying but infuriating winger for another. Mystifyingly Jack Wilshere remained on the bench throughout. Joe Cole didn’t even make the bench.
In two and a half years very little has changed and it would be difficult to pinpoint any significant strides forward. For a supposedly world class coach, Capello has not got his team playing any better than they were previously, his tactics and tactical decisions are questionable, squad selection debateable, and impact derisory.
The final nail, should I need to nail the lid any more down in my opinion, is what the man has done to his men. Once described as a golden generation - now more an egg-yolk yellow - we still undoubtedly have a pool of world class footballers in our ranks. Most sides in the world either club or country would welcome a Ferdinand, a Terry, a Cole, a Lampard, a Gerrard or a Rooney into their eleven. Yet how many have played to their potential? How many have improved individually or collectively? How many of them have flourished under Capello’s tutelage? Not one.
The £6 million bucks stop with you Fabio.
Similar to Sven, Capello cannot be blamed for the sums the FA put into his offshore account. Similarly to Sven, he can be blamed for questions being raised as to why we are paying him such an amount.
Prior to the World Cup a table emerged showing the figures earned by the various competing coaches in the tournament. It threw up some interesting reading. In top spot - by a distance - was our man Fab, who at the time of being offered the England job had been unemployed for over a year after being sacked and sitting on a lucrative pay-off from Real Madrid.
In second spot, on less than half of Capello, is none other than Marcelo Lippi, currently governing Capello’s motherland, Italy. Lippi took over the Azzurri in 2008, and the sceptic in you may suggest that had our ingenious FA not dived in and offered Capello such an inflated wage to land us the World Cup, he would have been jostling with Lippi to take over from Roberto Donadoni, albeit earning a fraction on life at Soho Square. The numeric’s and how they come to be, only add ire when you digest Tuesday night’s insipid performance over Montenegro.
Now, the World Cup has been and gone and for all of the various failings from all involved, Capello is still at the helm. If we are to move forward, we need a fresh start, a clean sheet - which is just as well given there was little evidence of clean sheets to be found anywhere in Bloemfontein.
The new-ish era got off in good enough fashion with seven goals notched against Bulgaria and Switzerland, yet against a side ranked below Gabon and Burkina Faso, the bland, basic and primitive way England went about dealing with Montenegro meant it was hard not to look back into the black.
32 months and 32 games since he first took charge of the Three Lions, what improvements could we see for a nigh on £15m investment? (not forgetting the money spent on his battalion of hand picked backroom staff and assistants; scouts, coaches, physicians, dieticians, advisors, agents, travel costs, property rental, medical care, insurance premiums and expenses) Not much.
Bar winning the World Cup – better make that the European Championships now – the only other way the FA can justify the money lavished on the Capello project is if there were tangible signs of progress and development under what they triumphantly declared a ‘world class coach’ upon his arrival.
Watching the Montenegro game did not strike me as progress, but instead gave me a harrowing de ja vu experience to the Graham Taylors car crash. A flat back four in a straight line seemingly afraid to have possession of the ball. Two deep midfielders stood next to each other with a phobia of the opposition box. Two wingers ineffectively hugging touchlines but stationed wide at all times to supply a steady trickle of miscued crosses in the vicinity of two strikers woefully isolated by the restrictions imposed on the rest. It was not a good look.
There were too many long balls; the passing wasn’t quick enough, accurate enough, incisive enough or good enough. The formation was too rigid, options too few, ideas too predictable and thus chances too scarce. Any signs of the subtle and intelligent inter-play and inter-changing that hallmarks today’s best club and international sides could not be traced. Neither could any sense of progress.
Most worrying of all was Capello’s myopic view of the whole thing. It was patently obvious, if not before the game then certainly after the opening exchanges, that the Montenegrins had come for a point, and would display very limited attacking intent. Nevertheless a back four remained in place throughout, with the only substitutions being one big target man for another, and the replacement of one flying but infuriating winger for another. Mystifyingly Jack Wilshere remained on the bench throughout. Joe Cole didn’t even make the bench.
In two and a half years very little has changed and it would be difficult to pinpoint any significant strides forward. For a supposedly world class coach, Capello has not got his team playing any better than they were previously, his tactics and tactical decisions are questionable, squad selection debateable, and impact derisory.
The final nail, should I need to nail the lid any more down in my opinion, is what the man has done to his men. Once described as a golden generation - now more an egg-yolk yellow - we still undoubtedly have a pool of world class footballers in our ranks. Most sides in the world either club or country would welcome a Ferdinand, a Terry, a Cole, a Lampard, a Gerrard or a Rooney into their eleven. Yet how many have played to their potential? How many have improved individually or collectively? How many of them have flourished under Capello’s tutelage? Not one.
The £6 million bucks stop with you Fabio.
Monday, 11 October 2010
Time to change this unqualified mess
The reputation of international football is in arguably its deepest trough thanks to the appalling World Cup we’ve just had to endure. With so much football for the consumer, a crowded schedule for the competitors and a waning interest away from the club game, John Baines has a look at whether it’s time to reshape the qualifying process.
Let’s just have a quick recap of what has gone on over the first part of this International break. Before and during the weekend there were 23 fixtures across the continent and there’s another 22 still to come next week as one instalment of the long and drawn out hike to end up in Ukraine and Poland 2012. Of those 23 matches, there were few surprises. Northern Ireland earned a creditable draw with the Italians, Armenia surprised Slovakia with a 3-1 win, Estonia did Serbia 3-1 away from home and the Netherlands nudged past Moldova by a single goal. Otherwise, it was much as expected with not much to get excited about. After a couple of qualifiers so far, the usual suspects of Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Andorra, the Faroe Islands, San Marino, Malta and Lichtenstein all remain pointless. Pointless being the word.
There are 51 teams seeded and divided across nine groups, when in reality, only 22 can qualify. The inclusions of the likes of San Marino - who have so far shipped in 19 goals in three games - as well as the equally hapless Andorra does nothing for anybody bar add unnecessary fixtures to the calendar and prolong the campaign. Quite why UEFA feel the need to continuously torment these minnows by allowing them to get trampled on again is anyone’s guess. One of UEFA’s remits is to promote and develop football in Europe, and it’s difficult to see any benefit for these countries to be part of the qualifying process. For the good of all, change is needed.
A not uncomplimentary suggestion would to be to use the UEFA coefficients – the method of ranking and seeding teams dependant on past results – to withdraw the lowest eight ranked nations to form a ‘development’ group, whereby these teams play each other during one qualifying period, to enable the top two to be ‘promoted’ to the main qualifying stage for the next tournament. So, hypothetically, the eight worst teams – which at present are the seven listed above plus Luxembourg who have amassed one point but are still bottom – play amongst each other during qualifying for Euro 2012, for the chance to attempt to get to Brazil 2014. It is a simple theory, which needs imposing.
Far from being elitist to the top countries, it gives these lesser nations the opportunity to have an achievable goal rather than the futile process of trying to reach a tournament they have no hope of appearing at. The players and fans don’t have to once again make up the numbers, or have their soul sapped by being thumped the whole way through. Over the years they would be able to see tangible improvements, whereas also, those sides with the threat of ‘relegation’ hanging over them, would also need to up the ante.
The current system just is not sport. San Marino taking on Netherlands or Italy playing the Faroes – both 5-0 wins in September – is akin to a champion boxer pounding an unfit amateur. Nobody gets anything out of it, it doesn’t improve the game at all.
The top nations are benefited of course by playing fewer games. The logistics of the revised format would have to be worked on, but should mean a condensed qualifying period would allow extra time for the implementation of winter breaks if necessary, or, at the very least just a few less unneeded games for our top players.
Either way, there are few losers. And certainly fewer losers than there are now. It’s a simple call Mr Platini.
Let’s just have a quick recap of what has gone on over the first part of this International break. Before and during the weekend there were 23 fixtures across the continent and there’s another 22 still to come next week as one instalment of the long and drawn out hike to end up in Ukraine and Poland 2012. Of those 23 matches, there were few surprises. Northern Ireland earned a creditable draw with the Italians, Armenia surprised Slovakia with a 3-1 win, Estonia did Serbia 3-1 away from home and the Netherlands nudged past Moldova by a single goal. Otherwise, it was much as expected with not much to get excited about. After a couple of qualifiers so far, the usual suspects of Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Andorra, the Faroe Islands, San Marino, Malta and Lichtenstein all remain pointless. Pointless being the word.
There are 51 teams seeded and divided across nine groups, when in reality, only 22 can qualify. The inclusions of the likes of San Marino - who have so far shipped in 19 goals in three games - as well as the equally hapless Andorra does nothing for anybody bar add unnecessary fixtures to the calendar and prolong the campaign. Quite why UEFA feel the need to continuously torment these minnows by allowing them to get trampled on again is anyone’s guess. One of UEFA’s remits is to promote and develop football in Europe, and it’s difficult to see any benefit for these countries to be part of the qualifying process. For the good of all, change is needed.
A not uncomplimentary suggestion would to be to use the UEFA coefficients – the method of ranking and seeding teams dependant on past results – to withdraw the lowest eight ranked nations to form a ‘development’ group, whereby these teams play each other during one qualifying period, to enable the top two to be ‘promoted’ to the main qualifying stage for the next tournament. So, hypothetically, the eight worst teams – which at present are the seven listed above plus Luxembourg who have amassed one point but are still bottom – play amongst each other during qualifying for Euro 2012, for the chance to attempt to get to Brazil 2014. It is a simple theory, which needs imposing.
Far from being elitist to the top countries, it gives these lesser nations the opportunity to have an achievable goal rather than the futile process of trying to reach a tournament they have no hope of appearing at. The players and fans don’t have to once again make up the numbers, or have their soul sapped by being thumped the whole way through. Over the years they would be able to see tangible improvements, whereas also, those sides with the threat of ‘relegation’ hanging over them, would also need to up the ante.
The current system just is not sport. San Marino taking on Netherlands or Italy playing the Faroes – both 5-0 wins in September – is akin to a champion boxer pounding an unfit amateur. Nobody gets anything out of it, it doesn’t improve the game at all.
The top nations are benefited of course by playing fewer games. The logistics of the revised format would have to be worked on, but should mean a condensed qualifying period would allow extra time for the implementation of winter breaks if necessary, or, at the very least just a few less unneeded games for our top players.
Either way, there are few losers. And certainly fewer losers than there are now. It’s a simple call Mr Platini.
Friday, 8 October 2010
Reds in arms. The unlikely unity of United and Liverpool
It’s not often that Manchester United should be glad to be upstaged by Liverpool, but this year there should be a Christmas card on its way from Old Trafford to Anfield.
Apart from a ‘What’s wrong with United?’ spread in the Manchester Evening News, United have managed to slope off into the international break without having every nook and cranny of their ordinary start to the season dissected by all and sundry.
After another unconvincing display at Sunderland, the Sunday papers began to get their teeth into the Reds, but just as the roast was being digested and Songs of Praise was starting, Monday’s pre-planned post-mortem’s of Sir Alex Ferguson’s side had been scrapped, with daggers drawn towards Roy Hodgson’s shambolic outfit.
Defeat to Blackpool, which left the Anfield club lingering in the relegation zone, was a Sports Editors dream. The furious reaction of the Liverpool support, coupled with calls for Kenny Dalglish to be brought back as manager - all on top of the takeover saga – meant any stinging criticisms towards the Manchester reds were tucked away conveniently in the middle of the supplements. Out of sight, out of mind. Crisis? Where?
So it’s all groovy on the playing front at O.T. and if you look hard enough, below all the mentions of New England Sports Ventures, administration and High Court cases, you might dig out news about United’s most recent financial figures released today.
Triumphantly boomed out to the media was the fact that United had become the first English club to break through the £100m profit barrier. Operating turnover was £286m – dwarfing neighbours City’s £125m recorded last week – and details of increased income from new media, broadcasting, sponsorship and commercial deals were told.
However, whilst those numbers reinforced the immense and ever expanding earning potential of the club, the sums were the silver lining round the cloud. The overall balance sheet actually showed a net loss of a hefty £83m, with virtually all of that in relation to the methods of the Glazers initial acquisition.
Whereas Hicks and Gillett were siphoning off £27m per annum to service their interest payments, the Glazers effortlessly trumped that by paying back lenders approx £40m in club funds. There were more large one-off payments shelled out as part of the controversial bond issue which was launched in January, and almost £20m was lost due to a downfall in interest rates.
Whilst the clubs top brass will try to paint a rosy picture of the healthy situation United find themselves in given the gains, these figures will further enrage fans who believe that too much of United’s vast income is being taken out of the club, and used to pay off the huge debts accrued by the Glazers. More in depth details of the finances are to be published shortly, where the full extent of the Red Devil’s debt will be made clearer.
The issues affecting both clubs are very similar yet have hit Liverpool harder because of their reduced earning capacity of their great rivals. But, in essence, the ownership issues are the same, and money earned by both institutes on the back of decades of history, tradition and success, is being removed to essentially, in the long term, increase the wealth of a load of wealthy Americans. The whole existence of both clubs, whilst unlikely they will ever cease to exist, is being jeopardised as they are being used as a cash cow by these parasite, greed-driven, selfish and spiteful businessman.
It may be rich to prophesise about money being taken out of football while there is so much money in it, and, how much do Manchester United and Liverpool care about Stockport and Tranmere? But, what rights do people with no association or affiliation have to rob money so many people have contributed to the cause?
The value and prestige of both clubs has been created by an unthinkable amount of people through countless generations. The modern day articles may have been shaped by the dynasties of Ferguson and Busby, Shankly and Paisley; been glorified by the Ronaldo’s, Gerrard’s, Beckham’s, Fowler’s, Robson’s, Rush’s, Best’s and Keegan’s to name but a few. But the club’s have been made and immortalised by the unnamed and the unknown.
From the millions of fans to the kit-men and tea ladies. From the stewards and secretaries to the caretakers and cleaners. Those people whom down the years have put in an extra hours work, gone that extra mile, done that extra deed, spent an extra few quid. All that contributes to what a football club is about and all have contributed to what is now mercilessly being taken out.
That’s what these moneymen need to realise, but probably never will do.
Apart from a ‘What’s wrong with United?’ spread in the Manchester Evening News, United have managed to slope off into the international break without having every nook and cranny of their ordinary start to the season dissected by all and sundry.
After another unconvincing display at Sunderland, the Sunday papers began to get their teeth into the Reds, but just as the roast was being digested and Songs of Praise was starting, Monday’s pre-planned post-mortem’s of Sir Alex Ferguson’s side had been scrapped, with daggers drawn towards Roy Hodgson’s shambolic outfit.
Defeat to Blackpool, which left the Anfield club lingering in the relegation zone, was a Sports Editors dream. The furious reaction of the Liverpool support, coupled with calls for Kenny Dalglish to be brought back as manager - all on top of the takeover saga – meant any stinging criticisms towards the Manchester reds were tucked away conveniently in the middle of the supplements. Out of sight, out of mind. Crisis? Where?
So it’s all groovy on the playing front at O.T. and if you look hard enough, below all the mentions of New England Sports Ventures, administration and High Court cases, you might dig out news about United’s most recent financial figures released today.
Triumphantly boomed out to the media was the fact that United had become the first English club to break through the £100m profit barrier. Operating turnover was £286m – dwarfing neighbours City’s £125m recorded last week – and details of increased income from new media, broadcasting, sponsorship and commercial deals were told.
However, whilst those numbers reinforced the immense and ever expanding earning potential of the club, the sums were the silver lining round the cloud. The overall balance sheet actually showed a net loss of a hefty £83m, with virtually all of that in relation to the methods of the Glazers initial acquisition.
Whereas Hicks and Gillett were siphoning off £27m per annum to service their interest payments, the Glazers effortlessly trumped that by paying back lenders approx £40m in club funds. There were more large one-off payments shelled out as part of the controversial bond issue which was launched in January, and almost £20m was lost due to a downfall in interest rates.
Whilst the clubs top brass will try to paint a rosy picture of the healthy situation United find themselves in given the gains, these figures will further enrage fans who believe that too much of United’s vast income is being taken out of the club, and used to pay off the huge debts accrued by the Glazers. More in depth details of the finances are to be published shortly, where the full extent of the Red Devil’s debt will be made clearer.
The issues affecting both clubs are very similar yet have hit Liverpool harder because of their reduced earning capacity of their great rivals. But, in essence, the ownership issues are the same, and money earned by both institutes on the back of decades of history, tradition and success, is being removed to essentially, in the long term, increase the wealth of a load of wealthy Americans. The whole existence of both clubs, whilst unlikely they will ever cease to exist, is being jeopardised as they are being used as a cash cow by these parasite, greed-driven, selfish and spiteful businessman.
It may be rich to prophesise about money being taken out of football while there is so much money in it, and, how much do Manchester United and Liverpool care about Stockport and Tranmere? But, what rights do people with no association or affiliation have to rob money so many people have contributed to the cause?
The value and prestige of both clubs has been created by an unthinkable amount of people through countless generations. The modern day articles may have been shaped by the dynasties of Ferguson and Busby, Shankly and Paisley; been glorified by the Ronaldo’s, Gerrard’s, Beckham’s, Fowler’s, Robson’s, Rush’s, Best’s and Keegan’s to name but a few. But the club’s have been made and immortalised by the unnamed and the unknown.
From the millions of fans to the kit-men and tea ladies. From the stewards and secretaries to the caretakers and cleaners. Those people whom down the years have put in an extra hours work, gone that extra mile, done that extra deed, spent an extra few quid. All that contributes to what a football club is about and all have contributed to what is now mercilessly being taken out.
That’s what these moneymen need to realise, but probably never will do.
Thursday, 7 October 2010
A New England Sport Venture, or same old American misadventure?
Backed into a legal and financial corner, it seems only a matter of time before Tom Hicks and George Gillett’s disastrous tenure at Liverpool is finally brought to end, but replacing the American businessmen are a group of...well, American businessmen. So what’s new...
To the naked eye it’s difficult to tell. What New England Sports Ventures (NESV) do have going for them is they are not Tom Hicks or George Gillett. The current owners have burdened the club with over £200m of debt, with £27m a year coming out of the club coffers just to pay back the duo’s interest payments for the purchase. To the disgruntled Anfield faithful, just about anybody will do.
The bad news is that NESV are cut from a similar cloth to Hicks and Gillett, and for that matter, the equally unpopular Glazers down the M62. NESV are effectively a money making exercise. The conglomerate is made up of men that have gotten rich, and want to become richer. Mansour or Abramovich they are not, and, in the long run, NESV will aim for regular and healthy profit from the acquisition, with details of how they intend to do this so far conspicuous by their absence.
What NESV’s takeover will do is free the enormous debt Liverpool are currently shouldering. The group will raise £300m needed to acquire the club through the consortiums own shareholders, but the silence has been deafening as to the level of investment thereafter. It is highly unlikely that they will fund a lavish spending spree, whilst they have been non-committal on what to do about the proposed new stadium.
The by-line is they will evaluate all options once the takeover is complete. But this is not Field of Dreams. A larger capacity gives scope for bigger attendances, but since the sides fortunes have dipped over the past twelve months, crowds for Europa League and domestic cup matches have been well down, with spare seats easily spotted at some league games too.
There is a direct correlation between on-field success and financial rewards, and it is clear the squad needs considerable rebuilding before they can challenge for the economic gains of the Champions League places, let alone the elusive league title so craved. New signings can be expected to be prudent and cerebral rather than exuberant, but more indicative of the new boards intentions will be what happens if and when faxes land on the desk for the likes of Pepe Reina and Fernando Torres.
Clearly the people involved with NESV are astute businessmen and therefore you would think they will have noted the downfall of Messrs Hicks and Gillett. Stateside they have achieved relative on-field success with the Boston Red Socks Baseball team, though trying to convert that into an indicator of how things should improve at Anfield is nigh on impossible. It really is just as difficult to predict what will come of the proposed new regime. Liverpool fans should hope that the New England Sports Venture is not the same old American misadventure.
To the naked eye it’s difficult to tell. What New England Sports Ventures (NESV) do have going for them is they are not Tom Hicks or George Gillett. The current owners have burdened the club with over £200m of debt, with £27m a year coming out of the club coffers just to pay back the duo’s interest payments for the purchase. To the disgruntled Anfield faithful, just about anybody will do.
The bad news is that NESV are cut from a similar cloth to Hicks and Gillett, and for that matter, the equally unpopular Glazers down the M62. NESV are effectively a money making exercise. The conglomerate is made up of men that have gotten rich, and want to become richer. Mansour or Abramovich they are not, and, in the long run, NESV will aim for regular and healthy profit from the acquisition, with details of how they intend to do this so far conspicuous by their absence.
What NESV’s takeover will do is free the enormous debt Liverpool are currently shouldering. The group will raise £300m needed to acquire the club through the consortiums own shareholders, but the silence has been deafening as to the level of investment thereafter. It is highly unlikely that they will fund a lavish spending spree, whilst they have been non-committal on what to do about the proposed new stadium.
The by-line is they will evaluate all options once the takeover is complete. But this is not Field of Dreams. A larger capacity gives scope for bigger attendances, but since the sides fortunes have dipped over the past twelve months, crowds for Europa League and domestic cup matches have been well down, with spare seats easily spotted at some league games too.
There is a direct correlation between on-field success and financial rewards, and it is clear the squad needs considerable rebuilding before they can challenge for the economic gains of the Champions League places, let alone the elusive league title so craved. New signings can be expected to be prudent and cerebral rather than exuberant, but more indicative of the new boards intentions will be what happens if and when faxes land on the desk for the likes of Pepe Reina and Fernando Torres.
Clearly the people involved with NESV are astute businessmen and therefore you would think they will have noted the downfall of Messrs Hicks and Gillett. Stateside they have achieved relative on-field success with the Boston Red Socks Baseball team, though trying to convert that into an indicator of how things should improve at Anfield is nigh on impossible. It really is just as difficult to predict what will come of the proposed new regime. Liverpool fans should hope that the New England Sports Venture is not the same old American misadventure.
Kop cries for King Kenny
So the Kop want King Kenny back do they?
The early stages of Roy Hodgson’s tenure have been extremely underwhelming, but there are more than a few mitigating factors. The on-going ownership saga can be nothing other than a distraction for all concerned and he’s been forced to downgrade from Argentina’s skipper to a Juventus bit-part in a crucial area of the field. True, results and performances could and should have been better, yet at the time Hodgson was the logical appointment and moving forward he remains a vastly experienced and astute manager to improve fortunes, given the circumstances.
Sunday’s embarrassing defeat to Blackpool was greeted by a cacophony of boos from the usually understanding Anfield crowd and there were audible chants for the reinstatement of Kenny Dalglish back into the managerial hot seat. I for one, cannot see the logic in their wishes.
Dalglish’s reappointment appears one more of sentiment than sense. When he initially took over the reins from Joe Fagan in 1985, the club had finished second in the league and appeared in that ill-fated European Cup final. The tradition of the bootroom was intrinsic to the club’s success, and Dalglish merely had to take over the baton and carry on the continuity of a proven formula which had worked for the best part of twenty years. In five full seasons, Dalglish hoisted an enviable three league titles and two FA Cups, but coming into the current regime is worlds apart from when the Scot first came into the post.
As Steve McMahon once put it, “all we did in training was play 5-a-side.” That is a far cry from the sports science driven scene of physicians and pro-zone, who have long since replaced the Subbuteo board kept in a dusty cupboard. The collection of British Isles born and bred players that made up the majority of Dalglish’s squad back then have been replaced by a gathering of nationalities from all parts, many of whom may not appreciate the standing and status of a man largely revered on these shores but not necessarily further afield, and certainly not by a gathering of American money-men, whoever they end up being.
Prior to his short and indifferent spells with Newcastle and Celtic, Dalglish’s last significant contribution was the 1995 title with Blackburn. It was an admirable achievement even given Jack Walker’s millions, but that was 15 years ago, and his modus operandi of a rigid 4-4-2, two wingers supplying two frontmen has been obsolete for some time. This is a different game altogether, and one which Dalglish might not be compatible with.
The list of managerial appointments made to appease the natives does not make good reading. Of the most recent examples, Howard Kendall returned to almost take Everton down, Kevin Keegan found there was no way to beat the Boardroom, and the less said about his replacement - Alan Shearer - the better.
Kenny Dalglish will forever be held in the highest esteem by all at Liverpool FC as a great player, but moreover as a great patron of this establishment. Bringing him back may repair the bond between the team and the terrace, but what really matters is how Liverpool fair on that pitch, and Dalglish is not the man for the job.
In today’s cynical footballing world of billionaire owners and baby Bentley’s, there is little scope for sentimental values, and that is why King Kenny should not be recoronated to his throne.
The early stages of Roy Hodgson’s tenure have been extremely underwhelming, but there are more than a few mitigating factors. The on-going ownership saga can be nothing other than a distraction for all concerned and he’s been forced to downgrade from Argentina’s skipper to a Juventus bit-part in a crucial area of the field. True, results and performances could and should have been better, yet at the time Hodgson was the logical appointment and moving forward he remains a vastly experienced and astute manager to improve fortunes, given the circumstances.
Sunday’s embarrassing defeat to Blackpool was greeted by a cacophony of boos from the usually understanding Anfield crowd and there were audible chants for the reinstatement of Kenny Dalglish back into the managerial hot seat. I for one, cannot see the logic in their wishes.
Dalglish’s reappointment appears one more of sentiment than sense. When he initially took over the reins from Joe Fagan in 1985, the club had finished second in the league and appeared in that ill-fated European Cup final. The tradition of the bootroom was intrinsic to the club’s success, and Dalglish merely had to take over the baton and carry on the continuity of a proven formula which had worked for the best part of twenty years. In five full seasons, Dalglish hoisted an enviable three league titles and two FA Cups, but coming into the current regime is worlds apart from when the Scot first came into the post.
As Steve McMahon once put it, “all we did in training was play 5-a-side.” That is a far cry from the sports science driven scene of physicians and pro-zone, who have long since replaced the Subbuteo board kept in a dusty cupboard. The collection of British Isles born and bred players that made up the majority of Dalglish’s squad back then have been replaced by a gathering of nationalities from all parts, many of whom may not appreciate the standing and status of a man largely revered on these shores but not necessarily further afield, and certainly not by a gathering of American money-men, whoever they end up being.
Prior to his short and indifferent spells with Newcastle and Celtic, Dalglish’s last significant contribution was the 1995 title with Blackburn. It was an admirable achievement even given Jack Walker’s millions, but that was 15 years ago, and his modus operandi of a rigid 4-4-2, two wingers supplying two frontmen has been obsolete for some time. This is a different game altogether, and one which Dalglish might not be compatible with.
The list of managerial appointments made to appease the natives does not make good reading. Of the most recent examples, Howard Kendall returned to almost take Everton down, Kevin Keegan found there was no way to beat the Boardroom, and the less said about his replacement - Alan Shearer - the better.
Kenny Dalglish will forever be held in the highest esteem by all at Liverpool FC as a great player, but moreover as a great patron of this establishment. Bringing him back may repair the bond between the team and the terrace, but what really matters is how Liverpool fair on that pitch, and Dalglish is not the man for the job.
In today’s cynical footballing world of billionaire owners and baby Bentley’s, there is little scope for sentimental values, and that is why King Kenny should not be recoronated to his throne.
Tuesday, 5 October 2010
Manchester United Club Focus – Internationals give United a welcome break.
There are many Premier League managers, and you can certainly count Sir Alex Ferguson in that number, whom see international breaks as irksome and inconvenient. You lose half your squad for the best part of a fortnight and once they reconvene, you only have a couple of days to recuperate and prepare for the rigours of another domestic challenge.
Saturday’s listless draw at Sunderland saw the Scot make four changes from the side that won midweek in Valencia, and whilst on this occasion a change was not as good as a rest, perhaps now, a rest will be as good as a change.
Despite lurking in their almost customary position just off top spot at this stage of the season, there seems something quite un-United about how United have been going about things. Since the last time his players jetted off to represent their countries, Sir Alex’s men have registered just three draws and a win in the league, coupled with the goalless draw with Rangers and the smash and grab in Spain. More to the point, and of more concern, would be the level of performance in these games.
Encapsulated by the pale display at the Stadium of Light, the Reds have yet to hit anything approaching top gear, and whilst the reappearance of Rio Ferdinand has put the shackles back on the defence, further forward the fluency of football has been strangely subdued.
Ordinarily that would mean back to the training ground to write the wrongs as a communion, however, for once, would Sir Alex be glad to see the back of his playing staff?
Even in this era when club duties seem to take precedence over national ones, it may just do the players some good to focus their minds on other football, and away from the goldfish bowl of Old Trafford.
There will be no time to convalesce in subdued showings or over analyse any indiscretions. By the time they’ve returned it’ll be straight back to the day job with a visit from West Brom. Clean heads and a clean slate could provide the clarity for United to find much needed some form and finesse as the season moves into the business stages.
What it will also do, is provide a window for players to recuperate and rest. Wayne Rooney and Ryan Giggs should be on or about ready for the Baggies and Lord Lucan himself - Owen Hargreaves could even be in contention. Conveniently, the likes of Wes Brown, Paul Scholes, Michael Carrick, Michael Owen and Dimitar Berbatov will all get a breather before what is pretty much wall to wall football up until the New Year.
So, usually a distraction, this international break could end up being a blessing in disguise. The timing of these fixtures means United have managed to slope off from too much scrutiny, and returning ready and refreshed, a decent win against West Brom will grease the wheels of the red machine as they prepare to wrestle back the Premier League crown.
Saturday’s listless draw at Sunderland saw the Scot make four changes from the side that won midweek in Valencia, and whilst on this occasion a change was not as good as a rest, perhaps now, a rest will be as good as a change.
Despite lurking in their almost customary position just off top spot at this stage of the season, there seems something quite un-United about how United have been going about things. Since the last time his players jetted off to represent their countries, Sir Alex’s men have registered just three draws and a win in the league, coupled with the goalless draw with Rangers and the smash and grab in Spain. More to the point, and of more concern, would be the level of performance in these games.
Encapsulated by the pale display at the Stadium of Light, the Reds have yet to hit anything approaching top gear, and whilst the reappearance of Rio Ferdinand has put the shackles back on the defence, further forward the fluency of football has been strangely subdued.
Ordinarily that would mean back to the training ground to write the wrongs as a communion, however, for once, would Sir Alex be glad to see the back of his playing staff?
Even in this era when club duties seem to take precedence over national ones, it may just do the players some good to focus their minds on other football, and away from the goldfish bowl of Old Trafford.
There will be no time to convalesce in subdued showings or over analyse any indiscretions. By the time they’ve returned it’ll be straight back to the day job with a visit from West Brom. Clean heads and a clean slate could provide the clarity for United to find much needed some form and finesse as the season moves into the business stages.
What it will also do, is provide a window for players to recuperate and rest. Wayne Rooney and Ryan Giggs should be on or about ready for the Baggies and Lord Lucan himself - Owen Hargreaves could even be in contention. Conveniently, the likes of Wes Brown, Paul Scholes, Michael Carrick, Michael Owen and Dimitar Berbatov will all get a breather before what is pretty much wall to wall football up until the New Year.
So, usually a distraction, this international break could end up being a blessing in disguise. The timing of these fixtures means United have managed to slope off from too much scrutiny, and returning ready and refreshed, a decent win against West Brom will grease the wheels of the red machine as they prepare to wrestle back the Premier League crown.
Manchester United Club Focus - Middle of the road midfield causing problems.
More points dropped, more ground lost. But whilst at such an early stage of the season the numbers are academic, the performances are not.
Saturday’s goalless draw at Sunderland was another very subdued offering from the Reds who have now drawn all four away league games this season. Again, rather than figures, more of a concern would be the notion that they have been sufficiently worked over by each of Fulham, Everton, Bolton and Sunderland. Chelsea have had a bit of luck with the fixtures, but it’s fair to say United could have gone about this quartet with a bit more decorum.
There’s been issues at either end with the defence too leaky at times and the forwards hitting a couple of blanks, but the mitigating factors behind these lies somewhere in the middle, or to be more specific, the weakest midfield United have had since Kleberson, Quinton Fortune and Eric Djemba-Djemba were strutting their stuff.
As demonstrated at the Stadium of Light, despite the surprise starting X1, the midfield were completely out manoeuvred by Sunderland’s who, although played very well on the day, are essentially mid-table material. Too often United are losing the midfield battle in games and this manifests itself elsewhere.
Last season United won only three of the ten games they played following Champions League duties, and it was another weary after show on Wearside. Steve Bruce’s maulers hustled hard from the off, but even after the early chasings, United could never exert themselves on the game. They lacked the legs of Sunderland, but even in possession there was too much lethargy to trouble the enthusiastic hosts.
If Ferdinand and Vidic can get games together then things will shore up at the back, and the forwards have sufficient danger between them to score the goals. Yet the key component is the missing middle part and unless that is rectified, United will fall short when it matters once again.
Amongst them there is undoubtedly the necessary ability, experience and depth, but what it does lack is, to keep it topical, some x-factor. Previous regimes had Robson and Keane as inspirers, and inspiration in the likes of a Giggs, Scholes, Beckham or Ronaldo. There isn’t much in the current crop that has the same punch and there is no obvious candidate to hold the torch throughout the season. Darren Fletcher’s reliable but restricted, Scholes and Giggs can’t do it every week, Michael Carrick doesn’t change games, who knows when Owen Hargreaves will reappear and in what shape, Darron Gibson’s done well but is back-up , Anderson needs games and to regain focus and Nani, a real asset when he’s on it, needs to produce more. Park...life?
Individually and collectively, United must recapture the art of seizing hold and commanding games. It is only then will they wrestle enough points from losses and draws will they be able to regain lost titles.
On the face of history, it may be premature to be writing the obituary now, in seasons of yore United have started just as underwhelmingly, yet, invariably evolve into a title winning unit. So, can the class of 2010 pass the season long tests their predecessors so often did with top marks? Must do better.
Saturday’s goalless draw at Sunderland was another very subdued offering from the Reds who have now drawn all four away league games this season. Again, rather than figures, more of a concern would be the notion that they have been sufficiently worked over by each of Fulham, Everton, Bolton and Sunderland. Chelsea have had a bit of luck with the fixtures, but it’s fair to say United could have gone about this quartet with a bit more decorum.
There’s been issues at either end with the defence too leaky at times and the forwards hitting a couple of blanks, but the mitigating factors behind these lies somewhere in the middle, or to be more specific, the weakest midfield United have had since Kleberson, Quinton Fortune and Eric Djemba-Djemba were strutting their stuff.
As demonstrated at the Stadium of Light, despite the surprise starting X1, the midfield were completely out manoeuvred by Sunderland’s who, although played very well on the day, are essentially mid-table material. Too often United are losing the midfield battle in games and this manifests itself elsewhere.
Last season United won only three of the ten games they played following Champions League duties, and it was another weary after show on Wearside. Steve Bruce’s maulers hustled hard from the off, but even after the early chasings, United could never exert themselves on the game. They lacked the legs of Sunderland, but even in possession there was too much lethargy to trouble the enthusiastic hosts.
If Ferdinand and Vidic can get games together then things will shore up at the back, and the forwards have sufficient danger between them to score the goals. Yet the key component is the missing middle part and unless that is rectified, United will fall short when it matters once again.
Amongst them there is undoubtedly the necessary ability, experience and depth, but what it does lack is, to keep it topical, some x-factor. Previous regimes had Robson and Keane as inspirers, and inspiration in the likes of a Giggs, Scholes, Beckham or Ronaldo. There isn’t much in the current crop that has the same punch and there is no obvious candidate to hold the torch throughout the season. Darren Fletcher’s reliable but restricted, Scholes and Giggs can’t do it every week, Michael Carrick doesn’t change games, who knows when Owen Hargreaves will reappear and in what shape, Darron Gibson’s done well but is back-up , Anderson needs games and to regain focus and Nani, a real asset when he’s on it, needs to produce more. Park...life?
Individually and collectively, United must recapture the art of seizing hold and commanding games. It is only then will they wrestle enough points from losses and draws will they be able to regain lost titles.
On the face of history, it may be premature to be writing the obituary now, in seasons of yore United have started just as underwhelmingly, yet, invariably evolve into a title winning unit. So, can the class of 2010 pass the season long tests their predecessors so often did with top marks? Must do better.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)