Who said tennis was a predictable sport...? I think that idiot may have been me. In my French Open post, I made a big point about how tennis now is all about the four big names, with no-one else likely to get a look-in for the foreseeable future. How wrong I was. Today's events have left a gaping hole in the bottom half of the male draw, a hole that a relatively inexperienced player will inevitably fill. This gives an unbelievable chance to someone, and arguably, the net winner out of today is Andy Murray, who analysts now start to see as having a fairly straight-forward run to the final. If he doesn't win it this year, you fear for his chances against a full pack.
I thought yesterday's events were dramatic, with the world number 5, Rafael Nadal, fresh off the back of his French Open success, struggle with an injury and depart to the hands of the relatively unknown, world-ranked 135, Steve Darcis. In my Andy Murray and Wimbledon opening post, I made a brief suggestion of how I expected the two weeks to pan out. I predicted that Nadal would make a slow start. I did not expect that to be backwards! However, given his clear agony throughout, particularly in the latter stages, it was clear to see that he was not at his best, and as a result, my prediction can be vindicated slightly (a thinly veiled excuse, I'm sure you'll agree!) I fully expected this to be the major shock of the two weeks, especially when we consider the Lukas Rosol incident of 12 months ago.
However, today's events have utterly eclipsed the drama of yesterday afternoon. Even before play had started today, the number of drop-outs began to climb. First, the huge John Isner retired injured from his match, having only played 2 games. Then, Rafael Nadal's conqueror, Darcis, had to pull out, citing the decision as 'the hardest of my career'. The first massive name fell just before play started on the show courts, with womens' number 2 Victoria Azarenka withdrawing at quarter to 1. After a horrendous-looking fall on the opening day, this decision came as little surprise. Her departure added further controversy, as she publicly stated that the courts were too slippery, bordering on dangerous. Given the amount of injuries we have witnessed over the past three days, her claims are certainly substantiated. However, I have yet to see a year where the ground staff do not perform their tasks effectively, and, as a result, we must trust the All England Club to rectify any problems with the court surfaces. Also, the fact that by this time in most years it has rained at least once should mean that the courts are comparatively drier to previous years. At the very least, players should be able to cope with the slippery and wet surfaces, having tolerated them every year for as long as the tournament has been in existence.
If we thought the early withdrawals would be the main talking point of the day, the high profile exits started. 2002 champion Lleyton Hewitt was the first to go, being defeated in four sets by the flamboyant Dustin Brown. An unconventional style and breath-taking execution of shots led the 27 year old German to his biggest win to date, netting him a cool £63,000 in the process. Womens' 13th seed Ana Ivanovic was next, with 19-year-old junior champion Eugenie Bouchard dumping the former world number 1 out. The shock results in the womens' draw continued, with number 9 seed Caroline Wozniacki beaten by unknown Czech Petra Cevkovska, before what was the shock of the day, with heavily fancied Maria Sharapova eliminated at the hands of world number 131 Larcha De Brito. Further withdrawals of Queens' finalist Marin Cilic and world number 6 Jo-Wilfried Tsonga due to injury took the day's total to 7 walkovers/withdrawals, a record for the tournament. The overall total currently stands at 10, and with injuries happening wherever you look in SW19, the number threatens to climb even higher by the end of the week.
All of this drama will have inevitably led to many British fans being fearful for the survival of Andy Murray. They needn't have worried, with the Scot coming through his match against Yen Hsun-Lu in straight sets. If I were a conspiracy theorist, I would be very suspicious about the possibility that Ivan Lendl had tampered with the water supply for Murray's competitors, or had over-watered the courts on which his potential opponents will play! These suspicions are only strengthened by this evening's events. Murray's main competitor in the bottom half of the draw, Roger Federer, played on Centre Court against the under-rated and dangerous serve-and-volleyer Sergei Stahovsky. Having won the opening set in a tense tie break, the match was levelled in another tie break. With the 17 Grand Slam winner struggling to adapt to Stahovsky's style of play, he lost the third 7-5, putting his run of 36 consecutive quarter-finals in severe danger. The reigning Wimbledon champion started the final set badly too, going a break down at 3-1. A Federer fightback ensued, with the Swiss breaking back to force a third tie break. After another nervy and tight encounter, the former world number 1 saved one match point with a stunning passing shot. However, he succumbed to the pressure of a second, slicing a shot wide to hand Stahovsky an incredible win, and put the cherry on top of the day of shocks.
Today's events have decimated both the men's and women's draw, leaving the door wide open for less prominent players to reach the latter stages. It also pours doubt on my earlier assertion that tennis is becoming predictable, as anyone who made a bet on today's results will have made a touch more than a small fortune! However, today's results will be forgotten to a certain extent if we end with a Murray v Djokovic final, and a Serena Williams womens' victory, as the finals will still look predictable. So long may the shocks continue, and I truly hope we have a Goran Ivanisevic winner this time around, that will last for another generation.
Analysis of sporting events, talking points and controversies.
Wednesday 26 June 2013
Monday 24 June 2013
Wimbledon Begins: English Expectation on Scottish Shoulders
The highlight of every British tennis fan's summer begins today, with SW19 playing host to the iconic grass court tournament. Get prepared to see shots of perfectly lined grass, strawberries and cream (whenever it happens not to be raining) and explanations of how the roof on Centre Court closes (when it inevitably does rain). As with every year, the British fans search in desperation for a potential winner from this small island. And with every year in recent memory, we have been disappointed. However, there are mutterings that perhaps this could be the year when the duck could be broken, when a British player could lift the iconic trophy.
I am, of course, referring to Andy Murray. After a superb second half of last season, where he won the gold medal at the Olympics, and then Britain's first Grand Slam for 65 years at the US Open, the world number 2 will fancy his chances at his home event. This is also reinforced by his devastating defeat in the Wimbledon final last campaign, where all will remember his emotional commiseration speech. However, I personally, despite being a tennis fan from Britain, will not be supporting Andy Murray in the next two weeks any more than any other player. This blog post will explain why I feel this way, and what we should expect to see over the next two weeks.
Getting straight to the crux of my argument regarding Andy Murray, I often feel as though the vast majority of fans are being hypocrites (and in recent months, glory supporters) when they blindly follow the world number 2 in Grand Slams. One of my early memories of Andy Murray is an interview conducted with him as a youngster, asking him about his future. One of the questions posed to him was: 'Would you consider yourself British?'. His answer: 'Scottish first, and British second'. Whilst I have nothing against the Scots, or any other nationality for that matter, the fact remains that Wimbledon is a tennis tournament held in England, a sport (and a country) that the Scots seemingly have little interest in. Therefore, English candidates should be the only ones that should receive whole-hearted backing from the home support. However, here is where we see aspects of glory supporting. After the decline of Tim Henman, it was only the Dunblane born youngster that showed any promise of winning tournaments. And so Britain followed him, dubbing him with the rather unfair tag of 'if he wins he's British, if he loses he's Scottish'. This unfairness is just one of a number of reasons why I will not be giving him special treatment.
For those of you who are now thinking 'but he's British', I have three further arguments for you. 1) In no other sport do we apply the same principle. For example, we do not support all the home nations in the 6 Nations rugby or World Cup football (in fact we often directly oppose them). 2) Scotland may not be 'British' for much longer, with a referendum on the union scheduled to take place next year. And if the vote is 'yes' to leave, will fans abandon Murray then for being 'not British'? (I doubt it due to his success-another piece of evidence of glory supporting). And 3) The idea that he identifies with Britain as a union is challenged somewhat by his complete disdain for the Davis Cup in recent years, which has seen the national side slip down the rankings dramatically. If he really believed himself to be British, rather than the Scottish nationality he claims to put first, he would participate in these events. I must reiterate, Murray is doing nothing wrong by identifying himself as Scottish. All I intend by this post is to challenge the assertion that English fans should follow him blindly.
Another reason I will be remaining neutral is to do with the commentary on Murray's matches. Again, not the fault of the player himself, as he can do little to affect the commentary of the BBC, but I still find it irritating. I have found a remarkable bias in play in all matches involving Murray, where commentators tend to exaggerate how well the Scot is playing, and often keeping him in matches long after he has effectively lost them. Often they just flat-out lie. Lines like 'Murray has dominated the first set, and been unfortunate on the important points' used to be commonplace when playing Federer, Nadal and Djokovic, and losing the set comprehensively. It is this bias that, perhaps unfairly, has led me to become more and more annoyed at the coverage, often watching on mute, and has caused me to become a tennis neutral.
Finally, having explained that I have become a neutral, mainly due to things beyond Murray's control, I therefore follow those people whose game I find most entertaining, and whose personality is most likeable. Whilst Andy can certainly claim to have as entertaining a game as many of the players around him, he lacks massively on the second half of the sentence. This is sort of confirmed by the fact that the BBC felt the need to run a biographical piece with the world number 2 this week, attempting to dispel the 'dour Scot' look that he so often carries. I am sure that, away from the court, he is exactly the same as any other normal person, with a good sense of humour (i.e. normal human emotions), making the documentary, in my opinion, fairly irrelevant. On court, he comes across as moany, grumpy and occasionally petulant, in complete contrast to the likes of Federer and Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, who are both highly likeable figures. Whilst Murray's on-court demenour has improved in recent years, if I were to support anyone this campaign at SW19, it would be someone who had a nice on and off court personality.
As for what we can expect over the next two weeks, I shall sum it up briefly: A Federer early masterclass, slow starts from Nadal and Djokovic, perhaps a couple of shocks along the way, pretty much a pre-determined women's final, with Serena and Sharapova looking strong, and hopefully, the nicest people win, and not necessarily the fans' hypocritical choice.
I am, of course, referring to Andy Murray. After a superb second half of last season, where he won the gold medal at the Olympics, and then Britain's first Grand Slam for 65 years at the US Open, the world number 2 will fancy his chances at his home event. This is also reinforced by his devastating defeat in the Wimbledon final last campaign, where all will remember his emotional commiseration speech. However, I personally, despite being a tennis fan from Britain, will not be supporting Andy Murray in the next two weeks any more than any other player. This blog post will explain why I feel this way, and what we should expect to see over the next two weeks.
Getting straight to the crux of my argument regarding Andy Murray, I often feel as though the vast majority of fans are being hypocrites (and in recent months, glory supporters) when they blindly follow the world number 2 in Grand Slams. One of my early memories of Andy Murray is an interview conducted with him as a youngster, asking him about his future. One of the questions posed to him was: 'Would you consider yourself British?'. His answer: 'Scottish first, and British second'. Whilst I have nothing against the Scots, or any other nationality for that matter, the fact remains that Wimbledon is a tennis tournament held in England, a sport (and a country) that the Scots seemingly have little interest in. Therefore, English candidates should be the only ones that should receive whole-hearted backing from the home support. However, here is where we see aspects of glory supporting. After the decline of Tim Henman, it was only the Dunblane born youngster that showed any promise of winning tournaments. And so Britain followed him, dubbing him with the rather unfair tag of 'if he wins he's British, if he loses he's Scottish'. This unfairness is just one of a number of reasons why I will not be giving him special treatment.
For those of you who are now thinking 'but he's British', I have three further arguments for you. 1) In no other sport do we apply the same principle. For example, we do not support all the home nations in the 6 Nations rugby or World Cup football (in fact we often directly oppose them). 2) Scotland may not be 'British' for much longer, with a referendum on the union scheduled to take place next year. And if the vote is 'yes' to leave, will fans abandon Murray then for being 'not British'? (I doubt it due to his success-another piece of evidence of glory supporting). And 3) The idea that he identifies with Britain as a union is challenged somewhat by his complete disdain for the Davis Cup in recent years, which has seen the national side slip down the rankings dramatically. If he really believed himself to be British, rather than the Scottish nationality he claims to put first, he would participate in these events. I must reiterate, Murray is doing nothing wrong by identifying himself as Scottish. All I intend by this post is to challenge the assertion that English fans should follow him blindly.
Another reason I will be remaining neutral is to do with the commentary on Murray's matches. Again, not the fault of the player himself, as he can do little to affect the commentary of the BBC, but I still find it irritating. I have found a remarkable bias in play in all matches involving Murray, where commentators tend to exaggerate how well the Scot is playing, and often keeping him in matches long after he has effectively lost them. Often they just flat-out lie. Lines like 'Murray has dominated the first set, and been unfortunate on the important points' used to be commonplace when playing Federer, Nadal and Djokovic, and losing the set comprehensively. It is this bias that, perhaps unfairly, has led me to become more and more annoyed at the coverage, often watching on mute, and has caused me to become a tennis neutral.
Finally, having explained that I have become a neutral, mainly due to things beyond Murray's control, I therefore follow those people whose game I find most entertaining, and whose personality is most likeable. Whilst Andy can certainly claim to have as entertaining a game as many of the players around him, he lacks massively on the second half of the sentence. This is sort of confirmed by the fact that the BBC felt the need to run a biographical piece with the world number 2 this week, attempting to dispel the 'dour Scot' look that he so often carries. I am sure that, away from the court, he is exactly the same as any other normal person, with a good sense of humour (i.e. normal human emotions), making the documentary, in my opinion, fairly irrelevant. On court, he comes across as moany, grumpy and occasionally petulant, in complete contrast to the likes of Federer and Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, who are both highly likeable figures. Whilst Murray's on-court demenour has improved in recent years, if I were to support anyone this campaign at SW19, it would be someone who had a nice on and off court personality.
As for what we can expect over the next two weeks, I shall sum it up briefly: A Federer early masterclass, slow starts from Nadal and Djokovic, perhaps a couple of shocks along the way, pretty much a pre-determined women's final, with Serena and Sharapova looking strong, and hopefully, the nicest people win, and not necessarily the fans' hypocritical choice.
Friday 21 June 2013
Jumping Through The Loophole: Mercedes Escape With A Reprimand
In a story that has been slowly unfolding over the last few weeks and months, Mercedes and Pirelli had their fates decided in the tribunal today over the alleged 'corruption' of the sport. Unlike recent F1 tribunal hearings, which have resulted in heavy penalties for alleged offences, both the German manufacturer and Pirelli have been let off with minimal penalties, and what the FIA have called a 'severe reprimand'. If we look at precedent in tribunals, McLaren Mercedes were fined a record $100 million, and excluded from the 2007 Constructors Championship for their part in the infamous 'Spygate'. So why was the punishment for Mercedes and Pirelli so correspondingly small? This post will attempt to investigate the reasoning behind this decision, along with discussing whether process really needed to be that big of a deal.
It is first worth reviewing the facts of the controversy. The problems came to light when Pirelli decided to use one of their allowed test sessions, immediately after the criticism of the wear of their tyres in the Spanish Grand Prix. The rules stipulate that the tyre manufacturers are allowed to participate in tyre test sessions. However, the rules also state that current cars cannot be used for the test, for fear of the tests giving the team involved an unfair advantage over the rest of the field. Pirelli decided to use Mercedes, and Mercedes chose to use the current car, which is currently driven by Nico Rosberg and Lewis Hamilton. This put them in direct contravension with the current FIA legislation, a fact that was regularly broadcast by Mercedes' rivals, mostly Red Bull and Ferrari. Eventually, the German team were charged with bringing the sport into disrepute, along with several other charges, which led, eventually, to the tribunal this week. After much talk in the press, the drawn out controversy finally reached its conclusion today, with Mercedes handed the reprimand, along with a ban on their young driver testing. A real punishment to the Germans, I think you'll agree!
However, before we start crying that it is inherent unfair treatment against British teams, it is worth attempting to explain why the punishment from the FIA was particularly lenient, after years of being especially strict. Firstly, the idea that the punishment doesn't fit the crime. Whilst it is true that the McLaren 'spygate' affair was considerably more serious than a simple testing misdemenour, and as a result, it would be fair to expect that the penalty would be more serious. However, the disparity in punishment is rather startling, especially when you consider the bare facts. In McLaren's case, it was Alex Stepney, their chief designer that was accused of the corruption, not the team as a whole. Nor was it assumed that Ron Dennis, then head of McLaren, had anything to do with the scandal. Therefore, an exclusion and a massive fine seems a touch extortionate considering it was a single 'rogue agent'. Enough for a dismissal and minor penalties for the advantage gained, perhaps?
Another explanation for today's decision could be that the tribunal found that 'neither Pirelli or Mercedes acted in bad faith'. It would be incredibly difficult to argue that Stepney did not act in 'bad faith' if you like, as he was certainly aware of what he was doing. However, once again, there seems to be problems with this argument. The rules are not exactly ambiguous on the test problem. It clearly states that the current car cannot be used, a rule that seems fairly common sense if you ask me. And yet, both Pirelli, and especially, Mercedes, chose not to question the running of the current car on those grounds. To me, that seems suspicious at best, and at worst, they could certainly be accused of acting in 'bad faith'. I am not advocating a similarly sized penalty to the McLaren fiasco of 2007, but I am merely raising the idea that perhaps the motives were not so different, and that Mercedes can count themselves highly fortunate to have escaped without a harsher sentence.
Regardless of the penalty, I think everyone can agree that this controversy has gone on far too long. If I look back to my Monaco Grand Prix post, I seem to remember mentioning the controversy hitting the news then. That was four weeks ago. Surely it cannot have taken that amount of time to work out what really happened at that test, as people up and down the paddock were quoting 'facts' to the camera even then. How true those facts were is debatable, but I refuse to believe that anything more than a brief examination of the data of the test would have given the FIA all they needed to know to conduct a fair and reasonable hearing. A week at most. The last real controversy regarding tyres was 'Indygate' back in 2005, where only 6 cars took to the start of the US Grand Prix after Michelin tyre failures in practice and qualifying. Despite a battering in the press, that debacle was sorted in 7 days. To suggest that, based on the ruling, a simple 'misunderstanding', required 4 weeks to decide on is, in my view, simply ridiculous.
At least I can be thankful that this farce is now over, and we can get back to what really matters in motorsport: the racing. We have had enough bureaucratic procrastination to last us for the rest of the year. Whether it was fair or not is worth debate, but too much risks another descent into inter-team squabbling. I truly hope that this is the end of the matter, and that the FIA remember the lenient ruling when sentencing its next accused.
It is first worth reviewing the facts of the controversy. The problems came to light when Pirelli decided to use one of their allowed test sessions, immediately after the criticism of the wear of their tyres in the Spanish Grand Prix. The rules stipulate that the tyre manufacturers are allowed to participate in tyre test sessions. However, the rules also state that current cars cannot be used for the test, for fear of the tests giving the team involved an unfair advantage over the rest of the field. Pirelli decided to use Mercedes, and Mercedes chose to use the current car, which is currently driven by Nico Rosberg and Lewis Hamilton. This put them in direct contravension with the current FIA legislation, a fact that was regularly broadcast by Mercedes' rivals, mostly Red Bull and Ferrari. Eventually, the German team were charged with bringing the sport into disrepute, along with several other charges, which led, eventually, to the tribunal this week. After much talk in the press, the drawn out controversy finally reached its conclusion today, with Mercedes handed the reprimand, along with a ban on their young driver testing. A real punishment to the Germans, I think you'll agree!
However, before we start crying that it is inherent unfair treatment against British teams, it is worth attempting to explain why the punishment from the FIA was particularly lenient, after years of being especially strict. Firstly, the idea that the punishment doesn't fit the crime. Whilst it is true that the McLaren 'spygate' affair was considerably more serious than a simple testing misdemenour, and as a result, it would be fair to expect that the penalty would be more serious. However, the disparity in punishment is rather startling, especially when you consider the bare facts. In McLaren's case, it was Alex Stepney, their chief designer that was accused of the corruption, not the team as a whole. Nor was it assumed that Ron Dennis, then head of McLaren, had anything to do with the scandal. Therefore, an exclusion and a massive fine seems a touch extortionate considering it was a single 'rogue agent'. Enough for a dismissal and minor penalties for the advantage gained, perhaps?
Another explanation for today's decision could be that the tribunal found that 'neither Pirelli or Mercedes acted in bad faith'. It would be incredibly difficult to argue that Stepney did not act in 'bad faith' if you like, as he was certainly aware of what he was doing. However, once again, there seems to be problems with this argument. The rules are not exactly ambiguous on the test problem. It clearly states that the current car cannot be used, a rule that seems fairly common sense if you ask me. And yet, both Pirelli, and especially, Mercedes, chose not to question the running of the current car on those grounds. To me, that seems suspicious at best, and at worst, they could certainly be accused of acting in 'bad faith'. I am not advocating a similarly sized penalty to the McLaren fiasco of 2007, but I am merely raising the idea that perhaps the motives were not so different, and that Mercedes can count themselves highly fortunate to have escaped without a harsher sentence.
Regardless of the penalty, I think everyone can agree that this controversy has gone on far too long. If I look back to my Monaco Grand Prix post, I seem to remember mentioning the controversy hitting the news then. That was four weeks ago. Surely it cannot have taken that amount of time to work out what really happened at that test, as people up and down the paddock were quoting 'facts' to the camera even then. How true those facts were is debatable, but I refuse to believe that anything more than a brief examination of the data of the test would have given the FIA all they needed to know to conduct a fair and reasonable hearing. A week at most. The last real controversy regarding tyres was 'Indygate' back in 2005, where only 6 cars took to the start of the US Grand Prix after Michelin tyre failures in practice and qualifying. Despite a battering in the press, that debacle was sorted in 7 days. To suggest that, based on the ruling, a simple 'misunderstanding', required 4 weeks to decide on is, in my view, simply ridiculous.
At least I can be thankful that this farce is now over, and we can get back to what really matters in motorsport: the racing. We have had enough bureaucratic procrastination to last us for the rest of the year. Whether it was fair or not is worth debate, but too much risks another descent into inter-team squabbling. I truly hope that this is the end of the matter, and that the FIA remember the lenient ruling when sentencing its next accused.
Thursday 20 June 2013
2013/2014 Premier League Fixtures Announced: So It Begins... Again (Champions League)
This week marked the announcement of the fixtures for the 2013/14 Premier League. Using the initial fixture list, this week I will be doing a series of four blog posts. The first three concern the potential impact of the fixtures on the races for the title, the final Champions League spot, and the battle to avoid relegation. In the final post in the series, I will be uploading a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet, designed to allow people to get involved in my annual predictions competition. In this second, I will be assessing the fixture list, and analysing its potential impact upon the race for the final Champions League spot. This race has been fiercely fought over the last few years, with the rewards for qualifying particularly lucrative. Based on the last few years, it is relatively safe to assume that the primary contenders for the 4th place spot this year will be Arsenal, Tottenham and possibly Liverpool. Whilst I accept that anomalies may occur (Newcastle in 2012 springs to mind), these are incredibly difficult to predict, even with the influence of the fixtures. Nevertheless, where possible I will try, but I will be predominantly focusing on the three expected contenders.
Similarly to the previous title race post, I will assess the importance of the first five, last five, and the busiest period of fixtures before making an initial conclusion over who should be considered favourite for the position. Beginning with Arsenal, having claimed the final Champions League spot last year, edging out local rivals Spurs on the final day, they will be anxious to keep their great rivals behind them once again this campaign. They begin with a seemingly comfortable home game against Aston Villa, before a trip to London rivals Fulham as their first away tie of the season. Their third game is the big one of the section, with Tottenham visiting the Emirates. Whilst the previous two games have ended in a 5-2 home success, there can be little margin for error, and the result should not be considered as comfortable as the scoreline suggests. After the North London Derby, Arsenal have two expected victories, firstly away to Sunderland, and then at home to Stoke. In a season in which more pressure than ever will be heaped onto Wenger's shoulders to deliver a trophy, a good start is essential to that aim. Failing to accrue valuable points could have disastrous consequences for the Gunners, potentially even affecting the manager's position.
Their main rivals for the final Champions League spot are also their local rivals, Tottenham. After two very near misses in the last two seasons, Spurs go into the 2013/14 campaign aiming to put right the heartbreak of the previous campaigns. In his second season in charge of the Lily Whites, Andre Villas Boas (AVB) will want to establish himself as a top manager in this country by qualifying for Europe's elite competition. Spurs start with a fairly kind fixture, with an away trip to newly promoted Crystal Palace, certainly a match the Spurs fans will expect three points in. Their White Hart Lane season kicks off with the visit of Swansea, which whilst potentially tricky, still puts Spurs as favourites to come out victorious. The trip to the Emirates stops the comfortable start to Spurs' campaign stone dead, and, with such a pivotal fixture so early in the season, gives AVB a good chance to lay his mark upon this campaign. Like Arsenal, after the North London Derby, Spurs have two relatively comfortable fixtures, firstly at home to Norwich, and then a potential banana skin tie at Championship champions Cardiff to round off the first 5. Tottenham often have good starts to the season, but tail off towards the back end. Therefore, a good start this campaign should be expected, but is no less essential than in previous seasons, as it gives Spurs breathing space to have a wobble later in the season.
The final contender considered in detail is Liverpool. Whilst they have shown little in the way of threatening the top four in recent seasons, I have a feeling that the 're-adjustment period' may come to an end this time around. With Brendan Rodgers's philosophy beginning to take hold towards the back end of last season, there is real promise for the men from Merseyside to be dark horses for the final Champions League spot this time around. Beginning their season at home to Stoke gives them a good opportunity to obtain early points, before an often tricky trip to Villa Park. Like their rivals, the third game is when it begins to get serious, with a visit from champions Manchester United. Having so often been second best to their North West rivals in recent years, they will be anxious to rectify this at Anfield in late August. After this, a tricky trip to Swansea and a home tie against Southampton follow, giving Liverpool breathing space before their next significant fixture. This initial run of results could prove pivotal to their season, as a poor start could see them cast into the wilderness for another season. Based on the opening five fixtures of the three protagonists, it is hard to make any conclusions over the favourites to have a positive start, as all have difficult games, and even the seemingly simple ones are often difficult to predict.
Moving onto the critical December period, which, as in the previous post, will consist of the five matches between December 14th and January 1st, we can see potential developments in this race. Beginning with the Gunners, we can see that their pivotal mid-season period begins with arguably the most difficult trip of the season to the Etihad Stadium, before an equally tough home game against Chelsea. Playing two title contenders in two games will play a critical role in arguably not just the success of this period, but of their season. Following these games, Arsenal take two tough away trips to both West Ham and then Newcastle, before ending this difficult period at home to Cardiff. Certainly I can see the Gunners dropping numerous points here, leaving the door open for their rivals. Spurs's mid-season begins in a similarly tough vein, entertaining rivals Liverpool in a Champions League 'six pointer'. A difficult trip to unpredictable Southampton follows this, before returning to White Hart Lane to play firstly West Brom, and then Stoke. Tottenham finish the period with a trip to Manchester United on New Year's Day, meaning that their mid-season ends as it began: with a difficult fixture. Whilst the Lily Whites may have won at Old Trafford last year, few would expect a repeat this campaign. Finally, Liverpool's mid season, beginning with that trip to White Hart Lane, before a winnable game against Cardiff. This period does not get any easier, with trips to Manchester City and Chelsea, before ending the period at home to Hull. Like Arsenal, this period may make or break their season, as with so many pivotal fixtures in so short a time, they have to maintain momentum, which means they cannot afford to lose fixtures. This period certainly benefits Spurs, as both Liverpool and Arsenal have several tricky ties. Whilst Tottenham do have a couple, they also have plenty of opportunities to pick up valuable points on their rivals.
Looking at the final five fixtures, we see another shift in momentum. Arsenal, having had a significant amount of their pivotal fixtures either in the mid-season period, or spread evenly throughout the rest of the campaign, have a significantly easier run-in than either of their two rivals. Home fixtures against West Ham, Newcastle and West Brom are supplemented by winnable away ties at Hull and a final day trip to Norwich. This run is certainly one where you could see the Gunners picking up maximum points, giving them the perfect opportunity to put pressure on their rivals towards the end of the campaign. Tottenham's run-in is slightly more difficult, although it is not unforeseeable that they may attain maximum points. Difficult but winnable away trips to West Brom, Stoke and West Ham come between home games against Fulham and a final day visit of Aston Villa. Whilst I would expect Spurs to drop some points in the run-in, I do still expect them based on these fixtures to be there or there abouts come the end of the season. Liverpool, on the other hand, have not been graced with a fortunate fixture list. Visits from Manchester City and Chelsea could see them drop valuable points, meaning that victories away at Norwich and Crystal Palace are essential, before a final day showdown with Newcastle. This period could see the Reds cast adrift from the race, but victories over the big names could see them gather significant momentum towards the end of the season.
Other than the major three, upon further examination of the fixtures at key times, Everton could also be in and around the running for that final space. A first 5 of Norwich (A), West Brom (H), Cardiff (A), Chelsea (H) and West Ham (A) allows Everton the chance to amass early points, whilst at the same time having their credentials tested. The mid-season period of Fulham (H), Swansea (A), Sunderland (H), Southampton (H) and Stoke (A) has similar implications, with most games being winnable, giving Everton fantastic momentum going into the second half of the season. The final 5 of Sunderland (A), Manchester United (H), Southampton (A), Manchester City (H), Hull (A) is slightly tougher, but with Roberto Martinez's knack of getting sides working well late into the season, it would be silly to completely write off their chances.
Nevertheless, I still believe that based on the fixtures, Tottenham should be considered favourites for the final Champions League spot, followed by Arsenal, and the two Liverpool sides lagging slightly behind. It will be very interesting once the season starts, to see how accurate my predictions turn out to be.
Similarly to the previous title race post, I will assess the importance of the first five, last five, and the busiest period of fixtures before making an initial conclusion over who should be considered favourite for the position. Beginning with Arsenal, having claimed the final Champions League spot last year, edging out local rivals Spurs on the final day, they will be anxious to keep their great rivals behind them once again this campaign. They begin with a seemingly comfortable home game against Aston Villa, before a trip to London rivals Fulham as their first away tie of the season. Their third game is the big one of the section, with Tottenham visiting the Emirates. Whilst the previous two games have ended in a 5-2 home success, there can be little margin for error, and the result should not be considered as comfortable as the scoreline suggests. After the North London Derby, Arsenal have two expected victories, firstly away to Sunderland, and then at home to Stoke. In a season in which more pressure than ever will be heaped onto Wenger's shoulders to deliver a trophy, a good start is essential to that aim. Failing to accrue valuable points could have disastrous consequences for the Gunners, potentially even affecting the manager's position.
Their main rivals for the final Champions League spot are also their local rivals, Tottenham. After two very near misses in the last two seasons, Spurs go into the 2013/14 campaign aiming to put right the heartbreak of the previous campaigns. In his second season in charge of the Lily Whites, Andre Villas Boas (AVB) will want to establish himself as a top manager in this country by qualifying for Europe's elite competition. Spurs start with a fairly kind fixture, with an away trip to newly promoted Crystal Palace, certainly a match the Spurs fans will expect three points in. Their White Hart Lane season kicks off with the visit of Swansea, which whilst potentially tricky, still puts Spurs as favourites to come out victorious. The trip to the Emirates stops the comfortable start to Spurs' campaign stone dead, and, with such a pivotal fixture so early in the season, gives AVB a good chance to lay his mark upon this campaign. Like Arsenal, after the North London Derby, Spurs have two relatively comfortable fixtures, firstly at home to Norwich, and then a potential banana skin tie at Championship champions Cardiff to round off the first 5. Tottenham often have good starts to the season, but tail off towards the back end. Therefore, a good start this campaign should be expected, but is no less essential than in previous seasons, as it gives Spurs breathing space to have a wobble later in the season.
The final contender considered in detail is Liverpool. Whilst they have shown little in the way of threatening the top four in recent seasons, I have a feeling that the 're-adjustment period' may come to an end this time around. With Brendan Rodgers's philosophy beginning to take hold towards the back end of last season, there is real promise for the men from Merseyside to be dark horses for the final Champions League spot this time around. Beginning their season at home to Stoke gives them a good opportunity to obtain early points, before an often tricky trip to Villa Park. Like their rivals, the third game is when it begins to get serious, with a visit from champions Manchester United. Having so often been second best to their North West rivals in recent years, they will be anxious to rectify this at Anfield in late August. After this, a tricky trip to Swansea and a home tie against Southampton follow, giving Liverpool breathing space before their next significant fixture. This initial run of results could prove pivotal to their season, as a poor start could see them cast into the wilderness for another season. Based on the opening five fixtures of the three protagonists, it is hard to make any conclusions over the favourites to have a positive start, as all have difficult games, and even the seemingly simple ones are often difficult to predict.
Moving onto the critical December period, which, as in the previous post, will consist of the five matches between December 14th and January 1st, we can see potential developments in this race. Beginning with the Gunners, we can see that their pivotal mid-season period begins with arguably the most difficult trip of the season to the Etihad Stadium, before an equally tough home game against Chelsea. Playing two title contenders in two games will play a critical role in arguably not just the success of this period, but of their season. Following these games, Arsenal take two tough away trips to both West Ham and then Newcastle, before ending this difficult period at home to Cardiff. Certainly I can see the Gunners dropping numerous points here, leaving the door open for their rivals. Spurs's mid-season begins in a similarly tough vein, entertaining rivals Liverpool in a Champions League 'six pointer'. A difficult trip to unpredictable Southampton follows this, before returning to White Hart Lane to play firstly West Brom, and then Stoke. Tottenham finish the period with a trip to Manchester United on New Year's Day, meaning that their mid-season ends as it began: with a difficult fixture. Whilst the Lily Whites may have won at Old Trafford last year, few would expect a repeat this campaign. Finally, Liverpool's mid season, beginning with that trip to White Hart Lane, before a winnable game against Cardiff. This period does not get any easier, with trips to Manchester City and Chelsea, before ending the period at home to Hull. Like Arsenal, this period may make or break their season, as with so many pivotal fixtures in so short a time, they have to maintain momentum, which means they cannot afford to lose fixtures. This period certainly benefits Spurs, as both Liverpool and Arsenal have several tricky ties. Whilst Tottenham do have a couple, they also have plenty of opportunities to pick up valuable points on their rivals.
Looking at the final five fixtures, we see another shift in momentum. Arsenal, having had a significant amount of their pivotal fixtures either in the mid-season period, or spread evenly throughout the rest of the campaign, have a significantly easier run-in than either of their two rivals. Home fixtures against West Ham, Newcastle and West Brom are supplemented by winnable away ties at Hull and a final day trip to Norwich. This run is certainly one where you could see the Gunners picking up maximum points, giving them the perfect opportunity to put pressure on their rivals towards the end of the campaign. Tottenham's run-in is slightly more difficult, although it is not unforeseeable that they may attain maximum points. Difficult but winnable away trips to West Brom, Stoke and West Ham come between home games against Fulham and a final day visit of Aston Villa. Whilst I would expect Spurs to drop some points in the run-in, I do still expect them based on these fixtures to be there or there abouts come the end of the season. Liverpool, on the other hand, have not been graced with a fortunate fixture list. Visits from Manchester City and Chelsea could see them drop valuable points, meaning that victories away at Norwich and Crystal Palace are essential, before a final day showdown with Newcastle. This period could see the Reds cast adrift from the race, but victories over the big names could see them gather significant momentum towards the end of the season.
Other than the major three, upon further examination of the fixtures at key times, Everton could also be in and around the running for that final space. A first 5 of Norwich (A), West Brom (H), Cardiff (A), Chelsea (H) and West Ham (A) allows Everton the chance to amass early points, whilst at the same time having their credentials tested. The mid-season period of Fulham (H), Swansea (A), Sunderland (H), Southampton (H) and Stoke (A) has similar implications, with most games being winnable, giving Everton fantastic momentum going into the second half of the season. The final 5 of Sunderland (A), Manchester United (H), Southampton (A), Manchester City (H), Hull (A) is slightly tougher, but with Roberto Martinez's knack of getting sides working well late into the season, it would be silly to completely write off their chances.
Nevertheless, I still believe that based on the fixtures, Tottenham should be considered favourites for the final Champions League spot, followed by Arsenal, and the two Liverpool sides lagging slightly behind. It will be very interesting once the season starts, to see how accurate my predictions turn out to be.
British and Irish Lions Tour 2013: Test Series Preview
Despite the prominence of many of the home nations' rugby squads in the world game over recent decades, the combination of them into the Lions has rarely led to success on tour. As being selected is seen as the highest honour in international rugby on the these shores, surely the players cannot be accused of being mercenaries like their footballing compatriots. However, a couple of things that perhaps could be laid at the door of many of the Lions players is either they have a 'Lampard and Gerrard' inability to work together when the nations unite, or perhaps they are too afraid of losing their place in the presitigious line-up to put themselves out there and perhaps make mistakes? Whatever the reason, the fact remains that the Lions have only won 2 test series in the previous 36 years, showing that there is clearly a problem.
Discovering this problem is currently the job of Warren Gatland. The ex-Wales boss impressed as manager of the dragons, leading them to two Six Nations Grand Slams in 2008 and 2012, and the World Cup semi final in 2011, where they were cruelly denied a place in the final after captain Sam Warburton was wrongfully dismissed against the French. As head coach of the Lions, his first job has been assembling a squad capable of winning a test tour, a job that has been shown to be incredibly difficult in the past. Fortunately, the new coach has a wealth of talent to select from. Having an excellent knowledge of Welsh talent is particularly important, especially as they are the current holders of the Six Nations, and they correspondingly had the most representatives in the initial squad. The first announcement of the Lions squad was made on the 30th April 2013, where the squad was made up of 15 Welsh players, 10 English, 9 Irish and just the 3 from Scotland. However, as is often the case in rugby tours, withdrawals and injuries are common. As a result, the make-up of the Lions squad has changed somewhat over the last few weeks. Correct at time of publishing, the Lions contained 15 Welsh players, 13 English, 10 Irish, and 4 Scots, with many being called up either to directly replace the injured player, or as cover in case of further injuries. Not the best start to a tour, but I suppose it was to be expected.
In assessing the Lions potential to lead a successful tour down under, it is worth looking at the warm-up games as an indication of their success. The Lions embarked on the tour in May, with the first warm up game taking place on the 1st June in Hong Kong. A comprehensive 59-8 victory against the Barbarians eased the Lions into life on tour, and gave them a morale boosting victory to start the campaign off. Having taken a brief stop in Asia, the Lions moved to Australasia, playing their second warm up game in Perth on June 5th. An even more emphatic win followed, with a 69-15 success over Western Force. Unfortunately, the match was marred by two incidents involving Cian Healy, with the Irish prop firstly being accused of biting an opponent (a charge that was subsequently dropped), and then suffering a tour-ending injury. His absence, coupled with the fact that the Lions had played 3 games in a week, meant that they had a much tougher game against the Queensland Reds in Brisbane. Winning only 22-12, and suffering a number of high profile casualties (Tuilagi and Bowe), the Lions were uninspiring in victory, giving Gatland his first cause for concern.
He needn't have worried about the Lions performances. A whitewash in their next game in Newcastle against the Combined New South Wales-Queensland Country on June 11th saw the Lions return to full form, winning 64-0. Another convincing victory followed, with New South Wales Waratahs dispatched 47-17 four days later in Sydney. However, once again injuries ruined an impressive display, with Jamie Roberts hobbling off. Having looked confident and ready for the start of the test series, the Lions then suffered a sucker punch, losing their final warm-up game 14-12 against the ACT Brumbies in Canberra. This threatened to undo all of the good work of the past two weeks, and potentially undermine the confidence of this injury plagued squad.
If Warren Gatland wanted his initial selections to all be fit for the start of the first test, and therefore selected his best squad, perhaps participating in 6 pre-test warm-ups was not the wisest move. Whilst it is traditional for tours to last longer than simply the test series, to expect that no injuries would be suffered is highly unrealistic. It has been argued that these warm-up matches are essential in enabling the team to gel and get match practice and fitness before the big test games, however, there have been accusations made that the matches selected were far too easy for the Lions, meaning that little match practice was actually gained from them. Even worse, it means that the injuries that have happened whilst on the tour are ultimately for nothing, as they were initially seen as a risk worth taking for match practice. These injuries can certainly partially explain the loss in the final warm-up game, as with a weakened side very few teams would fare well. Equally, the fact that none of these replacement players have been given sufficient time to gel puts the Lions almost back to the same position they were in when they began the tour.
Whilst I agree that warm-up games, in any sport, are necessary and positive, a few general principles must be applied. Firstly, always make sure you have sufficient rest time. You cannot legislate for certain injuries in games, however, you risk exacerbating the situation by playing so many games in such a short space of time, especially in a physical game like rugby. Therefore, perhaps four warm-up games would have been sufficient, giving the players with minor knocks time to recover before exerting themselves once again. As I mentioned at the top of the post, all home nation rugby players are desperate to be involved in the Lions setup, and therefore will not want to hand over their jersey once selected. This leaves them at a much greater risk of suffering serious injury, as their desire to keep their place often overwhelms their self-preservation instinct. Secondly, make sure you select sides that will test you. It is pointless playing a Sunday league side that you will score treble figures against in a glorified training exercise. If you want to allow your players to effectively gel and gain match practice and fitness, you have to be involved in a competitive game. Otherwise there is no pressure on the players to perform. Certainly, there are elements of this in the current tour, however, it is worth noting that two of the 6 games have been very close contests, with the Lions victorious in one, and defeated in the other.
As for what this indicates about the upcoming test series, I fear for the Lions. It is a strange one, as each of the home nations are capable of beating the Aussies on their day. Therefore, you wold expect that a side of the best players of each nation combined would whitewash them. However, rarely does this seem to be the case, and with the injuries that have been suffered by the Lions in the run-up, their chances of bringing home a series victory have been cut. That being said, Warren Gatland is a fantastic coach, and if anyone can get the best out of the players they have at their disposal, he can. I will be watching, more in hope than expectation, to see if the Lions can pull off an historic victory on Saturday to give them momentum going into the second test.
Discovering this problem is currently the job of Warren Gatland. The ex-Wales boss impressed as manager of the dragons, leading them to two Six Nations Grand Slams in 2008 and 2012, and the World Cup semi final in 2011, where they were cruelly denied a place in the final after captain Sam Warburton was wrongfully dismissed against the French. As head coach of the Lions, his first job has been assembling a squad capable of winning a test tour, a job that has been shown to be incredibly difficult in the past. Fortunately, the new coach has a wealth of talent to select from. Having an excellent knowledge of Welsh talent is particularly important, especially as they are the current holders of the Six Nations, and they correspondingly had the most representatives in the initial squad. The first announcement of the Lions squad was made on the 30th April 2013, where the squad was made up of 15 Welsh players, 10 English, 9 Irish and just the 3 from Scotland. However, as is often the case in rugby tours, withdrawals and injuries are common. As a result, the make-up of the Lions squad has changed somewhat over the last few weeks. Correct at time of publishing, the Lions contained 15 Welsh players, 13 English, 10 Irish, and 4 Scots, with many being called up either to directly replace the injured player, or as cover in case of further injuries. Not the best start to a tour, but I suppose it was to be expected.
In assessing the Lions potential to lead a successful tour down under, it is worth looking at the warm-up games as an indication of their success. The Lions embarked on the tour in May, with the first warm up game taking place on the 1st June in Hong Kong. A comprehensive 59-8 victory against the Barbarians eased the Lions into life on tour, and gave them a morale boosting victory to start the campaign off. Having taken a brief stop in Asia, the Lions moved to Australasia, playing their second warm up game in Perth on June 5th. An even more emphatic win followed, with a 69-15 success over Western Force. Unfortunately, the match was marred by two incidents involving Cian Healy, with the Irish prop firstly being accused of biting an opponent (a charge that was subsequently dropped), and then suffering a tour-ending injury. His absence, coupled with the fact that the Lions had played 3 games in a week, meant that they had a much tougher game against the Queensland Reds in Brisbane. Winning only 22-12, and suffering a number of high profile casualties (Tuilagi and Bowe), the Lions were uninspiring in victory, giving Gatland his first cause for concern.
He needn't have worried about the Lions performances. A whitewash in their next game in Newcastle against the Combined New South Wales-Queensland Country on June 11th saw the Lions return to full form, winning 64-0. Another convincing victory followed, with New South Wales Waratahs dispatched 47-17 four days later in Sydney. However, once again injuries ruined an impressive display, with Jamie Roberts hobbling off. Having looked confident and ready for the start of the test series, the Lions then suffered a sucker punch, losing their final warm-up game 14-12 against the ACT Brumbies in Canberra. This threatened to undo all of the good work of the past two weeks, and potentially undermine the confidence of this injury plagued squad.
If Warren Gatland wanted his initial selections to all be fit for the start of the first test, and therefore selected his best squad, perhaps participating in 6 pre-test warm-ups was not the wisest move. Whilst it is traditional for tours to last longer than simply the test series, to expect that no injuries would be suffered is highly unrealistic. It has been argued that these warm-up matches are essential in enabling the team to gel and get match practice and fitness before the big test games, however, there have been accusations made that the matches selected were far too easy for the Lions, meaning that little match practice was actually gained from them. Even worse, it means that the injuries that have happened whilst on the tour are ultimately for nothing, as they were initially seen as a risk worth taking for match practice. These injuries can certainly partially explain the loss in the final warm-up game, as with a weakened side very few teams would fare well. Equally, the fact that none of these replacement players have been given sufficient time to gel puts the Lions almost back to the same position they were in when they began the tour.
Whilst I agree that warm-up games, in any sport, are necessary and positive, a few general principles must be applied. Firstly, always make sure you have sufficient rest time. You cannot legislate for certain injuries in games, however, you risk exacerbating the situation by playing so many games in such a short space of time, especially in a physical game like rugby. Therefore, perhaps four warm-up games would have been sufficient, giving the players with minor knocks time to recover before exerting themselves once again. As I mentioned at the top of the post, all home nation rugby players are desperate to be involved in the Lions setup, and therefore will not want to hand over their jersey once selected. This leaves them at a much greater risk of suffering serious injury, as their desire to keep their place often overwhelms their self-preservation instinct. Secondly, make sure you select sides that will test you. It is pointless playing a Sunday league side that you will score treble figures against in a glorified training exercise. If you want to allow your players to effectively gel and gain match practice and fitness, you have to be involved in a competitive game. Otherwise there is no pressure on the players to perform. Certainly, there are elements of this in the current tour, however, it is worth noting that two of the 6 games have been very close contests, with the Lions victorious in one, and defeated in the other.
As for what this indicates about the upcoming test series, I fear for the Lions. It is a strange one, as each of the home nations are capable of beating the Aussies on their day. Therefore, you wold expect that a side of the best players of each nation combined would whitewash them. However, rarely does this seem to be the case, and with the injuries that have been suffered by the Lions in the run-up, their chances of bringing home a series victory have been cut. That being said, Warren Gatland is a fantastic coach, and if anyone can get the best out of the players they have at their disposal, he can. I will be watching, more in hope than expectation, to see if the Lions can pull off an historic victory on Saturday to give them momentum going into the second test.
Wednesday 19 June 2013
2013/2014 Premier League Fixtures Announced: So It Begins... Again (Title Race)
After a mere 4 and a half weeks after the culmination of the 2012/2013 Barclays Premier League season, our thoughts are once again thrust towards English football's most prestigious prize. With the unveiling of the fixtures for the coming season, analysts can begin to consider who could be on the move, both up and down. The main contenders for the title have seemingly already been pre-determined (Man City, Man United and possibly Chelsea), and at least one of the promoted sides have been favoured for the drop. The other two are normally decided by the difficulty of certain sides' fixtures at key times in the season. There will be four posts in the series about the recently published fixtures. This first post will outline the critical fixtures, and attempt to make initial conclusions on the title contenders based on the fixtures of the likely protagonists. The second and third posts will be similar in structure, but regarding the battle for the final Champions League spot, and the battle to avoid relegation. (I apologise if you happen to be a mid-table supporter, and thus feel neglected, but you may possibly count yourself lucky not to be involved in the relegation battle). The final post will be an invitation to take part in my yearly Premier League predictions. Having run the competition amongst family and friends for the last two years, I have decided to open it to whomever wished to participate. As a result, I will be attaching a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet, which includes the full fixture list, along with space to put your predictions down the side. I will explain the details in the later post.
For now, I will continue with my initial analysis of the upcoming Premier League season. Beginning with the title race, having outlined the three widely-acknowledged contenders, it is worth considering their fixtures. By assessing the first 5 fixtures, the fixtures at the busy Christmas period, and the run-in, including looking at the critical fixtures, we can make initial hypotheses about who should be considered favourites for the title. Champions Manchester United, having lost their talismanic manager at the end of last season, should certainly not be written off retaining their title, despite this loss. However, the Red Devils, and David Moyes, have a daunting start to 2013/2014 season. With a tricky away tie at Swansea to kick things off, they then host title rivals Chelsea. This will give the new man a real test of his title-winning credentials, and will perhaps show the extent of the gap left by Sir Alex Ferguson. The fixtures do not get any easier for the champions, with a North West derby at Anfield against historical rivals Liverpool. A quick break at home to Crystal Palace follows this, before the most anticipated game in English league football of recent years, the Manchester Derby, away at Manchester City. A baptism of fire for the former Everton manager, and one I am sure he will need to make a solid start on. A good set of results here will certainly give United a great foundation to build on, but defeats may cost them precious momentum.
City, runners-up in 2013, will be glad to start with a home game, giving them the opportunity to rectify the aberration at the end of last campaign, losing their final home game 2-3 to Norwich City. A visit from last season's under-achievers Newcastle, will certainly not be an easy one however, especially if their slow home start against Southampton last season is anything to go by. Manuel Pellegrini, similarly to David Moyes, will be looking to make a quick start to the campaign after his recent appointment at oil rich City, and with a number of big money signings, will be attempting to solidify his position. Two consecutive games against promoted sides may give the Citizens a chance to accrue some early points, especially in the home game against Hull, before a tricky trip to Stoke, a ground where City have failed to win on any of their previous 4 league fixtures. The Manchester Derby at the Etihad finishes City's opening 5, with the Citizens wanting to avoid the last minute heartbreak of last season. These fixtures perhaps allow City to ease into the season a little more than their rivals, though any slips will instantly see the pressure heaped onto the new man.
The final contenders, Chelsea, begin with a comfortable home tie against promoted Hull City, giving new manager Jose Mourinho a gentle re-introduction to English football. I doubt the 'Special One' will need much time to integrate, and a trip to Old Trafford will certainly bring Chelsea back to earth, giving them their first proper investigation. However, with Mourinho's positive record against United, and with the London club's spending power, this may be their first opportunity to stamp their authority on this season. Another winnable tie at home to last season's relegation threatened Aston Villa follows, before another tough away game against Roberto Martinez's Everton. They round off their opening 5 with a visit from London rivals Fulham. Like City, you would expect Chelsea to obtain a healthy number of points in this period, giving the new man a good chance to bed himself into the club. In this section, City appear to have the easiest of the fixtures, however United will have rid themselves of games against both of their main rivals, which could be a help or a hindrance to their season.
Moving onto the mid-season fixtures, it is important to look at the busiest time of the season to assess how the momentum may swing throughout the season. I will look at the fixtures from December 14th to January 1st, between which there will be 5 games. This is a period that Manchester United typically perform well in, and often base their success upon. However, consistent results often come hand-in-hand with a generous fixture list. United start this period with a winnable tie at Aston Villa, before hosting a tall West Ham side. A further two fortunate fixtures follow these, with consecutive away games at Hull and Norwich, before a difficult home game against Champions League chasing Tottenham. With the exception of the final game, United's fixture list in this critical part of the season could give them the valuable momentum they require. City, in contrast, begin this critical period with two testing visits from Arsenal and Liverpool, sandwiched around a trip to Fulham. A more straight-forward home game against Crystal Palace follows these, with City ending the period with a New Year's Day trip to Swansea, another tough challenge. This period may well end up being the defining feature of City's season, either pushing them towards the title, or potentially wrecking their aspirations. Chelsea's fixtures more resemble those of Man City, as after an initial visit from Crystal Palace, an examination at the hands of Arsenal, Swansea and then Liverpool will give the Blues little respite. Chelsea then begin 2014 with a trip to Southampton, a ground they famously lost at last season, and will be looking to rectify this campaign. In this period, United appear to have the upper hand, with their fixtures being relatively kind. Their rivals both have fixtures against Arsenal, Liverpool and Swansea, making Christmas a particularly stressful one this year.
Ending with the run-ins, Manchester United once again can consider themselves rather fortunate. With their only loseable game being a tasty affair at Goodison Park, which will see David Moyes's return to his old club, United have games against Hull, Norwich and Sunderland before ending with a winnable, but potentially banana-skin tie against Southampton. Certainly an opportunity for the champions to garner some momentum towards the end of the campaign. In contrast, Manchester City, once again, have a relatively tough run in. Kicked off with a trip to Anfield to face Liverpool, City then host last season's over-achievers West Brom, before successive trips to Crystal Palace and then bogey side Everton. A relatively straight-forward final day looks on the cards at home to West Ham, but should it come down to that game, we have seen that nothing looks straight-forward when City are concerned. Finally, Chelsea's run-in probably ranks somewhere in between the two, visiting both Swansea and Liverpool, with a home tie against Sunderland in between. Two expected wins finish Chelsea's season, with Norwich and Cardiff rounding off what Mourinho will hope is a successful return. However, once again, Manchester United appear to have the simplest run-in on paper, though games are rarely played on paper.
I understand that these fixtures are subject to change based on television rights and other competitions, and therefore my predictions may be rendered irrelevant. Based on the fixtures as they have been announced, the analysis tends to suggest that United should be considered initial favourites to retain the title. I also recognise that in all probability, my analysis will prove to be completely wrong. But that is football.
For now, I will continue with my initial analysis of the upcoming Premier League season. Beginning with the title race, having outlined the three widely-acknowledged contenders, it is worth considering their fixtures. By assessing the first 5 fixtures, the fixtures at the busy Christmas period, and the run-in, including looking at the critical fixtures, we can make initial hypotheses about who should be considered favourites for the title. Champions Manchester United, having lost their talismanic manager at the end of last season, should certainly not be written off retaining their title, despite this loss. However, the Red Devils, and David Moyes, have a daunting start to 2013/2014 season. With a tricky away tie at Swansea to kick things off, they then host title rivals Chelsea. This will give the new man a real test of his title-winning credentials, and will perhaps show the extent of the gap left by Sir Alex Ferguson. The fixtures do not get any easier for the champions, with a North West derby at Anfield against historical rivals Liverpool. A quick break at home to Crystal Palace follows this, before the most anticipated game in English league football of recent years, the Manchester Derby, away at Manchester City. A baptism of fire for the former Everton manager, and one I am sure he will need to make a solid start on. A good set of results here will certainly give United a great foundation to build on, but defeats may cost them precious momentum.
City, runners-up in 2013, will be glad to start with a home game, giving them the opportunity to rectify the aberration at the end of last campaign, losing their final home game 2-3 to Norwich City. A visit from last season's under-achievers Newcastle, will certainly not be an easy one however, especially if their slow home start against Southampton last season is anything to go by. Manuel Pellegrini, similarly to David Moyes, will be looking to make a quick start to the campaign after his recent appointment at oil rich City, and with a number of big money signings, will be attempting to solidify his position. Two consecutive games against promoted sides may give the Citizens a chance to accrue some early points, especially in the home game against Hull, before a tricky trip to Stoke, a ground where City have failed to win on any of their previous 4 league fixtures. The Manchester Derby at the Etihad finishes City's opening 5, with the Citizens wanting to avoid the last minute heartbreak of last season. These fixtures perhaps allow City to ease into the season a little more than their rivals, though any slips will instantly see the pressure heaped onto the new man.
The final contenders, Chelsea, begin with a comfortable home tie against promoted Hull City, giving new manager Jose Mourinho a gentle re-introduction to English football. I doubt the 'Special One' will need much time to integrate, and a trip to Old Trafford will certainly bring Chelsea back to earth, giving them their first proper investigation. However, with Mourinho's positive record against United, and with the London club's spending power, this may be their first opportunity to stamp their authority on this season. Another winnable tie at home to last season's relegation threatened Aston Villa follows, before another tough away game against Roberto Martinez's Everton. They round off their opening 5 with a visit from London rivals Fulham. Like City, you would expect Chelsea to obtain a healthy number of points in this period, giving the new man a good chance to bed himself into the club. In this section, City appear to have the easiest of the fixtures, however United will have rid themselves of games against both of their main rivals, which could be a help or a hindrance to their season.
Moving onto the mid-season fixtures, it is important to look at the busiest time of the season to assess how the momentum may swing throughout the season. I will look at the fixtures from December 14th to January 1st, between which there will be 5 games. This is a period that Manchester United typically perform well in, and often base their success upon. However, consistent results often come hand-in-hand with a generous fixture list. United start this period with a winnable tie at Aston Villa, before hosting a tall West Ham side. A further two fortunate fixtures follow these, with consecutive away games at Hull and Norwich, before a difficult home game against Champions League chasing Tottenham. With the exception of the final game, United's fixture list in this critical part of the season could give them the valuable momentum they require. City, in contrast, begin this critical period with two testing visits from Arsenal and Liverpool, sandwiched around a trip to Fulham. A more straight-forward home game against Crystal Palace follows these, with City ending the period with a New Year's Day trip to Swansea, another tough challenge. This period may well end up being the defining feature of City's season, either pushing them towards the title, or potentially wrecking their aspirations. Chelsea's fixtures more resemble those of Man City, as after an initial visit from Crystal Palace, an examination at the hands of Arsenal, Swansea and then Liverpool will give the Blues little respite. Chelsea then begin 2014 with a trip to Southampton, a ground they famously lost at last season, and will be looking to rectify this campaign. In this period, United appear to have the upper hand, with their fixtures being relatively kind. Their rivals both have fixtures against Arsenal, Liverpool and Swansea, making Christmas a particularly stressful one this year.
Ending with the run-ins, Manchester United once again can consider themselves rather fortunate. With their only loseable game being a tasty affair at Goodison Park, which will see David Moyes's return to his old club, United have games against Hull, Norwich and Sunderland before ending with a winnable, but potentially banana-skin tie against Southampton. Certainly an opportunity for the champions to garner some momentum towards the end of the campaign. In contrast, Manchester City, once again, have a relatively tough run in. Kicked off with a trip to Anfield to face Liverpool, City then host last season's over-achievers West Brom, before successive trips to Crystal Palace and then bogey side Everton. A relatively straight-forward final day looks on the cards at home to West Ham, but should it come down to that game, we have seen that nothing looks straight-forward when City are concerned. Finally, Chelsea's run-in probably ranks somewhere in between the two, visiting both Swansea and Liverpool, with a home tie against Sunderland in between. Two expected wins finish Chelsea's season, with Norwich and Cardiff rounding off what Mourinho will hope is a successful return. However, once again, Manchester United appear to have the simplest run-in on paper, though games are rarely played on paper.
I understand that these fixtures are subject to change based on television rights and other competitions, and therefore my predictions may be rendered irrelevant. Based on the fixtures as they have been announced, the analysis tends to suggest that United should be considered initial favourites to retain the title. I also recognise that in all probability, my analysis will prove to be completely wrong. But that is football.
Saturday 15 June 2013
The 2013 Confederations Cup: The International Champions League
Today marks the start of the Confederations Cup, a competition designed to take place a year before the start of the most prestigious football competition in existence, the World Cup. The participants consist of the respective champions of their continental competitions, spanning all continents. The previous World Cup winners, and the hosts of the upcoming contest are also present. In all, the competition involves 8 nations from all around the globe. I will briefly outline the participants, before asking how relevant the tournament is to the outcome of next year.
Before I do that, however, it is first worth noting the controversy that has surrounded this tournament. After the problems with the iconic Maracana stadium before the England friendly a couple of weeks ago, the country can hardly afford another battering in the tabloids over its suitability to host the great tournament. Protests over the spending of public money have already taken place outside Brasilia's stadium, and further protests are probably scheduled to disrupt proceedings. Whilst local authorities have been given the full confidence of FIFA to deal with the situation, the fact remains that controversy shrouds today's curtain raiser.
The 8 participants have been split into two groups of 4, and starting with group A, I will now briefly outline how they came to qualify for this competition. The hosts, Brazil, top this group, and take part in the opening match. Their opponents, Japan, qualified for this tournament after winning the 2011 Asian Cup, defeating Australia courtesy of an extra time goal from Southampton's Tadanari Lee. The third Group A participant is Mexico. The Olympic champions qualified for this tournament thanks to their 2011 Gold Cup victory over the USA, where they defeated their nemesis 4-2. Italy are the final team to be involved in group A. Though the Azzurri failed to win any of the major international tournaments, their run to the final of Euro 2012, coupled with Spain's qualification due to their World Cup win, booked the Italians' place in Brazil.
Group B, which starts tomorrow, begins with the current World Cup holders. The Spanish have dominated recent European and World tournaments, and as a result, their place cannot be in doubt. Uruguay occupy the second place in Group B. Having won the 2011 Copa America, ending the dominance of Brazil and Argentina, they beat the Paraguayans 3-0 in the final to solidify their place in Brazil. Thirdly, Nigeria occupy a place in the group, having been victorious in this year's African Cup of Nations. A Stephane M'Bia volley settled the final, with the Super Eagles defeating the underdogs Burkina Faso. The final team that will take part is the tiny nation of Tahiti. Having won their first international tournament in 2012, defeating New Caledonia in the final of the Oceania Nations Cup, the minnows will have to withstand an altogether more different challenge in Brazil.
As for how much the tournament indicates what is likely to occur in a year's time, I am highly sceptical. This is for two significant reasons. Firstly, there are several potential title contenders that will not be present at the Confederations Cup that you fully expect to be in Brazil in 2014. Examples of this include Germany, Portugal, Holland, and Argentina. It can certainly be argued that the reason they are not in Brazil for the next two weeks is simply because they are not the best sides in their region, and as a result should not be considered contenders. However, my argument against this would be that games often do not follow the pattern that you would expect. Think back to South Africa, and we see that the world champions Spain were in fact beaten in their opening group game by the Swiss. Should we consider Switzerland as contenders? Secondly, looking back four years to the Confederations Cup in South Africa, we see that the Brazilians lifted the trophy, only to be comprehensively outplayed in the World Cup quarter-finals by Holland a year later. World champions Spain, on the other hand, were eliminated at the hands of the USA.
For these reasons, I strongly suspect that this tournament will mean little in the grand scheme of things, and will do nothing to shed any light on who will win in Brazil next year. However, offer me a fortnight of international football in the summer, and I will accept it gladly. It may mean little, but my enjoyment will remain undiminished.
Before I do that, however, it is first worth noting the controversy that has surrounded this tournament. After the problems with the iconic Maracana stadium before the England friendly a couple of weeks ago, the country can hardly afford another battering in the tabloids over its suitability to host the great tournament. Protests over the spending of public money have already taken place outside Brasilia's stadium, and further protests are probably scheduled to disrupt proceedings. Whilst local authorities have been given the full confidence of FIFA to deal with the situation, the fact remains that controversy shrouds today's curtain raiser.
The 8 participants have been split into two groups of 4, and starting with group A, I will now briefly outline how they came to qualify for this competition. The hosts, Brazil, top this group, and take part in the opening match. Their opponents, Japan, qualified for this tournament after winning the 2011 Asian Cup, defeating Australia courtesy of an extra time goal from Southampton's Tadanari Lee. The third Group A participant is Mexico. The Olympic champions qualified for this tournament thanks to their 2011 Gold Cup victory over the USA, where they defeated their nemesis 4-2. Italy are the final team to be involved in group A. Though the Azzurri failed to win any of the major international tournaments, their run to the final of Euro 2012, coupled with Spain's qualification due to their World Cup win, booked the Italians' place in Brazil.
Group B, which starts tomorrow, begins with the current World Cup holders. The Spanish have dominated recent European and World tournaments, and as a result, their place cannot be in doubt. Uruguay occupy the second place in Group B. Having won the 2011 Copa America, ending the dominance of Brazil and Argentina, they beat the Paraguayans 3-0 in the final to solidify their place in Brazil. Thirdly, Nigeria occupy a place in the group, having been victorious in this year's African Cup of Nations. A Stephane M'Bia volley settled the final, with the Super Eagles defeating the underdogs Burkina Faso. The final team that will take part is the tiny nation of Tahiti. Having won their first international tournament in 2012, defeating New Caledonia in the final of the Oceania Nations Cup, the minnows will have to withstand an altogether more different challenge in Brazil.
As for how much the tournament indicates what is likely to occur in a year's time, I am highly sceptical. This is for two significant reasons. Firstly, there are several potential title contenders that will not be present at the Confederations Cup that you fully expect to be in Brazil in 2014. Examples of this include Germany, Portugal, Holland, and Argentina. It can certainly be argued that the reason they are not in Brazil for the next two weeks is simply because they are not the best sides in their region, and as a result should not be considered contenders. However, my argument against this would be that games often do not follow the pattern that you would expect. Think back to South Africa, and we see that the world champions Spain were in fact beaten in their opening group game by the Swiss. Should we consider Switzerland as contenders? Secondly, looking back four years to the Confederations Cup in South Africa, we see that the Brazilians lifted the trophy, only to be comprehensively outplayed in the World Cup quarter-finals by Holland a year later. World champions Spain, on the other hand, were eliminated at the hands of the USA.
For these reasons, I strongly suspect that this tournament will mean little in the grand scheme of things, and will do nothing to shed any light on who will win in Brazil next year. However, offer me a fortnight of international football in the summer, and I will accept it gladly. It may mean little, but my enjoyment will remain undiminished.
Sunday 9 June 2013
The 2013 Canadian Grand Prix: Is The Vettel Dominance Ominous?
The F1 season took a break from Europe to take a trip across the Atlantic to Canada this week for the seventh race of 2013. With the current standings in the World Championship beginning to favour triple and reigning world champion Sebastian Vettel, a victory for the German would begin to see him move ominously away from the chasing pack. With Mercedes chasing a fifth successive pole position, and the German chasing his third successive pole at Montreal, qualifying seemed a mouth-watering prospect. In terms of the race, Lewis Hamilton has always loved the Gilles Villeneuve circuit, taking his first ever victory there, and a three time winner, promising to claim his first victory as a Mercedes driver. In qualifying, these two protagonists took centre stage.
Qualifying, like last time out in Monaco, was thrust into chaos with the introduction of rain throughout the Saturday. This meant that the entirety was undertaken on the intermediate tyre, with initial slick tyre forays onto the track by Felipe Massa and Gilles Bianchi ending in spins and slides. Even with the wetter weather tyres, oversteer and drifting was common, leading to an unpredictable first qualifying session. Like Monaco, it was Force India's Paul di Resta who bore the brunt of the track increasing in pace as the session went on, being eliminated in 18th place. A bitter disappointment for the Scot, who was similarly unhappy on the radio two weeks ago. Q2 saw more improvement in the weather, leading to an ever improving track condition, however no-one dared risk the move to slick tyres. This once again meant a dash to be last over the line, thereby gaining the best track condition. More similarities to Monaco occurred in this session also, with Massa crashing off in the early part of the lap, leaving the Ferrari languishing in 16th place, and a real struggle to gain any serious points. The final section of qualifying was once again interrupted by rain, with firstly Hamilton, and then Vettel hitting the sweet spot and lighting the timing screens purple. With a late flurry of rain, it was the German who took his third consecutive pole in Canada, denying the Mercedes team. The real winner of qualifying, however, was Williams's Valtteri Bottas. Williams, beginning the seventh race of the season with 0 points, have a driver starting on the second row, with an impressive 3rd place finish. I doubt they will have a better chance to pick up points this season.
The two big DRS zones at the end and beginning of each lap seemed to suggest that we were in for a race of many overtaking manoeuvers. And so it proved. From the very beginning, although Vettel scampered off into the distance, leading by 2.8 seconds after just 2 laps, the midfield squabbled throughout the afternoon. Bottas, after his tremendous qualifying show yesterday, suffered the worst possible start, dropping three places in the opening lap, immediately putting his hopes for points in jeopardy. The Finn's early laps failed to get any easier, with Adrian Sutil spinning in an attempt to overtake the Williams driver on lap 6, forcing those immediately behind to take evasive action onto the grass at turn 3. The midfield switches seemed set to continue in the early stages, with the Ferrari of Massa and both Lotuses attempting to make their way through the field, meaning that overtaking was commonplace. Up front, even Sebastian Vettel was not having an undramatic beginning to the Grand Prix, coming dangerously close to wiping himself out of the race on lap ten, brushing the wall at turn 3, being lucky to avoid breaking an element of the suspension.
Moving towards the mid-part of the race, Vettel continued to stretch the gap back to Lewis Hamilton, eventually giving him a full pit stop advantage over the Mercedes driver. The initial round of stops began on lap 13, where pit stop strategies began to become evident. The majority of the top drivers seemed to be on a firm 2 stop strategy, meaning that the top few places were pretty much nailed on, but for the minor points place, drivers like Button, Raikkonen, di Resta and Grosjean all attempting the more risky one stop strategy to maximise their rewards. The overtaking remained relentless, with an intriguing scrap evolving for the final podium position between Nico Rosberg, Mark Webber and Fernando Alonso. The Mercedes certainly looked like he was backing up the quicker two drivers, and this pace eventually told, with the German losing two places in two corners, and then continued to fall away. The fight between Webber and Alonso continued for many laps, with the Aussie seemingly maintaining the gap. However, a collision when attempting a routine pass on backmarker Guido van der Garde allowed the Spaniard to close right up again, and cost the Red Bull driver part of his front wing. Eventually this, combined with wearing tyres, told, with Alonso passing Webber on lap 42 to assume the 3rd place position.
With the first position practically sewn up by half distance, the attention turned to the battle for the final podium positions, with Alonso closing in quickly on Hamilton. Having caught him by lap 60, an enthralling few laps ensued. Hamilton suffered behind the lapped traffic, allowing Fernando to overtake the Mercedes man on lap 63, albeit with a bit of contact. The Brit did not give up his place easily, challenging Alonso repeatedly for the place back. Further behind also remained interesting to the finish. Most notably, an incredible run from Paul di Resta, as he remained on the tyres on which he began the race until lap 57, meaning that he was the only one-stopper that did not have to worry about tyres come the end of the race and gave him a great chance of scoring points. Despite starting in a promising 3rd place, Valtteri Bottas failed to claim Williams's first points of the season, finishing in a disappointing 14th.
In complete contrast to the midfield action, Sebastian Vettel strolled to a 15 second victory over Fernando Alonso, leading all but one race laps. He finished a full 70 seconds ahead of 5th placed man Nico Rosberg, and lapped the rest of the field, in a devastating show of dominance. After a fantastic first stint, di Resta got his reward with a seventh place finish, with Toro Rosso's John Eric-Vergne taking an impressive 6th. Kimi Raikkonen continued his incredible record of scoring in consecutive races with a 9th place finish, leaving him level on points with Michael Schumacher's record of 24, and all eyes will be on the Finn in the next race. The day belonged to Vettel, however, with his dominant display firing a warning shot across the bows of his championship contenders, laying down the gauntlet for the rest of the campaign.
Qualifying, like last time out in Monaco, was thrust into chaos with the introduction of rain throughout the Saturday. This meant that the entirety was undertaken on the intermediate tyre, with initial slick tyre forays onto the track by Felipe Massa and Gilles Bianchi ending in spins and slides. Even with the wetter weather tyres, oversteer and drifting was common, leading to an unpredictable first qualifying session. Like Monaco, it was Force India's Paul di Resta who bore the brunt of the track increasing in pace as the session went on, being eliminated in 18th place. A bitter disappointment for the Scot, who was similarly unhappy on the radio two weeks ago. Q2 saw more improvement in the weather, leading to an ever improving track condition, however no-one dared risk the move to slick tyres. This once again meant a dash to be last over the line, thereby gaining the best track condition. More similarities to Monaco occurred in this session also, with Massa crashing off in the early part of the lap, leaving the Ferrari languishing in 16th place, and a real struggle to gain any serious points. The final section of qualifying was once again interrupted by rain, with firstly Hamilton, and then Vettel hitting the sweet spot and lighting the timing screens purple. With a late flurry of rain, it was the German who took his third consecutive pole in Canada, denying the Mercedes team. The real winner of qualifying, however, was Williams's Valtteri Bottas. Williams, beginning the seventh race of the season with 0 points, have a driver starting on the second row, with an impressive 3rd place finish. I doubt they will have a better chance to pick up points this season.
The two big DRS zones at the end and beginning of each lap seemed to suggest that we were in for a race of many overtaking manoeuvers. And so it proved. From the very beginning, although Vettel scampered off into the distance, leading by 2.8 seconds after just 2 laps, the midfield squabbled throughout the afternoon. Bottas, after his tremendous qualifying show yesterday, suffered the worst possible start, dropping three places in the opening lap, immediately putting his hopes for points in jeopardy. The Finn's early laps failed to get any easier, with Adrian Sutil spinning in an attempt to overtake the Williams driver on lap 6, forcing those immediately behind to take evasive action onto the grass at turn 3. The midfield switches seemed set to continue in the early stages, with the Ferrari of Massa and both Lotuses attempting to make their way through the field, meaning that overtaking was commonplace. Up front, even Sebastian Vettel was not having an undramatic beginning to the Grand Prix, coming dangerously close to wiping himself out of the race on lap ten, brushing the wall at turn 3, being lucky to avoid breaking an element of the suspension.
Moving towards the mid-part of the race, Vettel continued to stretch the gap back to Lewis Hamilton, eventually giving him a full pit stop advantage over the Mercedes driver. The initial round of stops began on lap 13, where pit stop strategies began to become evident. The majority of the top drivers seemed to be on a firm 2 stop strategy, meaning that the top few places were pretty much nailed on, but for the minor points place, drivers like Button, Raikkonen, di Resta and Grosjean all attempting the more risky one stop strategy to maximise their rewards. The overtaking remained relentless, with an intriguing scrap evolving for the final podium position between Nico Rosberg, Mark Webber and Fernando Alonso. The Mercedes certainly looked like he was backing up the quicker two drivers, and this pace eventually told, with the German losing two places in two corners, and then continued to fall away. The fight between Webber and Alonso continued for many laps, with the Aussie seemingly maintaining the gap. However, a collision when attempting a routine pass on backmarker Guido van der Garde allowed the Spaniard to close right up again, and cost the Red Bull driver part of his front wing. Eventually this, combined with wearing tyres, told, with Alonso passing Webber on lap 42 to assume the 3rd place position.
With the first position practically sewn up by half distance, the attention turned to the battle for the final podium positions, with Alonso closing in quickly on Hamilton. Having caught him by lap 60, an enthralling few laps ensued. Hamilton suffered behind the lapped traffic, allowing Fernando to overtake the Mercedes man on lap 63, albeit with a bit of contact. The Brit did not give up his place easily, challenging Alonso repeatedly for the place back. Further behind also remained interesting to the finish. Most notably, an incredible run from Paul di Resta, as he remained on the tyres on which he began the race until lap 57, meaning that he was the only one-stopper that did not have to worry about tyres come the end of the race and gave him a great chance of scoring points. Despite starting in a promising 3rd place, Valtteri Bottas failed to claim Williams's first points of the season, finishing in a disappointing 14th.
In complete contrast to the midfield action, Sebastian Vettel strolled to a 15 second victory over Fernando Alonso, leading all but one race laps. He finished a full 70 seconds ahead of 5th placed man Nico Rosberg, and lapped the rest of the field, in a devastating show of dominance. After a fantastic first stint, di Resta got his reward with a seventh place finish, with Toro Rosso's John Eric-Vergne taking an impressive 6th. Kimi Raikkonen continued his incredible record of scoring in consecutive races with a 9th place finish, leaving him level on points with Michael Schumacher's record of 24, and all eyes will be on the Finn in the next race. The day belonged to Vettel, however, with his dominant display firing a warning shot across the bows of his championship contenders, laying down the gauntlet for the rest of the campaign.
Saturday 8 June 2013
The 2013 French Open Finals: Same Old, Same Old?
In the French Open preview post, I set out who I thought would be the most likely candidates for both the men's and women's championships, hoping for a surprise or two along the way. As the end of another Grand Slam draws ever nearer, it is clear from the four finalists that this has not happened. No Goran Ivanisevic-style surprise for us this time around, with the biggest shock being that it is clay-court specialist David Ferrer, and not Roger Federer, in the men's final with Rafa Nadal. The top four domination of the men's game seems set to continue, with only Federer's position being weakened by the events of the last two weeks. In the women's game, it is arguably even more predictable, as the family that have monopolised the game for the past decade and a half remain in control, albeit halved in power.
With a little examination of the finalists and their run to the tournament's summit, we can see how monotonous today's game is. It could certainly be argued that has always been the case, especially in the men's game, with dominance from the likes of Borg, McEnroe, Connors, Becker, Agassi, Sampras, and more recently, Federer regularly characterising tennis. Therefore repeatedly seeing the same names perhaps should not be surprising. However, with the increased publicity and awareness of tennis in recent years, should we have expected to see more competition than experienced previously?
I will begin with today's women's final, contested between pre-tournament favourite Serena Williams, and reigning champion Maria Sharapova. Beginning with Serena, her route to the final has been relatively simple. Crushing her first three opponents for the loss of just 6 games, she cruised into the second week, doing little to challenge the assertion that the tournament winner is practically pre-determined. Another straight-sets victory in the fourth round against the 15th seed, Roberta Vinci, suggests that even the top 20 is not particularly competitive, seeing the American into the quarter final without dropping a set. There she met Svetlana Kuznetsova, who, despite being unseeded, is considered a very dangerous player. So it proved, with Serena being pushed all the way to the full three sets, claiming a 6-3 victory in the 3rd. The loss of a set evidently angered Williams, as she destroyed 5th seed Sara Errani in the subsequent semi-final to progress to yet another final, eradicating the memories of last year's shocking 1st round exit at Roland Garros.
Her opponent, Maria Sharapova, has had an altogether more strenuous passage to her second successive Parisian final. Despite winning all of her opening four matches without dropping a set, matching the achievement of Serena, she found it considerably more difficult than the American to whitewash opponents, conceding more and more games in each match she was involved in. The quarter final saw the Russian concede her first set of the tournament against Serb, Jelena Jankovic. A horrendous start saw the reigning champion lose the first set 6-0 to the world number 18, and though she recovered to win in three sets, she can ill-afford to reproduce this start against Serena. Her semi final also saw her lose a set, with Victoria Azarenka levelling the match after a strong start from Maria. Her battling third set victory shows that she certainly has the fight to challenge Serena. Whether a poor start would prove fatal is difficult to tell. Serena is definitely the favourite for today's final, but I would not count out Maria.
Moving on to the men's final, it appears almost unnecessary to reveal that Rafa Nadal is in another French Open final, as his dominance of the Grand Slam is well documented. The 7-times winner has had a more difficult route to this year's centrepiece than many would have expected. In both his first, and second round matches, he could only manage to win in 4 sets, suggesting signs of a Lukas Rosol-esque repeat, and the shock tennis seemingly requires. Nevertheless, he stabilised in later rounds, progressing from there to the semi finals without dropping a set, including a particularly impressive performance against Stanislav Wawrinka in the quarter-finals. There he met world number 1 Novak Djokovic, and yesterday saw one of the best matches in French Open history. A rollercoaster semi-final, with both men having ample opportunity to claim victory, Nadal triumphed in a mammoth 4 and a half hour, 5 set encounter, winning the final set 9-7 to progress to his eighth Roland Garros final. His trials and tribulations along the way, however, suggests that it is becoming ever more difficult to remain successful in the men's game.
In contrast, tomorrow will mark the inaugural Grand Slam final of David Ferrer's career. The clay court specialist has had a remarkably successful journey to the final, being the only one of the four finalists in either the men's or women's games not to drop a set. Bearing in mind the dominance of Rafa Nadal in recent years here, there are few who would have predicted that! Most impressive were his victories in the quarter and semi finals against firstly Tommy Robredo, whom he dispatched comfortably 6-2, 6-1, 6-1, and then home favourite Jo-Wilfried Tsonga. With an expectant home crowd, desperate for a French Grand Slam winner, to comprehensively beat the Frenchman 6-1, 7-6, 6-2 is highly impressive. To beat Nadal he will have to be at the top of his game, and get a touch of luck along the way, but with the form he is in, there is no reason why we can't see a significant shock tomorrow. It would certainly be nice to show that there is a bit of variety in the game.
The game of tennis has always had dominating factors, but certainly with the increasing coverage and publicity, I would have expected to see a more competitive tournament. If we compare tennis to another sport that has seen a recent increase in publicity, like Formula 1, we see the dominance of certain players maintained in tennis, and a much more competitive and open field in the latter. This makes me wonder if we will ever see a truly competitive tennis tournament, without there being some element of pre-determined nature to them. Until we do, moments like Ivanisevic's at Wimbledon will continue to be tennis gold.
With a little examination of the finalists and their run to the tournament's summit, we can see how monotonous today's game is. It could certainly be argued that has always been the case, especially in the men's game, with dominance from the likes of Borg, McEnroe, Connors, Becker, Agassi, Sampras, and more recently, Federer regularly characterising tennis. Therefore repeatedly seeing the same names perhaps should not be surprising. However, with the increased publicity and awareness of tennis in recent years, should we have expected to see more competition than experienced previously?
I will begin with today's women's final, contested between pre-tournament favourite Serena Williams, and reigning champion Maria Sharapova. Beginning with Serena, her route to the final has been relatively simple. Crushing her first three opponents for the loss of just 6 games, she cruised into the second week, doing little to challenge the assertion that the tournament winner is practically pre-determined. Another straight-sets victory in the fourth round against the 15th seed, Roberta Vinci, suggests that even the top 20 is not particularly competitive, seeing the American into the quarter final without dropping a set. There she met Svetlana Kuznetsova, who, despite being unseeded, is considered a very dangerous player. So it proved, with Serena being pushed all the way to the full three sets, claiming a 6-3 victory in the 3rd. The loss of a set evidently angered Williams, as she destroyed 5th seed Sara Errani in the subsequent semi-final to progress to yet another final, eradicating the memories of last year's shocking 1st round exit at Roland Garros.
Her opponent, Maria Sharapova, has had an altogether more strenuous passage to her second successive Parisian final. Despite winning all of her opening four matches without dropping a set, matching the achievement of Serena, she found it considerably more difficult than the American to whitewash opponents, conceding more and more games in each match she was involved in. The quarter final saw the Russian concede her first set of the tournament against Serb, Jelena Jankovic. A horrendous start saw the reigning champion lose the first set 6-0 to the world number 18, and though she recovered to win in three sets, she can ill-afford to reproduce this start against Serena. Her semi final also saw her lose a set, with Victoria Azarenka levelling the match after a strong start from Maria. Her battling third set victory shows that she certainly has the fight to challenge Serena. Whether a poor start would prove fatal is difficult to tell. Serena is definitely the favourite for today's final, but I would not count out Maria.
Moving on to the men's final, it appears almost unnecessary to reveal that Rafa Nadal is in another French Open final, as his dominance of the Grand Slam is well documented. The 7-times winner has had a more difficult route to this year's centrepiece than many would have expected. In both his first, and second round matches, he could only manage to win in 4 sets, suggesting signs of a Lukas Rosol-esque repeat, and the shock tennis seemingly requires. Nevertheless, he stabilised in later rounds, progressing from there to the semi finals without dropping a set, including a particularly impressive performance against Stanislav Wawrinka in the quarter-finals. There he met world number 1 Novak Djokovic, and yesterday saw one of the best matches in French Open history. A rollercoaster semi-final, with both men having ample opportunity to claim victory, Nadal triumphed in a mammoth 4 and a half hour, 5 set encounter, winning the final set 9-7 to progress to his eighth Roland Garros final. His trials and tribulations along the way, however, suggests that it is becoming ever more difficult to remain successful in the men's game.
In contrast, tomorrow will mark the inaugural Grand Slam final of David Ferrer's career. The clay court specialist has had a remarkably successful journey to the final, being the only one of the four finalists in either the men's or women's games not to drop a set. Bearing in mind the dominance of Rafa Nadal in recent years here, there are few who would have predicted that! Most impressive were his victories in the quarter and semi finals against firstly Tommy Robredo, whom he dispatched comfortably 6-2, 6-1, 6-1, and then home favourite Jo-Wilfried Tsonga. With an expectant home crowd, desperate for a French Grand Slam winner, to comprehensively beat the Frenchman 6-1, 7-6, 6-2 is highly impressive. To beat Nadal he will have to be at the top of his game, and get a touch of luck along the way, but with the form he is in, there is no reason why we can't see a significant shock tomorrow. It would certainly be nice to show that there is a bit of variety in the game.
The game of tennis has always had dominating factors, but certainly with the increasing coverage and publicity, I would have expected to see a more competitive tournament. If we compare tennis to another sport that has seen a recent increase in publicity, like Formula 1, we see the dominance of certain players maintained in tennis, and a much more competitive and open field in the latter. This makes me wonder if we will ever see a truly competitive tennis tournament, without there being some element of pre-determined nature to them. Until we do, moments like Ivanisevic's at Wimbledon will continue to be tennis gold.
Sunday 2 June 2013
England vs Brazil: Is The Road to Brazil Blocked?
In a week in which the remodelled iconic Brazilian stadium, the Maracana, has been heavily criticised for the various safety and security concerns, football fans finally got to see the 'finished product' in the lead up to (in my opinion) the real 'Greatest Show On Earth', the World Cup in 2014. Unfortunately, those safety concerns had an immediate impact on the stadium capacity, reducing tonight's crowd to a 'meagre' 60,000 packing one of the world's prettiest new stadiums. The inaugural match of its long-awaited re-opening saw Roy Hodgson's England visit the new home of the Brazilians.
Fresh off the back of a disappointing 1-1 draw at home to the Republic of Ireland, in which Hodgson and his tactics were criticised for being predictable and one-dimensional, England took the long trip to Brazil as underdogs (unless of course you are one of those England fans who still maintains at the beginning of every tournament that we can 'channel the spirit of 66'). 1,000 loyal England fans (or 'gluttons for punishment' as I call them) made the long trip to South America, to be significantly outnumbered. In fairness to them, the England fans were often the more vocal and recognisable, putting the 59,000 Brazilians to shame at times. This was certainly seen as a good indicator of England's progress under Hodgson, as after positive home results against the likes of Spain and Brazil in the last year, the real test would come away from home. It would also be a first impression of what our expectations at the next World Cup should be.
Looking at the two sides, you would have fancied the Brazilians to win at home against what is regularly considered a weaker generation of England team than we would have experienced under a decade ago. With the high-profile move of Brazil's pin-up striker Neymar to Catalan giants Barcelona for a reported £50 million in the week, the attention was once again on his shoulders. There is also no doubt that the weight of the expectant Brazilian population will also be upon him to deliver the World Cup trophy on home soil next year. Brazil too, however, seem to be going through a weaker generation than the famous periods in the 1970's and, in my earlier World Cup memories, the three 'Rs' of Ronaldo, Rivaldo and Ronaldinho in their dominant 2002 World Cup success. Therefore, this seemed to be set up for an intriguing contest from two underachieving nations.
The opening 15 minutes summed up my earlier point perfectly, with neither side at risk of scoring. Missed passes aplenty characterised the early part of this game, as neither side managed to capitalise on mistakes from the other, opting instead to hand possession straight back. However, it was the Brazilians, urged in by the vast majority of the Maracana, who got a foothold in the game first. Towards the end of the first half, England were indebted to their goalkeeper Joe Hart, who made a string of good saves, most notably from Neymar, using his face to deflect a goalbound effort. England seemingly perked up after these warning shots, and began to string a few passes together. This culminated in a great chance for Theo Walcott just before the half time whistle. A neat reverse pass released the Arsenal winger, only to see him hit his shot straight at Julio Cesar in the Brazil goal. This brought to an end a rather dire first 45, in which neither side had really improved their chances of being seen as contenders for next year's tournament.
Demons over the stadium then came back to the fore, as all television pictures were suspended during the half time interval, leaving millions worldwide without access to live broadcasting of the game. Whilst this problem may not have been anything to do with the stadium, it only gave pundits the chance to further discuss the remodelling, and leaves this failure towards the front of the minds of many. This is particularly true because there wasn't much to talk about in the first half! Fortunately, the problem was fixed before the restart, and we were able to enjoy what turned out to be a highly entertaining second half. After a period of heavy Brazil pressure, a bit of fortune handed the 5 time world champions the lead. Substitute Hernanes curled a fantastic shot beyond the despairing dive of Joe Hart and onto the bar. Luckily for the Brazilians, the ball rebounded to the feet of Fred, who stroked the ball beyond the prone Hart. At this point, I must confess, I feared for England, as having been utterly outplayed for the majority of the match, a cricket score now looked likely.
However, to England's credit, they responded well. Chances for Milner and Rooney came and went, leaving England fans wondering whether they had spurned their opportunity. Step forward Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain. England's newest golden boy stamped his mark on this historic stadium with a stunning team goal just before the hour. Neat one-touch football between Milner and Rooney gave Oxlade-Chamberlain the chance to volley at goal, a chance which he dispatched emphatically into the bottom corner. Even better was to come for the 1,000 travelling English fans. After heavy Brazilian pressure, Wayne Rooney broke free at the other end, and, courtesy of a small deflection, curled a looping, dipping shot underneath Cesar's crossbar, and England lead. Bearing in mind their awful first-half performance, this was the stuff of dreams for the travelling fanbase. Unfortunately, their joy was to be short lived. A Brazilian raid down the right hand side saw a deflected cross put into the England box, and Paulinho was on hand to acrobatically volley the ball across the goal, giving Joe Hart no chance. Despite further Brazilian pressure, England's defence remained resolute to the end of the game.
A 2-2 draw is certainly a scoreline I would have taken at start of play this evening, and one that was unforeseeable after the first half performance. Though the Brazilians dominated possession for the majority of the game, there are certainly positives that can be taken from this England performance, that can give us hope for a successful World Cup (but not too much!). Despite the mid-week derision, credit must go to Roy Hodgson, whose tactics were evidently poor in the first half, but his changes in the second period clearly gave England a greater say in the game. Whether we can read too much into this result is difficult to tell, as I believe that neither the English nor the Brazilians will be fancied to lift the historic trophy next July. As for the state of the preparations for the Brazilian World Cup, I would put them somewhere between the Delhi Commonwealth Games of 2010 (which now best known for the term 'Delhi Belly'), and the perfectionist Beijing Olympics in 2008. The 'Road to Brazil' is not blocked, but there are a few obstacles that need shifting first.
Fresh off the back of a disappointing 1-1 draw at home to the Republic of Ireland, in which Hodgson and his tactics were criticised for being predictable and one-dimensional, England took the long trip to Brazil as underdogs (unless of course you are one of those England fans who still maintains at the beginning of every tournament that we can 'channel the spirit of 66'). 1,000 loyal England fans (or 'gluttons for punishment' as I call them) made the long trip to South America, to be significantly outnumbered. In fairness to them, the England fans were often the more vocal and recognisable, putting the 59,000 Brazilians to shame at times. This was certainly seen as a good indicator of England's progress under Hodgson, as after positive home results against the likes of Spain and Brazil in the last year, the real test would come away from home. It would also be a first impression of what our expectations at the next World Cup should be.
Looking at the two sides, you would have fancied the Brazilians to win at home against what is regularly considered a weaker generation of England team than we would have experienced under a decade ago. With the high-profile move of Brazil's pin-up striker Neymar to Catalan giants Barcelona for a reported £50 million in the week, the attention was once again on his shoulders. There is also no doubt that the weight of the expectant Brazilian population will also be upon him to deliver the World Cup trophy on home soil next year. Brazil too, however, seem to be going through a weaker generation than the famous periods in the 1970's and, in my earlier World Cup memories, the three 'Rs' of Ronaldo, Rivaldo and Ronaldinho in their dominant 2002 World Cup success. Therefore, this seemed to be set up for an intriguing contest from two underachieving nations.
The opening 15 minutes summed up my earlier point perfectly, with neither side at risk of scoring. Missed passes aplenty characterised the early part of this game, as neither side managed to capitalise on mistakes from the other, opting instead to hand possession straight back. However, it was the Brazilians, urged in by the vast majority of the Maracana, who got a foothold in the game first. Towards the end of the first half, England were indebted to their goalkeeper Joe Hart, who made a string of good saves, most notably from Neymar, using his face to deflect a goalbound effort. England seemingly perked up after these warning shots, and began to string a few passes together. This culminated in a great chance for Theo Walcott just before the half time whistle. A neat reverse pass released the Arsenal winger, only to see him hit his shot straight at Julio Cesar in the Brazil goal. This brought to an end a rather dire first 45, in which neither side had really improved their chances of being seen as contenders for next year's tournament.
Demons over the stadium then came back to the fore, as all television pictures were suspended during the half time interval, leaving millions worldwide without access to live broadcasting of the game. Whilst this problem may not have been anything to do with the stadium, it only gave pundits the chance to further discuss the remodelling, and leaves this failure towards the front of the minds of many. This is particularly true because there wasn't much to talk about in the first half! Fortunately, the problem was fixed before the restart, and we were able to enjoy what turned out to be a highly entertaining second half. After a period of heavy Brazil pressure, a bit of fortune handed the 5 time world champions the lead. Substitute Hernanes curled a fantastic shot beyond the despairing dive of Joe Hart and onto the bar. Luckily for the Brazilians, the ball rebounded to the feet of Fred, who stroked the ball beyond the prone Hart. At this point, I must confess, I feared for England, as having been utterly outplayed for the majority of the match, a cricket score now looked likely.
However, to England's credit, they responded well. Chances for Milner and Rooney came and went, leaving England fans wondering whether they had spurned their opportunity. Step forward Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain. England's newest golden boy stamped his mark on this historic stadium with a stunning team goal just before the hour. Neat one-touch football between Milner and Rooney gave Oxlade-Chamberlain the chance to volley at goal, a chance which he dispatched emphatically into the bottom corner. Even better was to come for the 1,000 travelling English fans. After heavy Brazilian pressure, Wayne Rooney broke free at the other end, and, courtesy of a small deflection, curled a looping, dipping shot underneath Cesar's crossbar, and England lead. Bearing in mind their awful first-half performance, this was the stuff of dreams for the travelling fanbase. Unfortunately, their joy was to be short lived. A Brazilian raid down the right hand side saw a deflected cross put into the England box, and Paulinho was on hand to acrobatically volley the ball across the goal, giving Joe Hart no chance. Despite further Brazilian pressure, England's defence remained resolute to the end of the game.
A 2-2 draw is certainly a scoreline I would have taken at start of play this evening, and one that was unforeseeable after the first half performance. Though the Brazilians dominated possession for the majority of the game, there are certainly positives that can be taken from this England performance, that can give us hope for a successful World Cup (but not too much!). Despite the mid-week derision, credit must go to Roy Hodgson, whose tactics were evidently poor in the first half, but his changes in the second period clearly gave England a greater say in the game. Whether we can read too much into this result is difficult to tell, as I believe that neither the English nor the Brazilians will be fancied to lift the historic trophy next July. As for the state of the preparations for the Brazilian World Cup, I would put them somewhere between the Delhi Commonwealth Games of 2010 (which now best known for the term 'Delhi Belly'), and the perfectionist Beijing Olympics in 2008. The 'Road to Brazil' is not blocked, but there are a few obstacles that need shifting first.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)