This weekend's Singapore Grand Prix from Marina Bay has perhaps pull the final nail in the coffin of this season's Driver Championship. With Sebastian Vettel leaving the Asian city-state 60 points ahead with only 150 remaining, it seems now a case of when and not if the German will take his fourth consecutive drivers' title. It is an incredible feat, matched only by fellow German Michael Schumacher, and he will be hoping to surpass his compatriot's record in the coming years. With the amount of years left in the Red Bull driver's career, I would not be at all surprised if Vettel did manage to take all of Schumacher's records away from him one-by-one, just less than a decade after people said they would never be beaten. It is an indication of the incredible domination Vettel has had on the sport, and no race has illustrated this more than the Singapore Grand Prix this weekend.
The big news in the weeks in between the Italian Grand Prix and the trip to Marina Bay is that Lotus driver Kimi Raikkonen, who had already spurned an approach from Red Bull, decided instead to move to his former employers Ferrari for the start of the 2014 season. My initial reaction to the Finn's decision was that he had decided to return to the team he won his one and only title with, and that the Italian side remained the most likely team to repeat that success with. Therefore, the decision seemed to be odd from the perspective that the Finn turned down Red Bull, but sensible on the basis that he is familiar with many of the Ferrari team, and I feel that he will settle in quicker with. However, reports over the following days suggested that Raikkonen's decision was motivated by both success and finances. The former McLaren man, in interviews with the international media, implied that he had decided to make the move to the Scuderia as Lotus had failed to pay his wages for a month. This simply puts the icing on the cake for the Finn, who has enjoyed a reasonable amount of success with the British team, but he needs to make that step up the grid if he wants to realistically challenge for any titles in the future.
Raikkonen, who was also suffering the effects of an injection he had into his back, was clearly still distracted by his new contract, as his qualifying did not go to plan. On any street circuit it is important to qualify well, as those further down the grid are more succeptible to first lap incidents, and getting stuck behind slower cars in front. In Q1, the Red Bulls, who had also dominated the practice sessions, were the only team able to cruise through into Q2 using only the hard tyres. Even the Mercedes, who have been notoriously good on a single lap, were unable to just stay on the hard tyres. Ferrari had an unwanted scare, as Felipe Massa found himself in the bottom 6 as the flag dropped. Fortunately for the Italians, the Brazilian managed to get himself into the relative safety of mid-table, but he did little to put himself in the shop window. The big casualty from Q1 was Paul di Resta. The Brit has struggled in recent races, and is no longer a stranger to exiting in the first qualifying session, so perhaps it should not be such a shock. Q2 saw Raikkonen depart as the big name dropout, as his back caused him too much pain to get his best lap. The man to take his place was Esteban Gutierrez. The Sauber driver managed to break into the top 10 for the first time, outqualifying his more experienced teammate in the progress. Vettel's dominance in the first two qualifying sessions seemed to be continued in the final shootout, as he blasted into the 1:42's, a full seven tenths faster than his nearest rivals. So convinced was the German that he had done enough, he decided not to return to the track, instead becoming a spectator. However, he would have been a nervous onlooker as Nico Rosberg set the fastest first sector on his final lap. As the Mercedes passed the line, Vettel managed a sigh of relief, as Rosberg could only get within a tenth of his initial time.
That one tenth would prove pivotal in the run to the first corner. Unusually, the Red Bull was beaten off the line by Rosberg, who powered off the line. Having passed Vettel before the first corner, the Mercedes ran wide into turn 2, allowing Vettel to sneak back up the inside to get the lead back. Behind, the big winner was, once again, Fernando Alonso, who went from 7th to 3rd in the space of two corners. Steering clear of any danger, the Spaniard went all the way around the outside of two rows to claim the final podium spot. In fact, the entire field managed to avoid contact on the opening lap, showing incredible driving accuracy. Once he had maintained his lead, Sebastian Vettel quickly made the break, scampering away from Rosberg. By the time the Mercedes made his first pit stop, Vettel was over 7.5 seconds clear. As the race ran on, it became more and more obvious that Vettel was strolling to a comfortable victory, so attention turned to the chasing pack behind. After the first stops, Hamilton and Grosjean began reeling in Mark Webber quite quickly, with the Australian on older tyres. Just as it looked that the result was inevitable, Daniel Ricciardo made an uncharacteristic error, locking up both front tyres and sliding into the barriers. This brought out the safety car, eradicating Vettel's lead and throwing the result back into the air.
This lasted next to no time however, as no sooner had the safety car pitted then Vettel made the break once again. With one Red Bull scampering away, the attention turned to the other. Aussie Mark Webber had been battling with Hamilton and Grosjean since the early laps, and this seemed set to be an ongoing rivalry. However, his cause was aided by the sight of Grosjean's engine giving in on lap 38. When the pair then made their final stops, they fell back behind the majority of the chasing pack, meaning a full-throttle race to the finish. It seemed to be a tactical decision that worked, as the Aussie managed to perform the undercut on Nico Rosberg, to take an effective 3rd place. However, this was swiftly wiped away by Raikkonen's ability to perform the same undercut. With both Alonso, who was trying to one stop, and Vettel way up the road, the final podium spot was the only thing up for grabs at this point. With both McLarens one stopping, there were mobile chicanes that needed passing for those behind. However, this often became easier said than done, as Hamilton and Rosberg almost collected one another on several occasions when trying to pass Perez.
Despite chasing Raikkonen down to try and claim the final podium spot, Webber began to struggle massively into the final couple of laps, losing four seconds a lap to the Mercedeses behind. He was eventually passed by both, before being forced to retire with a lack of fuel, and a sick engine, eventually setting fire to itself on the final lap. It is just the latest in a long list of misfortune for the Aussie, who will be glad to leave the sport at this rate! In contrast, his teammate Vettel came home to win the race with ease, leading by over 30 seconds from Fernando Alonso. However, for both, the day ended badly. For Webber, having accepted a lift from Fernando Alonso, he was penalised with a 10 place penalty at the next race in Korea, for three reprimands in a season. For Vettel, despite his dominant victory, almost guaranteeing the title, he was roundly booed on the podium. Whilst this was not the first time (it happened at Monza), the first time could easily be explained as being deep Ferrari territory. Singapore is not. To boo any racer is unacceptable, especially when they have performed so admirably this season. Whilst it could be argued that F1 is getting boring, as the German is sweeping everything and everyone aside, this is not justification for booing someone. I do not recall Schumacher being booed wherever he went, or Senna. I think that we have to credit Red Bull for making a terrific car, and Vettel for driving it so well.
As for the title: it looks over. 60 points is a lot to recoup out of 150. We would need to see a few Vettel non-finishes for this to be anything other than a Red Bull and Vettel success. I simply hope that we do see a few more interesting and close races over the next few weeks, otherwise F1 will begin to become a touch tedious and repetitive. Since the change to the tyres Red Bull have seemed best prepared to deal with the rule changes and the tyres, giving them an inherent advantage. Next season, hopefully we will see a slightly different story, getting us back to the start of the season, where any one of 6 or 7 cars could win races.
Analysis of sporting events, talking points and controversies.
Saturday 28 September 2013
Monday 23 September 2013
Why Is The Footballing World Not 'Right Behind Gay Footballers'?
The 21st century has seen football as a sport attempt to clean up its image, with anti-social behaviour and racism being stamped down upon by clubs, both on the pitch and in the stands. However, strangely, clubs do not seem as willing to support the Right Behind Gay Footballers campaign, which is indicated by the reluctance of many of the Premier League clubs to wear the rainbow laces that symbolise the campaign. Despite it being another form of discrimination, similar to racism, football seems unwilling to give it the same treatment. This post will examine the scale of the problem, before suggesting potential reasons behind the clubs' decisions not to don the striking rainbow laces for this week's fixtures.
Whilst racism often, and quite rightly, takes the headlines, with sagas like that of John Terry and Luis Suarez a couple of examples in recent years, homophobia often goes under the radar. Having attended many games over the years, I can recall several examples of homophobic abuse from the sidelines. Whilst there are perhaps not as many examples of on-field homophobic abuse, this does not mean there is not a issue within the game. Discrimination against gay sportsmen is not simply isolated to football, however. In almost every sport the statistics are striking. Despite an approximate of 10% of the population being gay, there are hardly any examples of gay sportsmen. Now, either this is an incredibly unlikely set of circumstances, or there is something that is forcing gay footballers to hide their sexuality. The perception of football dressing rooms and stadia as 'laddish enviroments' often means that those gay footballers believe that they will not be as readily accepted as they are in the rest of society, and this is unfortunate. I am certain that these worries are sometimes unnecessary, as many dressing rooms would be perfectly accepting of gay team mates. However, I am equally certain that there are dressing rooms that would not take as kindly to it, and would treat the player differently as a result. Also, players will suffer abuse for being different in any way, and being gay would immediately make the player a target for homophobic supporters. Neither of these scenarios are very pleasant, and many stories from ex-professionals have indicated how hard it is to be a gay man in sport.
Two examples spring instantly to mind. Ex-Welsh rugby union captain Gareth Thomas, who became the first openly gay rugby union player in 2009, has since explained the months and years of emotional turmoil at the thought of coming out to his fellow rugby players, and feared being abused by the crowd. This is actually a fantastic success story, as his fears were unfounded, his colleagues accepted him with open arms, and he has since gone on to become a gay icon for sportsmen worldwide. Others were not as fortunate. The first example of an openly gay British footballer ended in tragedy. Justin Fashanu, the ex-Norwich, Nottingham Forest, Manchester City and West Ham United player was subjected to abuse, both inside and outside the dressing room. Eventually, after a brief career state-side, he was accused of sexual assault by a seventeen year old, a charge he always claimed was unfounded. Sadly, this led to his suicide in 1998. The fact that in 10 years the feeling has changed is positive, however the problem of homophobic abuse still remains, otherwise we would have expected to see many more players come out. In recent years, American football Robbie Rogers, who plied his trade at Leeds United, came out and immediately retired, citing his homosexuality as the reason behind his decision. This, coupled with the decision not to wear the rainbow laces, implies that there is still some work to do to kick homophobic abuse out of football.
So what is the 'Right Behind Gay Footballers' campaign? Gay rights group Stonewall, created in 1989 after the infamous Stonewall riots, launched the Right Behind campaign earlier this week. Designed to back gay players and unite against homophobia within sport, the British based group sent rainbow laces to each of the 92 Football League clubs this week, in the hope that they would wear them, symbolising football's unity against discrimination. After a successful Twitter campaign, which saw the hashtag #RBGF trending nationwide, it was expected that the majority of football clubs would support the motion. However, the campaign initially went down like a lead balloon within the clubs, with only Everton from England's top flight openly stating that they would wear them. Neither Norwich nor Aston Villa in Saturday's early fixture donned the laces, sending the initial message that football is not whole-heartedly behind the campaign.
But why could that be? As much as football detractors will be writing the sport off as discriminatory and homophobic, I refuse to accept that the vast majority of footballers, chairmen and fans are not wholly supportive of gay rights in everyday life, and therefore we would expect football to be no different. Perhaps it would be more worth looking at the campaign itself, and the way that it has conducted itself over the last week. Here we can see a good idea of why football clubs, and gay footballers in general, would be less willing to get involved. There have been many incidents of crass behaviour by those running the campaign, with many of the supportive slogans and adverts getting dangerously close to the knuckle. Even the title of the campaign, 'Right Behind Gay Footballers', is intended to be a play on an old homophobic joke. Whilst the intentions behind the campaign are undoubtedly good, much of the execution is not serious enough for the footballing world to consider it as a significant problem. To trivialise the problem means that the footballing world will fail to take the message of the campaign seriously. In fact, we could even say that it is counter-productive, as it actually reinforces the bigoted stereotypes that are consistently screamed at them from the terraces. From this perspective it is easy to see why many of those involved in the game would not want to be associated with such a poorly executed campaign.
This certainly goes some way to explaining the reluctance of many of the football clubs in wearing the rainbow laces associated with the RBGF campaign. However, my personal opinion remains that they should all still be wearing them. Yes, the campaign is flawed, but the message behind it remains the same: that there is no place in football for homophobic abuse or discrimination. The people designing the campaign and the advertisers have been extremely silly, but the motion is positive. There is no guarantee that this subject will come up again for a while, so even if it means supporting a flawed campaign, it is always good to indicate how united football is against a topic. I can, however, understand the reluctance of many gay footballers to want to wear something that appears to worsen the stereotypes that they have been verbally battered with for so many years.
Whilst racism often, and quite rightly, takes the headlines, with sagas like that of John Terry and Luis Suarez a couple of examples in recent years, homophobia often goes under the radar. Having attended many games over the years, I can recall several examples of homophobic abuse from the sidelines. Whilst there are perhaps not as many examples of on-field homophobic abuse, this does not mean there is not a issue within the game. Discrimination against gay sportsmen is not simply isolated to football, however. In almost every sport the statistics are striking. Despite an approximate of 10% of the population being gay, there are hardly any examples of gay sportsmen. Now, either this is an incredibly unlikely set of circumstances, or there is something that is forcing gay footballers to hide their sexuality. The perception of football dressing rooms and stadia as 'laddish enviroments' often means that those gay footballers believe that they will not be as readily accepted as they are in the rest of society, and this is unfortunate. I am certain that these worries are sometimes unnecessary, as many dressing rooms would be perfectly accepting of gay team mates. However, I am equally certain that there are dressing rooms that would not take as kindly to it, and would treat the player differently as a result. Also, players will suffer abuse for being different in any way, and being gay would immediately make the player a target for homophobic supporters. Neither of these scenarios are very pleasant, and many stories from ex-professionals have indicated how hard it is to be a gay man in sport.
Two examples spring instantly to mind. Ex-Welsh rugby union captain Gareth Thomas, who became the first openly gay rugby union player in 2009, has since explained the months and years of emotional turmoil at the thought of coming out to his fellow rugby players, and feared being abused by the crowd. This is actually a fantastic success story, as his fears were unfounded, his colleagues accepted him with open arms, and he has since gone on to become a gay icon for sportsmen worldwide. Others were not as fortunate. The first example of an openly gay British footballer ended in tragedy. Justin Fashanu, the ex-Norwich, Nottingham Forest, Manchester City and West Ham United player was subjected to abuse, both inside and outside the dressing room. Eventually, after a brief career state-side, he was accused of sexual assault by a seventeen year old, a charge he always claimed was unfounded. Sadly, this led to his suicide in 1998. The fact that in 10 years the feeling has changed is positive, however the problem of homophobic abuse still remains, otherwise we would have expected to see many more players come out. In recent years, American football Robbie Rogers, who plied his trade at Leeds United, came out and immediately retired, citing his homosexuality as the reason behind his decision. This, coupled with the decision not to wear the rainbow laces, implies that there is still some work to do to kick homophobic abuse out of football.
So what is the 'Right Behind Gay Footballers' campaign? Gay rights group Stonewall, created in 1989 after the infamous Stonewall riots, launched the Right Behind campaign earlier this week. Designed to back gay players and unite against homophobia within sport, the British based group sent rainbow laces to each of the 92 Football League clubs this week, in the hope that they would wear them, symbolising football's unity against discrimination. After a successful Twitter campaign, which saw the hashtag #RBGF trending nationwide, it was expected that the majority of football clubs would support the motion. However, the campaign initially went down like a lead balloon within the clubs, with only Everton from England's top flight openly stating that they would wear them. Neither Norwich nor Aston Villa in Saturday's early fixture donned the laces, sending the initial message that football is not whole-heartedly behind the campaign.
But why could that be? As much as football detractors will be writing the sport off as discriminatory and homophobic, I refuse to accept that the vast majority of footballers, chairmen and fans are not wholly supportive of gay rights in everyday life, and therefore we would expect football to be no different. Perhaps it would be more worth looking at the campaign itself, and the way that it has conducted itself over the last week. Here we can see a good idea of why football clubs, and gay footballers in general, would be less willing to get involved. There have been many incidents of crass behaviour by those running the campaign, with many of the supportive slogans and adverts getting dangerously close to the knuckle. Even the title of the campaign, 'Right Behind Gay Footballers', is intended to be a play on an old homophobic joke. Whilst the intentions behind the campaign are undoubtedly good, much of the execution is not serious enough for the footballing world to consider it as a significant problem. To trivialise the problem means that the footballing world will fail to take the message of the campaign seriously. In fact, we could even say that it is counter-productive, as it actually reinforces the bigoted stereotypes that are consistently screamed at them from the terraces. From this perspective it is easy to see why many of those involved in the game would not want to be associated with such a poorly executed campaign.
This certainly goes some way to explaining the reluctance of many of the football clubs in wearing the rainbow laces associated with the RBGF campaign. However, my personal opinion remains that they should all still be wearing them. Yes, the campaign is flawed, but the message behind it remains the same: that there is no place in football for homophobic abuse or discrimination. The people designing the campaign and the advertisers have been extremely silly, but the motion is positive. There is no guarantee that this subject will come up again for a while, so even if it means supporting a flawed campaign, it is always good to indicate how united football is against a topic. I can, however, understand the reluctance of many gay footballers to want to wear something that appears to worsen the stereotypes that they have been verbally battered with for so many years.
The B*****d in Black: Should We Do More To Protect Referees?
The announcement of Howard Webb as the referee of this weekend's Manchester derby caused many groups of City fans to take to social media and call fix, at times abusing the policeman from the North East. This all comes after a statement last week from former referee Mark Halsey, who has said that without further support for the officials, we will soon see a referee becoming so under pressure they may consider taking their own life. Whilst this claim may appear dramatic on the surface, there is much in the way of evidence to support it. This post will look at recent examples of top class referees being put under intense pressure, before examining the potential fixes to this problem.
In terms of examples, I can recall three in recent years of referees receiving threats against his person, or even his life. The one I will start with is Tom Henning Ovrebo, whose name will be all too familiar with Chelsea fans. In the 2009 UEFA Champions League semi final, the Norwegian had a shocking evening, refusing to grant Chelsea two stonewall penalties, and potentially even a third, and debatably dismissing Eric Abidal. However, the final two penalty claims, which came after Andres Iniesta's dramatic late equaliser, sent many of the Chelsea players into a rage, surrounding the referee in complaint. The Norwegian left the field to a chorus of boos. Had that been the end of the story, it would have been acceptable, as the crowd has every right to voice their displeasure. What they do not have the right to do is send the referee threatening messages, both through the post and over social networking sites. This is what happened to Ovrebo, with threats against his life common in the following fortnight.
Example number two is the referee of the EURO 2004 quarter final between Portugal and England: Urs Meier. The Swiss official generally had a good game, however his performance will be best remembered for a shocking error which cost England their place in the competition. At 2-2, and deep into stoppage time, a Beckham corner was met powerfully by Sol Campbell, thumping the ball into the net. Unbelievably, the referee had blown his whistle for a foul, despite Campbell failing to come into contact with anyone until after he had headed the ball. This effectively denied England a place in the semi-finals, and ultimately eliminated them, as penalties resulted in the inevitable elimination. Meier, like Ovrebo, suffered an influx of death threats, leading to him being given personal security for some time afterwards.
The final example is the one referred to by Mark Halsey last week. Mark Clattenburg was relieved of his refereeing duties mid-way through last season, after it emerged that accusations had been made that the official had racially abused Chelsea's John Obi Mikel. In fact, these accusations had been completely fabricated by the Chelsea players, and passed onto Mikel as if fact. This led, understandably, to a very angry Nigerian. However, less acceptable was his reaction. After the game had concluded the midfielder, by all accounts, barged into the referee's dressing room and threatened to break his legs. It has to be said that these rumours were not started by Mikel himself, so it is slightly different to other examples. However, it does indicate just how high passions run on the football field.
So what can be done to help referees? Having experienced abuse from the sidelines as a referee first-hand, I can certainly vouch for the argument that the Respect campaign has done next to nothing for the game. People can still lip read what Wayne Rooney says to referees, players continue to get in the faces of referees when a decision goes against them, and I am certain that there are many incidents that go completely unpunished. Any referee that feels threatened is unacceptable, and must be stamped out. What crowds don't understand when they abuse referees is that without one, the game could not begin. It is therefore pointless abusing them, and even more pointless complaining about decisions that have already been made. We will not change our minds!
Having said that, recieving abuse from fans during the game is something that a referee has to accept as being part and parcel of the game. When passions run high, sometimes fans will use offensive language towards officials that have made poor decisions. That is not to excuse racist or any other type of discriminatory abuse, as that is certainly the exception to the rule. However, general abuse from the fans is to be expected, and referees have put themselves in the frame for that. The area that football needs to stamp out of the game is the abuse of referees by footballers on the pitch, and the subsequent abuse that referees recieve after the game.
In terms of the off-field abuse, which has often resulted in death threats being sent to referees, there is little more the world of football can do other than to appeal to the common sense of the football fans involved. The police must be trusted to act swiftly and harshly against offenders, and football as a sport must punish any person found guilty with lifetime bans. I think the best way to combat the ever declining treatment of officials on the pitch is to go right back to the very grass roots of the game and make more sending-off worthy offences. Attempting the top-down approach, like the Respect, has been proven to be ineffective, so perhaps it is best to concentrate on the next generation of football players. By giving harsher sanctions for dissent and abuse from a very early age, to both the players and the crowd, referees can wrestle back the control from the sidelines, and gain the sort of status that rugby officials enjoy. Whilst not available at the grass roots, video and audio technology could also be used to retrospectively ban players who have been caught abusing referees on camera or microphone. However, one way in which referees can help themselves is by explaining their decisions, and admitting when they have made mistakes. I am a big supporter of referee press conferences, as it gives the officials the chance to explain their actions, and give the situation from their perspective. This would help to clear up much of the debate of the did they/didn't they see it.
Nevertheless, even without these press conferences, abuse of any referee is unacceptable. And it does not bode well for the future of the game. Speaking from experience, the abuse that I recieved from parents at youth level as a referee at 14 well and truly put me off from continuing it as a career. If more make the same decision, we could find ourselves with a distinct shortage of top quality referees, which will only anger fans more, as more mistakes will be made. Referees are put under exceptional pressure, and they do an excellent job 99% of the time. And 99% of fans respect that. But we still need to act to prevent that 1% of fans in the 1% of cases ruining football in the present, and the future.
In terms of examples, I can recall three in recent years of referees receiving threats against his person, or even his life. The one I will start with is Tom Henning Ovrebo, whose name will be all too familiar with Chelsea fans. In the 2009 UEFA Champions League semi final, the Norwegian had a shocking evening, refusing to grant Chelsea two stonewall penalties, and potentially even a third, and debatably dismissing Eric Abidal. However, the final two penalty claims, which came after Andres Iniesta's dramatic late equaliser, sent many of the Chelsea players into a rage, surrounding the referee in complaint. The Norwegian left the field to a chorus of boos. Had that been the end of the story, it would have been acceptable, as the crowd has every right to voice their displeasure. What they do not have the right to do is send the referee threatening messages, both through the post and over social networking sites. This is what happened to Ovrebo, with threats against his life common in the following fortnight.
Example number two is the referee of the EURO 2004 quarter final between Portugal and England: Urs Meier. The Swiss official generally had a good game, however his performance will be best remembered for a shocking error which cost England their place in the competition. At 2-2, and deep into stoppage time, a Beckham corner was met powerfully by Sol Campbell, thumping the ball into the net. Unbelievably, the referee had blown his whistle for a foul, despite Campbell failing to come into contact with anyone until after he had headed the ball. This effectively denied England a place in the semi-finals, and ultimately eliminated them, as penalties resulted in the inevitable elimination. Meier, like Ovrebo, suffered an influx of death threats, leading to him being given personal security for some time afterwards.
The final example is the one referred to by Mark Halsey last week. Mark Clattenburg was relieved of his refereeing duties mid-way through last season, after it emerged that accusations had been made that the official had racially abused Chelsea's John Obi Mikel. In fact, these accusations had been completely fabricated by the Chelsea players, and passed onto Mikel as if fact. This led, understandably, to a very angry Nigerian. However, less acceptable was his reaction. After the game had concluded the midfielder, by all accounts, barged into the referee's dressing room and threatened to break his legs. It has to be said that these rumours were not started by Mikel himself, so it is slightly different to other examples. However, it does indicate just how high passions run on the football field.
So what can be done to help referees? Having experienced abuse from the sidelines as a referee first-hand, I can certainly vouch for the argument that the Respect campaign has done next to nothing for the game. People can still lip read what Wayne Rooney says to referees, players continue to get in the faces of referees when a decision goes against them, and I am certain that there are many incidents that go completely unpunished. Any referee that feels threatened is unacceptable, and must be stamped out. What crowds don't understand when they abuse referees is that without one, the game could not begin. It is therefore pointless abusing them, and even more pointless complaining about decisions that have already been made. We will not change our minds!
Having said that, recieving abuse from fans during the game is something that a referee has to accept as being part and parcel of the game. When passions run high, sometimes fans will use offensive language towards officials that have made poor decisions. That is not to excuse racist or any other type of discriminatory abuse, as that is certainly the exception to the rule. However, general abuse from the fans is to be expected, and referees have put themselves in the frame for that. The area that football needs to stamp out of the game is the abuse of referees by footballers on the pitch, and the subsequent abuse that referees recieve after the game.
In terms of the off-field abuse, which has often resulted in death threats being sent to referees, there is little more the world of football can do other than to appeal to the common sense of the football fans involved. The police must be trusted to act swiftly and harshly against offenders, and football as a sport must punish any person found guilty with lifetime bans. I think the best way to combat the ever declining treatment of officials on the pitch is to go right back to the very grass roots of the game and make more sending-off worthy offences. Attempting the top-down approach, like the Respect, has been proven to be ineffective, so perhaps it is best to concentrate on the next generation of football players. By giving harsher sanctions for dissent and abuse from a very early age, to both the players and the crowd, referees can wrestle back the control from the sidelines, and gain the sort of status that rugby officials enjoy. Whilst not available at the grass roots, video and audio technology could also be used to retrospectively ban players who have been caught abusing referees on camera or microphone. However, one way in which referees can help themselves is by explaining their decisions, and admitting when they have made mistakes. I am a big supporter of referee press conferences, as it gives the officials the chance to explain their actions, and give the situation from their perspective. This would help to clear up much of the debate of the did they/didn't they see it.
Nevertheless, even without these press conferences, abuse of any referee is unacceptable. And it does not bode well for the future of the game. Speaking from experience, the abuse that I recieved from parents at youth level as a referee at 14 well and truly put me off from continuing it as a career. If more make the same decision, we could find ourselves with a distinct shortage of top quality referees, which will only anger fans more, as more mistakes will be made. Referees are put under exceptional pressure, and they do an excellent job 99% of the time. And 99% of fans respect that. But we still need to act to prevent that 1% of fans in the 1% of cases ruining football in the present, and the future.
Saturday 21 September 2013
Diving: A Red Card Offence?
Last weekend's events, most notably David Moyes's comments after Manchester United's home victory against Crystal Palace, has brought the topic of diving back into the public eye. So many players are accused of it, and there there are discussions in pubs up and down the land assessing what the appropriate penalty for divers is. The current system of a yellow card for 'simulation' is widely considered to be too lenient. However, is the answer really, as Crystal Palace chairman Steve Parish has suggested, a straight red card for diving offences? This post will look at the offence as it is currently defined, before examining the possible new punishments for the crime.
In order to fully understand the topic in question, it is worth consulting the FA definition of diving (or 'simulation'). Diving constitutes: 'an attempt by a player to gain an unfair advantage by diving to the ground and possibly feigning an injury, to appear as if a foul has been committed'. This seems relatively clear, and you would expect to see fairly regular punishments based on this definition. However, it proceeds to state that: 'a referee should be 100% certain that a player has simulated (feigned) an unfair challenge before cautioning the offender for unsporting behaviour. The referee must be convinced that there has been no physical contact whatsoever by the player challenging for the ball.' This is the cause of the controversy, as this clause means that referees tend to be overly lenient on simulation, not wanting to call a player a cheat, and this sometimes leads to miscarriages of justice when the referee gets it wrong. We will examine this in more detail later.
Looking purely at the definition as it stands, we should perhaps compare it with other offences. By examining both those considered to be worthy of yellow and red cards, we will be able to see which category this offence more resembles. If we look at the options in both categories, I would say that 'unsporting conduct' would most easily be comparable from the yellow card section. The red card section does not appear to have an easily comparable alternative, with neither serious foul play, nor violent conduct accurately describing the act. If we run with the unsporting conduct offence, there are clear parallels between the pair. This indicates that perhaps the initial classification of diving as a yellow card carries weight.
However, two alternatives have been suggested by prominent men in English football. We will begin by the suggestion made by Crystal Palace chairman Steve Parish, that diving should constitute a straight-red card offence. Despite my above paragraph, there is evidence to suggest that this may be a possible alternative. Diving is a scourge in world football, and needs to be stamped out. If we look at another offence that has been 'stamped down upon', we find that racism has been much more heavily punished in recent years, in an attempt to eradicate it from the game. Now, I am not for one moment saying that diving is as bad as racism, however, I am merely making the point that if you want rid of an aspect from a game, you must penalise every instance heavily. Therefore, a case could certainly be made for the introduction of a heavy-handed penalty for diving, at least until the act is not so prominent. However, there are a couple of problems with this. Firstly, there will be the inevitable comparison between diving and the other red card offences, which illustrates the gap in severity. Simulation does not seem on the same page as intentionally breaking someone's leg, but, under this rule change, they would be considered equally severe. Secondly, there is a more pressing issue with the rules. As the current idea of diving is so open to interpretation, there are already many instances of referees making the wrong call. Under these new rules, a referee making the wrong call could irreparably change the outcome of the game, potentially ruining a team's season. Until we solidify what is considered a dive, I feel that a red card could not be awarded for the offence.
The second alternative is one that appears far more reasonable. David Moyes, having stated that he wanted to stamp out diving from his own club, with Ashley Young coming in for further criticism, then suggested that video technology should be used to retrospectively ban players who have been proven to have dived. As much as that will be a dagger to the heart of Michel Platini, I think that this is an excellent idea. It lowers the fear of referee's getting a decision woefully wrong and costing a team a game in an instant, whilst ensuring that those guilty of diving are rightfully punished. I would introduce an initial ban of 4 games for a diving offence, meaning that there is that aspect of over the top punishment with a more accurate justice system, which I believe forms a nice middle ground. Once simulation has begun to die out of the game, a reduction in the ban could then be enacted. However, I suspect that none of these will be considered, players will be allowed to con referees and dive all over the place. This will continue to cause a horrible Catch 22 situation for referees, who will be blamed as much if they fail to penalise a dive, than if they wrongfully penalise one. And it will continue to be the topic of pub gossip for years to come.
In order to fully understand the topic in question, it is worth consulting the FA definition of diving (or 'simulation'). Diving constitutes: 'an attempt by a player to gain an unfair advantage by diving to the ground and possibly feigning an injury, to appear as if a foul has been committed'. This seems relatively clear, and you would expect to see fairly regular punishments based on this definition. However, it proceeds to state that: 'a referee should be 100% certain that a player has simulated (feigned) an unfair challenge before cautioning the offender for unsporting behaviour. The referee must be convinced that there has been no physical contact whatsoever by the player challenging for the ball.' This is the cause of the controversy, as this clause means that referees tend to be overly lenient on simulation, not wanting to call a player a cheat, and this sometimes leads to miscarriages of justice when the referee gets it wrong. We will examine this in more detail later.
Looking purely at the definition as it stands, we should perhaps compare it with other offences. By examining both those considered to be worthy of yellow and red cards, we will be able to see which category this offence more resembles. If we look at the options in both categories, I would say that 'unsporting conduct' would most easily be comparable from the yellow card section. The red card section does not appear to have an easily comparable alternative, with neither serious foul play, nor violent conduct accurately describing the act. If we run with the unsporting conduct offence, there are clear parallels between the pair. This indicates that perhaps the initial classification of diving as a yellow card carries weight.
However, two alternatives have been suggested by prominent men in English football. We will begin by the suggestion made by Crystal Palace chairman Steve Parish, that diving should constitute a straight-red card offence. Despite my above paragraph, there is evidence to suggest that this may be a possible alternative. Diving is a scourge in world football, and needs to be stamped out. If we look at another offence that has been 'stamped down upon', we find that racism has been much more heavily punished in recent years, in an attempt to eradicate it from the game. Now, I am not for one moment saying that diving is as bad as racism, however, I am merely making the point that if you want rid of an aspect from a game, you must penalise every instance heavily. Therefore, a case could certainly be made for the introduction of a heavy-handed penalty for diving, at least until the act is not so prominent. However, there are a couple of problems with this. Firstly, there will be the inevitable comparison between diving and the other red card offences, which illustrates the gap in severity. Simulation does not seem on the same page as intentionally breaking someone's leg, but, under this rule change, they would be considered equally severe. Secondly, there is a more pressing issue with the rules. As the current idea of diving is so open to interpretation, there are already many instances of referees making the wrong call. Under these new rules, a referee making the wrong call could irreparably change the outcome of the game, potentially ruining a team's season. Until we solidify what is considered a dive, I feel that a red card could not be awarded for the offence.
The second alternative is one that appears far more reasonable. David Moyes, having stated that he wanted to stamp out diving from his own club, with Ashley Young coming in for further criticism, then suggested that video technology should be used to retrospectively ban players who have been proven to have dived. As much as that will be a dagger to the heart of Michel Platini, I think that this is an excellent idea. It lowers the fear of referee's getting a decision woefully wrong and costing a team a game in an instant, whilst ensuring that those guilty of diving are rightfully punished. I would introduce an initial ban of 4 games for a diving offence, meaning that there is that aspect of over the top punishment with a more accurate justice system, which I believe forms a nice middle ground. Once simulation has begun to die out of the game, a reduction in the ban could then be enacted. However, I suspect that none of these will be considered, players will be allowed to con referees and dive all over the place. This will continue to cause a horrible Catch 22 situation for referees, who will be blamed as much if they fail to penalise a dive, than if they wrongfully penalise one. And it will continue to be the topic of pub gossip for years to come.
Tuesday 10 September 2013
Italian Grand Prix 2013: The Place Where Ferrari's Dreams Died?
Today's Italian Grand Prix marked the end of the European F1 season. Next, the Formula 1 roadshow rolls into Asia, with races at Singapore, Japan and Abu Dhabi to come. With Red Bull and Sebastian Vettel so far in the lead in both championships, it looks as though the end of the European season has coincided with the end of the F1 season as a competitive entity. Vettel's victory in the heart of Ferrari territory, at a circuit where they were unfavoured, signals a level of dominance that I fear will continue for the rest of the season.
But just how dominant have the Red Bulls been in Europe? It is interesting to look at the statistics of the European season, and the winners of each race. I will do a run down of the races undertaken, the winners, and the points based purely on European races. Spain was the first race of the season, which saw Fernando Alonso take his second victory on home soil. Monaco saw a win for Mercedes and Nico Rosberg, who took their second win in the following European race in Britain. Another home victory saw Vettel take his first European victory of the season at the Nurburgring. He would win another two, in Belgium and today in Italy, after a first Mercedes win for Lewis Hamilton in the Hungarian Grand Prix. Whilst the Red Bull man has won the most European races this year, he only beats Nico Rosberg by one, and the majority have come in the latter part of the season. This implies that his dominance is not as strong as initially suspected.
This is supported by the points accrued. Though Vettel does remain in the lead on European points, he is only 16 clear of Fernando Alonso. If we compare that to the 53 point lead that the German enjoys overall, 37 points of that must have come outside of Europe. Bearing in mind that there have been only 5 races thus far away from the continent, it implies that Vettel's dominance is considerably greater in Asia and America than in Europe. A little further analysis of the points also indicates that Vettel's dominance in Europe has only occurred since his home win in Germany. 75% of his European points have come in the final four races of the European season. If we compare this to Alonso, the last four account for only 55%, meaning that he has remained the more consistent. Whilst Vettel may not have been as dominant in Europe as elsewhere, Red Bull as a team certainly have. Between them, Vettel and Webber have accrued 206 points on European soil, a full 53 points clear of their nearest rivals, which would be Mercedes, with Ferrari a further four points back. Overall, Red Bull's lead currently stands at 102 points, which implies that Red Bull's dominance as a team is almost identical in Europe to away from it. Obviously, these statistics may alter, with a further 7 races to take place away from Europe this season.
In terms of the Italian Grand Prix, the practice sessions were all dominated by the world-champion elect. The qualifying session on the Saturday was expected to have a similar result. After the heroics of the Marussias and Guido van der Garde in Belgium's Q1, they sadly could not replicate the feat, perishing at the first time of asking. Q2 proved far more shocking, as the pole sitter of the four previous races Lewis Hamilton, 'drove like an idiot', in his own words, and could only manage 12th. Both of the Lotuses also had to watch Q3 from the pits, with Nico Hulkenberg and the two Toro Rossos being the shock inclusions to Q3. Having sauntered through to third session, Vettel cruised to pole, with team mate Mark Webber ensuring that Red Bull locked out the front row for the first time since the second race of the season. The big surprise happened immediately behind them, as Sauber's Nico Hulkenberg angered the Italian population, beating the Ferrari pair to 3rd on the grid. In double disappointment, Alonso had to settle for 5th, being beaten by his teammate for the first time in several races. This would do his race victory chances no favours, and would ultimately see his title bid go up in smoke.
The start at Monza is always chaotic, with the opening chicane normally causing several collisions throughout the field. This danger will not have been lessened by the start of Vettel. The German locked both front brakes on the turn into turn 1, sending a considerable amount of smoke up, clouding the vision of those behind. This inevitably had an impact on the consertina effect that occurred behind, with Kimi Raikkonen damaging his front wing in contact with Sergio Perez, sending the McLaren driver onto the escape road. Even more concerning for Vettel, the lock-up left worries of flat-spots on his tyres, with the potential to cause damage to the car, and ruin his one stop race. The Ferraris both had excellent starts, passing both Hulkenberg and Webber by the end of lap 2, with Alonso making an exceptional pass around the Red Bull man at the Curva Grande. Inter-team cooperation then started taking place, with Massa offering no resistance to a move from Alonso a few laps later, meaning that the Spaniard could get after Vettel. The German, though, was showing no signs of a flat spot, edging out a gap of 7 seconds by lap 10.
Further back, after a good start, Lewis Hamilton was still struggling in the midfield. Having made up two places from the start, the Brit had failed to surge through the field, instead being stuck in a battle with Jenson Button for 10th. However, his afternoon was ruined by a couple of early problems. First, the engineers discovered an issue with the radio communications between the driver and the team, meaning that no message could be delivered throughout the race. Even more dramatic was the announcement that the Mercedes had a slow puncture, meaning that the Brit needed to pit, wrecking his plans for a one-stop race. This also explained the slow progress that Hamilton had been making. That message could not be delivered to the driver though, meaning that Hamilton stayed out for a further 2 laps before finally recieving the message and making the stop, but this will have cost him valuable time. He rejoined behind Kimi Raikkonen, who had been fighting back from the first lap incident. The Finn had been setting a succession of fastest laps, and looked like flying through the field. Hamilton, on fresher tyres, got right among the fastest laps, swapping the honour with the Lotus. As a result of this scintillating pace, the pair of them managed to pass those they were fighting before they made their stops (Button, Perez, Grosjean, Ricciardo). But would they have to stop again?
Vettel's suspected problems seemed to be coming back to haunt him, as when he past the 20th lap, he began to lose half to three-quarters of a second a lap. Clearly concerned, the Red Bull mechanics decided to pull him in on lap 23, when the lead was just 5 seconds. After a quick inspection (2.7 seconds), they concluded that all was fine, and sent him back out. Alonso, attempting to press home his advantage, stayed out. Unfortunately for the Ferrari driver, this plan completely backfired. The Red Bull team's decision to keep Vettel out there was vindicated, as the German extended his lead to 10 seconds by the time Alonso made his pit stop. Instead of retaining the lead, the Spaniard nearly fell back behind Webber. Further back, Hamilton and Raikkonen continued their onslaught on the field, passing the other Mercedes in Nico Rosberg. However, this was halted by the unsurprising decision by Lotus to pit Raikkonen a second time, dropping him way down the field. Hamilton pressed on, passing Nico Hulkenberg for 5th, but ultimately his progress came to the same end, requiring another stop. However, just like the stop before, continuing radio problems meant that he stayed out a further two laps than they intended. Despite the best efforts of the Mercedes pit crew, he rejoined behind Raikkonen once again, in 14th, meaning that he would need to pass him on track. But would they be able to trouble the points?
Up front, whilst Vettel scampered away at the front, Alonso was challenged heavily by the other Red Bull of Mark Webber. The Red Bull team would have liked nothing more than a 1-2 on Ferrari territory, further showing their dominance. However, once again misfortune struck the Aussie, who was told that they had a gear issue between the 2nd and 3rd gears. This meant that he couldn't get the necessary acceleration to reel in the Ferrari, meaning that he began to fall back a little. Even worse news was to follow for Christian Horner and the boys on the pit wall at Red Bull. Vettel seemed to be developing the same problems as his team mate. Fortunately, he had built up a healthy lead of over 12 seconds, meaning that he could take it a bit easier without costing himself the race. However, the news that the Red Bulls were having problems had filtered back to the Ferrari pit wall, and the drivers were soon pushing hard to catch the pair in front.
In the battle for the points, Hamilton took the lead in the push for the top 10, passing the Lotus brilliantly round the Curva Grande, before getting past Perez's McLaren to make it into the points. But he wasn't finished there. He quickly managed to catch and dispatch the other McLaren of Button, before chasing down the pair in front of him. This led to a final lap dash for 7th place, with both Grosjean and Ricciardo in the Mercedes's sights. Up front, despite struggling through the final few laps, Vettel managed to nurse his car home for the maximum 25 points, winning by just 5.7 seconds. His 53 point lead seems insumountable, but this race could have been a different story had the problem emerged a few laps sooner. Perhaps he will have a bigger fight from his new Australian team mate, but for now he remains the top dog in Formula 1.
But just how dominant have the Red Bulls been in Europe? It is interesting to look at the statistics of the European season, and the winners of each race. I will do a run down of the races undertaken, the winners, and the points based purely on European races. Spain was the first race of the season, which saw Fernando Alonso take his second victory on home soil. Monaco saw a win for Mercedes and Nico Rosberg, who took their second win in the following European race in Britain. Another home victory saw Vettel take his first European victory of the season at the Nurburgring. He would win another two, in Belgium and today in Italy, after a first Mercedes win for Lewis Hamilton in the Hungarian Grand Prix. Whilst the Red Bull man has won the most European races this year, he only beats Nico Rosberg by one, and the majority have come in the latter part of the season. This implies that his dominance is not as strong as initially suspected.
This is supported by the points accrued. Though Vettel does remain in the lead on European points, he is only 16 clear of Fernando Alonso. If we compare that to the 53 point lead that the German enjoys overall, 37 points of that must have come outside of Europe. Bearing in mind that there have been only 5 races thus far away from the continent, it implies that Vettel's dominance is considerably greater in Asia and America than in Europe. A little further analysis of the points also indicates that Vettel's dominance in Europe has only occurred since his home win in Germany. 75% of his European points have come in the final four races of the European season. If we compare this to Alonso, the last four account for only 55%, meaning that he has remained the more consistent. Whilst Vettel may not have been as dominant in Europe as elsewhere, Red Bull as a team certainly have. Between them, Vettel and Webber have accrued 206 points on European soil, a full 53 points clear of their nearest rivals, which would be Mercedes, with Ferrari a further four points back. Overall, Red Bull's lead currently stands at 102 points, which implies that Red Bull's dominance as a team is almost identical in Europe to away from it. Obviously, these statistics may alter, with a further 7 races to take place away from Europe this season.
In terms of the Italian Grand Prix, the practice sessions were all dominated by the world-champion elect. The qualifying session on the Saturday was expected to have a similar result. After the heroics of the Marussias and Guido van der Garde in Belgium's Q1, they sadly could not replicate the feat, perishing at the first time of asking. Q2 proved far more shocking, as the pole sitter of the four previous races Lewis Hamilton, 'drove like an idiot', in his own words, and could only manage 12th. Both of the Lotuses also had to watch Q3 from the pits, with Nico Hulkenberg and the two Toro Rossos being the shock inclusions to Q3. Having sauntered through to third session, Vettel cruised to pole, with team mate Mark Webber ensuring that Red Bull locked out the front row for the first time since the second race of the season. The big surprise happened immediately behind them, as Sauber's Nico Hulkenberg angered the Italian population, beating the Ferrari pair to 3rd on the grid. In double disappointment, Alonso had to settle for 5th, being beaten by his teammate for the first time in several races. This would do his race victory chances no favours, and would ultimately see his title bid go up in smoke.
The start at Monza is always chaotic, with the opening chicane normally causing several collisions throughout the field. This danger will not have been lessened by the start of Vettel. The German locked both front brakes on the turn into turn 1, sending a considerable amount of smoke up, clouding the vision of those behind. This inevitably had an impact on the consertina effect that occurred behind, with Kimi Raikkonen damaging his front wing in contact with Sergio Perez, sending the McLaren driver onto the escape road. Even more concerning for Vettel, the lock-up left worries of flat-spots on his tyres, with the potential to cause damage to the car, and ruin his one stop race. The Ferraris both had excellent starts, passing both Hulkenberg and Webber by the end of lap 2, with Alonso making an exceptional pass around the Red Bull man at the Curva Grande. Inter-team cooperation then started taking place, with Massa offering no resistance to a move from Alonso a few laps later, meaning that the Spaniard could get after Vettel. The German, though, was showing no signs of a flat spot, edging out a gap of 7 seconds by lap 10.
Further back, after a good start, Lewis Hamilton was still struggling in the midfield. Having made up two places from the start, the Brit had failed to surge through the field, instead being stuck in a battle with Jenson Button for 10th. However, his afternoon was ruined by a couple of early problems. First, the engineers discovered an issue with the radio communications between the driver and the team, meaning that no message could be delivered throughout the race. Even more dramatic was the announcement that the Mercedes had a slow puncture, meaning that the Brit needed to pit, wrecking his plans for a one-stop race. This also explained the slow progress that Hamilton had been making. That message could not be delivered to the driver though, meaning that Hamilton stayed out for a further 2 laps before finally recieving the message and making the stop, but this will have cost him valuable time. He rejoined behind Kimi Raikkonen, who had been fighting back from the first lap incident. The Finn had been setting a succession of fastest laps, and looked like flying through the field. Hamilton, on fresher tyres, got right among the fastest laps, swapping the honour with the Lotus. As a result of this scintillating pace, the pair of them managed to pass those they were fighting before they made their stops (Button, Perez, Grosjean, Ricciardo). But would they have to stop again?
Vettel's suspected problems seemed to be coming back to haunt him, as when he past the 20th lap, he began to lose half to three-quarters of a second a lap. Clearly concerned, the Red Bull mechanics decided to pull him in on lap 23, when the lead was just 5 seconds. After a quick inspection (2.7 seconds), they concluded that all was fine, and sent him back out. Alonso, attempting to press home his advantage, stayed out. Unfortunately for the Ferrari driver, this plan completely backfired. The Red Bull team's decision to keep Vettel out there was vindicated, as the German extended his lead to 10 seconds by the time Alonso made his pit stop. Instead of retaining the lead, the Spaniard nearly fell back behind Webber. Further back, Hamilton and Raikkonen continued their onslaught on the field, passing the other Mercedes in Nico Rosberg. However, this was halted by the unsurprising decision by Lotus to pit Raikkonen a second time, dropping him way down the field. Hamilton pressed on, passing Nico Hulkenberg for 5th, but ultimately his progress came to the same end, requiring another stop. However, just like the stop before, continuing radio problems meant that he stayed out a further two laps than they intended. Despite the best efforts of the Mercedes pit crew, he rejoined behind Raikkonen once again, in 14th, meaning that he would need to pass him on track. But would they be able to trouble the points?
Up front, whilst Vettel scampered away at the front, Alonso was challenged heavily by the other Red Bull of Mark Webber. The Red Bull team would have liked nothing more than a 1-2 on Ferrari territory, further showing their dominance. However, once again misfortune struck the Aussie, who was told that they had a gear issue between the 2nd and 3rd gears. This meant that he couldn't get the necessary acceleration to reel in the Ferrari, meaning that he began to fall back a little. Even worse news was to follow for Christian Horner and the boys on the pit wall at Red Bull. Vettel seemed to be developing the same problems as his team mate. Fortunately, he had built up a healthy lead of over 12 seconds, meaning that he could take it a bit easier without costing himself the race. However, the news that the Red Bulls were having problems had filtered back to the Ferrari pit wall, and the drivers were soon pushing hard to catch the pair in front.
In the battle for the points, Hamilton took the lead in the push for the top 10, passing the Lotus brilliantly round the Curva Grande, before getting past Perez's McLaren to make it into the points. But he wasn't finished there. He quickly managed to catch and dispatch the other McLaren of Button, before chasing down the pair in front of him. This led to a final lap dash for 7th place, with both Grosjean and Ricciardo in the Mercedes's sights. Up front, despite struggling through the final few laps, Vettel managed to nurse his car home for the maximum 25 points, winning by just 5.7 seconds. His 53 point lead seems insumountable, but this race could have been a different story had the problem emerged a few laps sooner. Perhaps he will have a bigger fight from his new Australian team mate, but for now he remains the top dog in Formula 1.
Thursday 5 September 2013
England's Future: Should We Prepare For Success?
As the Premier League season takes a break for international qualifiers, our attention has turned to the national side. With World Cup 2014 qualifiers this weekend against Moldova and Ukraine, there has been much discussion over what our expectations should be for present and future tournaments. English football in recent years has, in general, been burdened with a ridiculously heightened set of expectations. Every pre-tournament begins with a select group of fans insisting that 'this will be our year'. And it never has been.
The subject has reared its head once again with the new FA Chairman Greg Dyke making his first official speech in his new capacity. Having been appointed as David Bernstein's successor in March, beginning his new role in July, the 66 year old has been making headlines in recent days. Yesterday, the news broke that Dyke expects England to be capable of reaching the Euro 2020 semi finals, and then potentially win the 2022 World Cup in Qatar. In this post, I will be examining just how realistic this statement is, and giving my opinions on England's chances over the next decade or so.
A good place to start when examining this statement is to look at England's historical performances in tournaments. If Dyke's comments are to be believed, then an upward trend, no matter how small, should be expected in order to see a progression towards the later stages of competitions. This would give evidence for such optimism. I will go back to my earliest memories of England, to see if we have progressed since the mid-90s. Euro 96' was obviously a massive competition for the nation, as it was the first time since 1966 that England had hosted an international tournament. With the home crowd urging their side on, England progressed to the semi finals of a major tournament. There they faced the pre-tournament favourites Germany, and after 120 minutes the two could not be separated. In a repeat of the famous 1990 World Cup semi, England were to lose on penalties, with Gareth Southgate the man to shoulder the responsibility. This penalty shootout would start an alarming pattern of spot-kick exits. In 1998, England made the short journey to France for the World Cup. After getting through the groups, they met Argentina in the knock-out round. This game will best be remembered for the emergence of Michael Owen, who at 18 scored a wondergoal, and then the dismissal of David Beckham, for a retaliatory kick on Diego Simeone. These events would lead to another penalty shootout, with David Batty the unfortunate individual this time around.
In 2000, England were placed in a 'Group of Death' with Germany, Portugal and Romania. Having lost their opening game by the narrowest of margins to the Portuguese, the English gained revenge over their great rivals Germany, meaning a final game showdown with the Romanians. There, despite leading 2-1 at half time, England let that slip, eventually losing 3-2 to exit the tournament at the group stage. The Japan/South Korea World Cup of 2002 saw the English once again placed in the toughest group, with Sweden, Nigeria and Argentina their opponents. After drawing their opening game, the English claimed revenge for their 1998 defeat to Argentina, with Beckham redeeming himself with the winning goal from the spot. Another draw with Nigeria saw the English scrape through in second place, where they met Denmark. There they cruised through, winning 3-0 to face Brazil in the quarter final. With many saying that the winner would come from this match, England raced into a lead, with Owen opening the scoring mid-way through the half. But once again they conspired to lose, with goals from Rivaldo and a freak free-kick from Ronaldinho knocking the English out. Euro 2004 saw the return of the penalty kick exit. After progressing through the groups relatively easily, England faced hosts Portugal in the quarters. After taking the lead, the English lost prodigy Wayne Rooney to a broken metatarsal, before Portugal fought back to take the match to penalties. There, misses from Darius Vassell and, most spectacularly, from David Beckham condemned England to another exit.
Germany hosted the 2006 World Cup, and after a comfortable journey through the group, England edged past Ecuador thanks to a Beckham free-kick. The quarter-finals saw the English up against Portugal, and after a controversial red card to Rooney, with Cristiano Ronaldo the villain, England once again exited on penalties. After misses from Lampard, Gerrard and Carragher, it was over to Ronaldo to deal the final blow. Two years later, after a dismal campaign under manager Steve McLaren, England lost 3-2 to Croatia in their final qualifying game to deny them a place in Austria-Switzerland. Fabio Capello's England managed to qualify for South Africa 2010 without losing, but they struggled to get out of the easiest group in the competition. After dismal draws against the USA and Algeria, they laboured to a 1-0 win against Slovenia. The knockout round saw them face the Germans, where they were destroyed 4-1. Most recently, last summer saw the English side travel to Poland-Ukraine, where after cruising through the group, they met a strong Italian outfit in the quarters. After 120 minutes of stalemate, it was once again down to the lottery of a penalty shootout. There, misses from Young and Cole sent England packing. In none of the last seven tournaments have England progressed past the quarter finals. Rather than the upward trend that would support the claims, it has been almost the exact opposite, so Dyke's comments that he expects England to win the 2022 World Cup seem completely against historical evidence.
But maybe I am being pessimistic on our young and upcoming players. Perhaps we have in our youth ranks the next Lionel Messi, who will lead England to stardom and success. If these prospects are what Dyke is basing his claims on, it is therefore worth looking at England's up and coming talent. If we discard those players that are over the 30 year old mark, England's next team will roughly consist of: Hart, Baines, Jones, Cahill, Walker, Wilshere, Walcott, Oxlade-Chamberlain, Cleverley, Welbeck, Rooney. Whilst an above average team, I would not consider this side capable of winning major international honours, especially when compared with the Spanish and the Brazilians. In terms of the youth prospects, players like Ross Barkley and Nathan Redmond have started this new season well, but they are hardly likely to push England to the international victory that is being suggested. The longer-term future prospects are not much better either, as the grassroots game has all too often been criticised for not bringing the players through. Dyke's argument seems to assume that we are now at as good if not a better position than the 'Golden Era' of 2002-2006. This is backed up by his recent comments that an English World Cup win in 2014 is 'unlikely'. The very fact that we are thinking about it seems deluded, as we do not have the history or the squad to support these claims.
The final reason why I believe Dyke's claim of England's chances of victory in 2022 is ridiculous is a simple one: it takes place in Qatar. There has already been a great deal of controversy over whether a summer World Cup in the Middle East country is possible, with temperatures of up to 50C expected. It is no coincidence that England tend to do badly in countries with a high temperature. South Africa 2010 is a good example of this, and I expect to see another example next summer. Sides that are used to the Middle Eastern climate will benefit from the 2022 World Cup, unless the switch to a winter World Cup occurs. I disagree with the idea, but it would level the playing field somewhat. The climate alone would ordinarily be enough to leave England at a disadvantage, and I suspect that that is what we will see in 2022.
So how can we rectify this situation? I think we have to start from square one, go right back to basics and make revolutionary changes to the grassroots of our game. Having considerable experience of youth football, having been a player, and later, a referee, I know all too well the problems that young players face. Even from a very young age, technical ability and training is bred out of players, replaced by the desire to win at all costs. This leaves current players with an exceptionally bad attitude, to both referees and managers, and lacking in the technical ability to move to the next level. This is not aided by the way that I have observed families behave on the touchlines of matches. In my refereeing days, I genuinely enjoyed the matches, and the kids in general were well-behaved. You at times got the odd one that would mouth off, but the majority were respectful. The parents, on the other hand, were disgraceful. The abuse and language that I as the referee, the opposing players, and even their own children would recieve was horrendous, and it made me despair of parenting in this country. It is not difficult to see how players pick up those disrespectful habits, and this, coupled with the lack of training, is precisely why English players are not as successful. For those who complain that we do not see enough English transfers, this is simply because we want to be the best league in the world, and those who blame this on the national side's failure start the blaming process too late in the players' development.
I think we have to adopt a much more Spanish or German approach, with the emphasis on training and nurturing, rather than the victory-based emphasis on resentment and anger that currently exists. We have to do this from the very earliest age, with any talent encouraged and technique valued over victory. Parents forget that their children are not fighting for £50,000 a week and 3 points in the Premier League, and they need to calm down. I would happily hand out lifetime bans for misbehaviour at football grounds and school fields. That may appear harsh, but some of what I have witnessed and been subjected to from parents is astonishing and disgusting, and I would never want any referee (bear in mind I was only 14 at the time) going through that. We see this happen all too often in the Premier League (the Respect campaign is, in my opinion, a joke), and children and parents are inevitably going to continue this. Stamping it out, like we have seen with racism, is the only way we are going to improve.
As for the English game and their chances, I think that Dyke appears to be one of those England supporters that goes into every tournament with a sense of optimism about England's chances. I, for one would like to hear some refreshing honesty from the upper echelons of the FA for once. Saying things like 'we should expect to win the World Cup in 2022' is at best laughable, as I see no reason why the slump we have become so accustomed to will not continue. It is perhaps best to accept that England as a footballing nation are no better than a quarter final place at major tournaments. That way we won't have to feel the disappointment and anger at our players when we lose on penalties to Portugal. Without an overhaul of our mentality at the grassroots level, both in terms of training and anger management, I fail to see England winning anything for a long time.
The subject has reared its head once again with the new FA Chairman Greg Dyke making his first official speech in his new capacity. Having been appointed as David Bernstein's successor in March, beginning his new role in July, the 66 year old has been making headlines in recent days. Yesterday, the news broke that Dyke expects England to be capable of reaching the Euro 2020 semi finals, and then potentially win the 2022 World Cup in Qatar. In this post, I will be examining just how realistic this statement is, and giving my opinions on England's chances over the next decade or so.
A good place to start when examining this statement is to look at England's historical performances in tournaments. If Dyke's comments are to be believed, then an upward trend, no matter how small, should be expected in order to see a progression towards the later stages of competitions. This would give evidence for such optimism. I will go back to my earliest memories of England, to see if we have progressed since the mid-90s. Euro 96' was obviously a massive competition for the nation, as it was the first time since 1966 that England had hosted an international tournament. With the home crowd urging their side on, England progressed to the semi finals of a major tournament. There they faced the pre-tournament favourites Germany, and after 120 minutes the two could not be separated. In a repeat of the famous 1990 World Cup semi, England were to lose on penalties, with Gareth Southgate the man to shoulder the responsibility. This penalty shootout would start an alarming pattern of spot-kick exits. In 1998, England made the short journey to France for the World Cup. After getting through the groups, they met Argentina in the knock-out round. This game will best be remembered for the emergence of Michael Owen, who at 18 scored a wondergoal, and then the dismissal of David Beckham, for a retaliatory kick on Diego Simeone. These events would lead to another penalty shootout, with David Batty the unfortunate individual this time around.
In 2000, England were placed in a 'Group of Death' with Germany, Portugal and Romania. Having lost their opening game by the narrowest of margins to the Portuguese, the English gained revenge over their great rivals Germany, meaning a final game showdown with the Romanians. There, despite leading 2-1 at half time, England let that slip, eventually losing 3-2 to exit the tournament at the group stage. The Japan/South Korea World Cup of 2002 saw the English once again placed in the toughest group, with Sweden, Nigeria and Argentina their opponents. After drawing their opening game, the English claimed revenge for their 1998 defeat to Argentina, with Beckham redeeming himself with the winning goal from the spot. Another draw with Nigeria saw the English scrape through in second place, where they met Denmark. There they cruised through, winning 3-0 to face Brazil in the quarter final. With many saying that the winner would come from this match, England raced into a lead, with Owen opening the scoring mid-way through the half. But once again they conspired to lose, with goals from Rivaldo and a freak free-kick from Ronaldinho knocking the English out. Euro 2004 saw the return of the penalty kick exit. After progressing through the groups relatively easily, England faced hosts Portugal in the quarters. After taking the lead, the English lost prodigy Wayne Rooney to a broken metatarsal, before Portugal fought back to take the match to penalties. There, misses from Darius Vassell and, most spectacularly, from David Beckham condemned England to another exit.
Germany hosted the 2006 World Cup, and after a comfortable journey through the group, England edged past Ecuador thanks to a Beckham free-kick. The quarter-finals saw the English up against Portugal, and after a controversial red card to Rooney, with Cristiano Ronaldo the villain, England once again exited on penalties. After misses from Lampard, Gerrard and Carragher, it was over to Ronaldo to deal the final blow. Two years later, after a dismal campaign under manager Steve McLaren, England lost 3-2 to Croatia in their final qualifying game to deny them a place in Austria-Switzerland. Fabio Capello's England managed to qualify for South Africa 2010 without losing, but they struggled to get out of the easiest group in the competition. After dismal draws against the USA and Algeria, they laboured to a 1-0 win against Slovenia. The knockout round saw them face the Germans, where they were destroyed 4-1. Most recently, last summer saw the English side travel to Poland-Ukraine, where after cruising through the group, they met a strong Italian outfit in the quarters. After 120 minutes of stalemate, it was once again down to the lottery of a penalty shootout. There, misses from Young and Cole sent England packing. In none of the last seven tournaments have England progressed past the quarter finals. Rather than the upward trend that would support the claims, it has been almost the exact opposite, so Dyke's comments that he expects England to win the 2022 World Cup seem completely against historical evidence.
But maybe I am being pessimistic on our young and upcoming players. Perhaps we have in our youth ranks the next Lionel Messi, who will lead England to stardom and success. If these prospects are what Dyke is basing his claims on, it is therefore worth looking at England's up and coming talent. If we discard those players that are over the 30 year old mark, England's next team will roughly consist of: Hart, Baines, Jones, Cahill, Walker, Wilshere, Walcott, Oxlade-Chamberlain, Cleverley, Welbeck, Rooney. Whilst an above average team, I would not consider this side capable of winning major international honours, especially when compared with the Spanish and the Brazilians. In terms of the youth prospects, players like Ross Barkley and Nathan Redmond have started this new season well, but they are hardly likely to push England to the international victory that is being suggested. The longer-term future prospects are not much better either, as the grassroots game has all too often been criticised for not bringing the players through. Dyke's argument seems to assume that we are now at as good if not a better position than the 'Golden Era' of 2002-2006. This is backed up by his recent comments that an English World Cup win in 2014 is 'unlikely'. The very fact that we are thinking about it seems deluded, as we do not have the history or the squad to support these claims.
The final reason why I believe Dyke's claim of England's chances of victory in 2022 is ridiculous is a simple one: it takes place in Qatar. There has already been a great deal of controversy over whether a summer World Cup in the Middle East country is possible, with temperatures of up to 50C expected. It is no coincidence that England tend to do badly in countries with a high temperature. South Africa 2010 is a good example of this, and I expect to see another example next summer. Sides that are used to the Middle Eastern climate will benefit from the 2022 World Cup, unless the switch to a winter World Cup occurs. I disagree with the idea, but it would level the playing field somewhat. The climate alone would ordinarily be enough to leave England at a disadvantage, and I suspect that that is what we will see in 2022.
So how can we rectify this situation? I think we have to start from square one, go right back to basics and make revolutionary changes to the grassroots of our game. Having considerable experience of youth football, having been a player, and later, a referee, I know all too well the problems that young players face. Even from a very young age, technical ability and training is bred out of players, replaced by the desire to win at all costs. This leaves current players with an exceptionally bad attitude, to both referees and managers, and lacking in the technical ability to move to the next level. This is not aided by the way that I have observed families behave on the touchlines of matches. In my refereeing days, I genuinely enjoyed the matches, and the kids in general were well-behaved. You at times got the odd one that would mouth off, but the majority were respectful. The parents, on the other hand, were disgraceful. The abuse and language that I as the referee, the opposing players, and even their own children would recieve was horrendous, and it made me despair of parenting in this country. It is not difficult to see how players pick up those disrespectful habits, and this, coupled with the lack of training, is precisely why English players are not as successful. For those who complain that we do not see enough English transfers, this is simply because we want to be the best league in the world, and those who blame this on the national side's failure start the blaming process too late in the players' development.
I think we have to adopt a much more Spanish or German approach, with the emphasis on training and nurturing, rather than the victory-based emphasis on resentment and anger that currently exists. We have to do this from the very earliest age, with any talent encouraged and technique valued over victory. Parents forget that their children are not fighting for £50,000 a week and 3 points in the Premier League, and they need to calm down. I would happily hand out lifetime bans for misbehaviour at football grounds and school fields. That may appear harsh, but some of what I have witnessed and been subjected to from parents is astonishing and disgusting, and I would never want any referee (bear in mind I was only 14 at the time) going through that. We see this happen all too often in the Premier League (the Respect campaign is, in my opinion, a joke), and children and parents are inevitably going to continue this. Stamping it out, like we have seen with racism, is the only way we are going to improve.
As for the English game and their chances, I think that Dyke appears to be one of those England supporters that goes into every tournament with a sense of optimism about England's chances. I, for one would like to hear some refreshing honesty from the upper echelons of the FA for once. Saying things like 'we should expect to win the World Cup in 2022' is at best laughable, as I see no reason why the slump we have become so accustomed to will not continue. It is perhaps best to accept that England as a footballing nation are no better than a quarter final place at major tournaments. That way we won't have to feel the disappointment and anger at our players when we lose on penalties to Portugal. Without an overhaul of our mentality at the grassroots level, both in terms of training and anger management, I fail to see England winning anything for a long time.
Tuesday 3 September 2013
Transfer Deadline Day: A Summer Of Sagas
This summer has seen the usual hustle and bustle around Europe, from car-window interviews to gossip columns. The main theme of this transfer window has been sagas, with players such as Bale, Suarez, Rooney and Fabregas all involved in drawn-out proceedings. However, the money that has been spent on players this summer is astonishing, and this post will review the biggest and most important signings and sagas from around the major European nations.
England:
Biggest Fee Paid: Mesut Ozil - Real Madrid to Arsenal (£42.4 Million)
Biggest Fee Recieved: Gareth Bale - Tottenham Hotspur to Real Madrid (£85.3 Million)
Most Active: Crystal Palace (16 new signings)
Most Spent: Tottenham Hotspur (£109 Million)
Review:
As is illustrated by the above and below statistics, it is England where the majority of the big money moves have been. English clubs also account for the vast majority of transfer sagas this summer, with Gareth Bale's seemingly inevitable move to Real Madrid taking forever to complete. Another man that commanded a considerable amount of column inches this summer was Luis Suarez. Having stated his displeasure at percieved 'broken promises' from the Liverpool hierarchy, he made his intention to leave clear. Cue two bids from Arsenal, the second designed to trigger a release clause in his contract. Embarrassingly for the Gunners, they had misinterpreted the clause, meaning that no deal had been struck. As the saga dragged on, it became more apparent that the Uruguayan would not be leaving Liverpool without a fight. This eventually culminated in Suarez accepting that he would have to stay at Anfield.
The big winners from this window are undoubtedly Tottenham Hotspur. Being able to spend £109 Million and have only effectively spent 25 puts them in good stead for the Financial Fair Play regulations, and gives them an enormous amount of talent at the same time. The big losers: Manchester United. A distinct lack of signings will do little to calm the doubters of David Moyes and Ed Woodward, and the fact that they wasted so much time on the sagas of Cesc Fabregas, Thiago Alcantara, Wayne Rooney and the Everton duo of Marouane Fellaini and Leighton Baines will have further exacerbated matters. To end up with only one major signing this summer is poor, and not what you would expect a championship winning side to manage. Had they decided not to sign anyone, that is a different matter. However, having chased and failed, Moyes's reputation will not have been aided.
England's transfer deadline day saw just two big money moves. Of the top 6, only two had failed to spend any money to this point, and it was today (arguably with an element of panic-buying) that saw them finally open the cheque-book. Firstly, Arsenal managed to capture the mercurial German Mesut Ozil from Real Madrid. Though a good signing for the Gunners, I question firstly the £42.4 Million fee, and the fact that midfield is not an area that I would consider weak in the Arsenal squad. They would have been much better off buying defenders or strikers. The second was expected: Marouane Fellaini's move to Manchester United. Though they cut it fine, after their pursuit of Ander Herrera ended shambolically (with reports of imposters attempting to defraud money from the Spaniards), they did manage to finalise the former Everton man. It seems that they did not manage to finalise a deal for Real Madrid's Fabio Coentrao, with documents handed in late and with multiple spelling mistakes. All in all, an eventful final day, but not one United will look back on with fondness.
Total Paid: £624,560,000
Spain:
Biggest Fee Paid: Gareth Bale - Tottenham Hotspur to Real Madrid (£85.3 Million)
Biggest Fee Recieved: Radamel Falcao - Atletico Madrid to AS Monaco (£49 Million)
Most Active: Elche and Sevilla (14 new signings)
Most Spent: Real Madrid (£146.1 Million)
Review:
As is the case practically every season, the main Spanish transfer stories revolved around the El Clasico pair, with a case of one-upmanship seemingly prevolent. Real Madrid cast the first stone, signing the hotly rated pairing of Isco and Asier Illaramendi for £20 Million and £34 Million respectively. Barcelona, having not spent at that point, then unleashed what was, at the time, the biggest transfer of the summer, with the capture of Santos wonderkid Neymar. For a fee of £57 Million, he has a lot to live up to at the Catalan club, but what team would not want a strikeforce of Messi and Neymar? Madrid, not to be outdone by their fiercest rivals, had the final say. After a prolonged negotiation, which went on far longer than anyone cared for, they managed to snare their man the day before the deadline. Gareth Bale would join the Galacticos at Madrid for a world record fee of £85.3 Million.
The main winners in this transfer window are probably the pair of them, as they now both have formidable squads that will be envied by most managers around the world, and they are both capable of claiming any title they want this season. It is an extraordinary amount of money to pay for those players, but if they come good, the rewards will be just as substantial. The main loser is probably Atletico Madrid. Although they managed to recoup £50 Million for their talismanic striker Falcao, they failed to adequately replace him. Though David Villa is an excellent signing, his powers are beginning to wane, and I think they will miss the big Columbian's presence up front this season.
Transfer deadline day in Spain consisted mostly of the unveiling of the world's most expensive player, with Gareth Bale paraded around the Santiago Bernabeu in the famous white shirt. The main moves on deadline day were all from Real Madrid, with the need to recoup some of their expenditure. The first move was the Brazilian playmaker Kaka back to AC Milan. After a turbulent few seasons in Spain, which most will consider a failure for the former World's Best Player, he will be glad to have left. Finally, Mesut Ozil's transfer will have helped line the fairly empty Madrid coffers, as £42.4 Million is not to be sniffed at. That made the day a bittersweet one for the Madrid fans, as the German had become a fan favourite, and many were sad to see him leave.
Total Paid: £313,000,000
Italy:
Biggest Fee Paid: Gonzalo Higuain - Real Madrid to Napoli (£31.3 Million)
Biggest Fee Recieved: Edinson Cavani - Napoli to Paris Saint Germain (£55 Million)
Most Active: Parma (29 new signings)
Most Spent: Napoli (£71.7 Million)
Review:
Italian football's summer transfer window was dominated by one club: Napoli. The initial speculation over the future of Uruguayan striker Edinson Cavani culminated in his transfer to Paris Saint Germain. Due to the amount of interest in his signature, Napoli were able to hold clubs to ransom, meaning that the £55 Million release clause in his contract needed to be met. Once that departure had happened, a spending spree could begin. Though six or seven top quality players were signed, the marquee signing was undoubtedly that of Gonzalo Higuain from Real Madrid for a fee of £31.3 Million. However, the Naples side was not the only one investing in a top quality striker, after the surprise news that Mario Gomez had left European Champions Bayern Munich in favour of Fiorentina for a reported fee of £15 Million. The champions Juventus, unwilling to be outdone, managed to snare two: firstly Fernando Llorente on a free, and then Carlos Tevez from Manchester City for a fee of £10 Million.
The main winners of this transfer window in Italy have undoubtedly been Napoli, though Juventus's forward line is now impressive. The trio of signings from Madrid, with Jose Callejon and Raul Albiol joining Higuain, along with Liverpool's Pepe Reina and PSV Eindhoven's Dries Mertens. This side is now well capable of, at least, Champions League qualification, and perhaps even the title. The losers in the window are probably the Milan sides, with AC losing Kevin-Prince Boateng, though they did rectify that somewhat with the signing of Madrid's Kaka. Inter, however, have failed to land that marquee signing, electing instead to sign a few players at around £6-8 Million. How successful that will prove is yet to be seen.
Deadline day was relatively quiet in Italy, with the vast majority of deals done early in the summer. Only Milan were particularly busy, with the initial signing of Real Madrid's Kaka, for a reported fee of £8 Million. This is especially impressive when you consider that they managed to get £56 Million for the Brazilian from the Spaniards just 4 years ago. Further signings of Valter Birsa from Genoa and Alessandro Matri from Juventus may prove good signings, but they pretty much constituted the largest signings on the day itself.
Total Paid: £295,300,000
France:
Biggest Fee Paid: Edinson Cavani - Napoli to Paris Saint Germain (£55 Million)
Biggest Fee Recieved: Mahmadou Sakho - Paris Saint Germain (£18 Million)
Most Active: Bastia and AS Monaco (12 new signings)
Most Spent: AS Monaco (£140.7 Million)
Review:
As was to be expected, the two oil rich clubs almost monopolised the spending in France, with Paris Saint Germain and AS Monaco fighting it out between themselves for the biggest Ligue 1 transfer of the summer. AS Monaco began the spending early, with firstly a £50 Million deal for Radamel Falcao, before a £70 Million double swoop for Porto's James Rodriguez and Joao Moutinho. Not to be outdone, the Parisians then broke the principality's Falcao record with a £55 Million transfer of Edinson Cavani. They backed this up with a £15 Million of Lille's Lucas Digne and a £31.4 Million transfer of Roma's Marquinhos. Monaco then finished the spending with deals for Toulalan, Romero and finally Sevilla's Geoffrey Kondogbia, taking their total past £140 Million.
If both of these sides constitute the winners in this season's transfer market, then Lille and Montpellier have to be the losers. If those two sides want to be challenging for honours and Champions League places then they need to be continuing to strengthen. Lille, in particular, who have lost some of their star talent in recent years, have failed to adequately replace them.
With the two big spenders getting the majority of their deals done early doors, it was over to the sides like Lyon and Marseille to provide the entertainment on deadline day. The days leading up to September 2nd had been dominated by the behaviour of Lille midfielder and Marseille target Florian Thuavin. After some exceptional performances at the back-end of last season, the 20-year-old was advised to request a new contract, despite only having signed in January. The suspicions were raised that this was Marseille's advice, attempting to drive a wedge between the two parties. If this is the reason, it worked to perfection for OM, who managed, eventually, to grab the youngster for £12 Million. This left a very sour taste in the mouths of Lille, who complained that Marseille had unfairly approached their player. Other than this drama, there was little on deadline day to get unduly excited about.
Total Paid: £311,700,000
Germany:
Biggest Fee Paid: Mario Gotze - Borussia Dortmund to Bayern Munich (£32.5 Million)
Biggest Fee Recieved: Mario Gotze - Borussia Dortmund to Bayern Munich (£32.5 Million)
Most Active: Bayer Leverkusen, Eintracht Frankfurt and Stuttgart (9 new signings)
Most Spent: Bayern Munich (£52.5 Million)
Review:
Germany, similarly to Italy, has had a relatively quiet summer in terms of transfers. After much initial speculation about the futures of Dortmund pair Mario Gotze and Robert Lewandowski, their fates were sealed very early on, with Gotze joining Bayern Munich for £32.5 Million, and Lewandowski signing a new contract at Signal Iduna Park. Certainly, these two clubs have been the largest spenders in the transfer market, with the highly rated Thiago Alcantara joining Gotze at Bayern Munich, after being wanted by Manchester United, to further strengthen the midfield. For Dortmund, they added to the forward line early by bringing in the pacy Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang from St. Etienne for around £11.5 Million, and then replaced Gotze with Shakhtar Donetsk's notoriously unspellable Henrikh Mkhitaryan for around £20 Million. The Ukrainian had been tracked by Liverpool and Tottenham before moving to Germany.
Other big transfers from Germany include Mario Gomez's decision to leave the European champions in favour of Fiorentina, Luiz Gustavo's £17 Million move to Wolfsburg and Bayer Leverkusen's signing of Hamburg's highly rated youngster Son-Ming Heun, in order to replace the departed Andre Schurrle. In the final few days of the transfer window, the major transfer deal was that of AC Milan's Kevin Prince Boateng to Schalke 04. A fantastic signing for the Germans, as they had needed that extra bit of creativity. Other than that, very little activity occurred on the final day.
Unlike in the other countries, there does not appear to be many obvious winners or losers in the Bundesliga. Both Bayern and Dortmund bought well, but they also lost a couple of top quality players. Schalke and Leverkusen both added well to their squads to move them closer to the top two. Arguably the only loser is Hamburg, as they failed to replace the top-scoring Son after his departure to Leverkusen.
Total Paid: £216,500,000
Conclusion:
All of the nations have spent big this season, with every league being involved in a transfer over £30 Million. This has caused records to be shattered in England, and I suspect around many clubs too. How well these players will perform is yet to be seen, but the price tags placed on many will put more pressure on their shoulders. This year's deadline day was not as dramatic as those of previous years, but the amount of money spent more than makes up for this.
England:
Biggest Fee Paid: Mesut Ozil - Real Madrid to Arsenal (£42.4 Million)
Biggest Fee Recieved: Gareth Bale - Tottenham Hotspur to Real Madrid (£85.3 Million)
Most Active: Crystal Palace (16 new signings)
Most Spent: Tottenham Hotspur (£109 Million)
Review:
As is illustrated by the above and below statistics, it is England where the majority of the big money moves have been. English clubs also account for the vast majority of transfer sagas this summer, with Gareth Bale's seemingly inevitable move to Real Madrid taking forever to complete. Another man that commanded a considerable amount of column inches this summer was Luis Suarez. Having stated his displeasure at percieved 'broken promises' from the Liverpool hierarchy, he made his intention to leave clear. Cue two bids from Arsenal, the second designed to trigger a release clause in his contract. Embarrassingly for the Gunners, they had misinterpreted the clause, meaning that no deal had been struck. As the saga dragged on, it became more apparent that the Uruguayan would not be leaving Liverpool without a fight. This eventually culminated in Suarez accepting that he would have to stay at Anfield.
The big winners from this window are undoubtedly Tottenham Hotspur. Being able to spend £109 Million and have only effectively spent 25 puts them in good stead for the Financial Fair Play regulations, and gives them an enormous amount of talent at the same time. The big losers: Manchester United. A distinct lack of signings will do little to calm the doubters of David Moyes and Ed Woodward, and the fact that they wasted so much time on the sagas of Cesc Fabregas, Thiago Alcantara, Wayne Rooney and the Everton duo of Marouane Fellaini and Leighton Baines will have further exacerbated matters. To end up with only one major signing this summer is poor, and not what you would expect a championship winning side to manage. Had they decided not to sign anyone, that is a different matter. However, having chased and failed, Moyes's reputation will not have been aided.
England's transfer deadline day saw just two big money moves. Of the top 6, only two had failed to spend any money to this point, and it was today (arguably with an element of panic-buying) that saw them finally open the cheque-book. Firstly, Arsenal managed to capture the mercurial German Mesut Ozil from Real Madrid. Though a good signing for the Gunners, I question firstly the £42.4 Million fee, and the fact that midfield is not an area that I would consider weak in the Arsenal squad. They would have been much better off buying defenders or strikers. The second was expected: Marouane Fellaini's move to Manchester United. Though they cut it fine, after their pursuit of Ander Herrera ended shambolically (with reports of imposters attempting to defraud money from the Spaniards), they did manage to finalise the former Everton man. It seems that they did not manage to finalise a deal for Real Madrid's Fabio Coentrao, with documents handed in late and with multiple spelling mistakes. All in all, an eventful final day, but not one United will look back on with fondness.
Total Paid: £624,560,000
Spain:
Biggest Fee Paid: Gareth Bale - Tottenham Hotspur to Real Madrid (£85.3 Million)
Biggest Fee Recieved: Radamel Falcao - Atletico Madrid to AS Monaco (£49 Million)
Most Active: Elche and Sevilla (14 new signings)
Most Spent: Real Madrid (£146.1 Million)
Review:
As is the case practically every season, the main Spanish transfer stories revolved around the El Clasico pair, with a case of one-upmanship seemingly prevolent. Real Madrid cast the first stone, signing the hotly rated pairing of Isco and Asier Illaramendi for £20 Million and £34 Million respectively. Barcelona, having not spent at that point, then unleashed what was, at the time, the biggest transfer of the summer, with the capture of Santos wonderkid Neymar. For a fee of £57 Million, he has a lot to live up to at the Catalan club, but what team would not want a strikeforce of Messi and Neymar? Madrid, not to be outdone by their fiercest rivals, had the final say. After a prolonged negotiation, which went on far longer than anyone cared for, they managed to snare their man the day before the deadline. Gareth Bale would join the Galacticos at Madrid for a world record fee of £85.3 Million.
The main winners in this transfer window are probably the pair of them, as they now both have formidable squads that will be envied by most managers around the world, and they are both capable of claiming any title they want this season. It is an extraordinary amount of money to pay for those players, but if they come good, the rewards will be just as substantial. The main loser is probably Atletico Madrid. Although they managed to recoup £50 Million for their talismanic striker Falcao, they failed to adequately replace him. Though David Villa is an excellent signing, his powers are beginning to wane, and I think they will miss the big Columbian's presence up front this season.
Transfer deadline day in Spain consisted mostly of the unveiling of the world's most expensive player, with Gareth Bale paraded around the Santiago Bernabeu in the famous white shirt. The main moves on deadline day were all from Real Madrid, with the need to recoup some of their expenditure. The first move was the Brazilian playmaker Kaka back to AC Milan. After a turbulent few seasons in Spain, which most will consider a failure for the former World's Best Player, he will be glad to have left. Finally, Mesut Ozil's transfer will have helped line the fairly empty Madrid coffers, as £42.4 Million is not to be sniffed at. That made the day a bittersweet one for the Madrid fans, as the German had become a fan favourite, and many were sad to see him leave.
Total Paid: £313,000,000
Italy:
Biggest Fee Paid: Gonzalo Higuain - Real Madrid to Napoli (£31.3 Million)
Biggest Fee Recieved: Edinson Cavani - Napoli to Paris Saint Germain (£55 Million)
Most Active: Parma (29 new signings)
Most Spent: Napoli (£71.7 Million)
Review:
Italian football's summer transfer window was dominated by one club: Napoli. The initial speculation over the future of Uruguayan striker Edinson Cavani culminated in his transfer to Paris Saint Germain. Due to the amount of interest in his signature, Napoli were able to hold clubs to ransom, meaning that the £55 Million release clause in his contract needed to be met. Once that departure had happened, a spending spree could begin. Though six or seven top quality players were signed, the marquee signing was undoubtedly that of Gonzalo Higuain from Real Madrid for a fee of £31.3 Million. However, the Naples side was not the only one investing in a top quality striker, after the surprise news that Mario Gomez had left European Champions Bayern Munich in favour of Fiorentina for a reported fee of £15 Million. The champions Juventus, unwilling to be outdone, managed to snare two: firstly Fernando Llorente on a free, and then Carlos Tevez from Manchester City for a fee of £10 Million.
The main winners of this transfer window in Italy have undoubtedly been Napoli, though Juventus's forward line is now impressive. The trio of signings from Madrid, with Jose Callejon and Raul Albiol joining Higuain, along with Liverpool's Pepe Reina and PSV Eindhoven's Dries Mertens. This side is now well capable of, at least, Champions League qualification, and perhaps even the title. The losers in the window are probably the Milan sides, with AC losing Kevin-Prince Boateng, though they did rectify that somewhat with the signing of Madrid's Kaka. Inter, however, have failed to land that marquee signing, electing instead to sign a few players at around £6-8 Million. How successful that will prove is yet to be seen.
Deadline day was relatively quiet in Italy, with the vast majority of deals done early in the summer. Only Milan were particularly busy, with the initial signing of Real Madrid's Kaka, for a reported fee of £8 Million. This is especially impressive when you consider that they managed to get £56 Million for the Brazilian from the Spaniards just 4 years ago. Further signings of Valter Birsa from Genoa and Alessandro Matri from Juventus may prove good signings, but they pretty much constituted the largest signings on the day itself.
Total Paid: £295,300,000
France:
Biggest Fee Paid: Edinson Cavani - Napoli to Paris Saint Germain (£55 Million)
Biggest Fee Recieved: Mahmadou Sakho - Paris Saint Germain (£18 Million)
Most Active: Bastia and AS Monaco (12 new signings)
Most Spent: AS Monaco (£140.7 Million)
Review:
As was to be expected, the two oil rich clubs almost monopolised the spending in France, with Paris Saint Germain and AS Monaco fighting it out between themselves for the biggest Ligue 1 transfer of the summer. AS Monaco began the spending early, with firstly a £50 Million deal for Radamel Falcao, before a £70 Million double swoop for Porto's James Rodriguez and Joao Moutinho. Not to be outdone, the Parisians then broke the principality's Falcao record with a £55 Million transfer of Edinson Cavani. They backed this up with a £15 Million of Lille's Lucas Digne and a £31.4 Million transfer of Roma's Marquinhos. Monaco then finished the spending with deals for Toulalan, Romero and finally Sevilla's Geoffrey Kondogbia, taking their total past £140 Million.
If both of these sides constitute the winners in this season's transfer market, then Lille and Montpellier have to be the losers. If those two sides want to be challenging for honours and Champions League places then they need to be continuing to strengthen. Lille, in particular, who have lost some of their star talent in recent years, have failed to adequately replace them.
With the two big spenders getting the majority of their deals done early doors, it was over to the sides like Lyon and Marseille to provide the entertainment on deadline day. The days leading up to September 2nd had been dominated by the behaviour of Lille midfielder and Marseille target Florian Thuavin. After some exceptional performances at the back-end of last season, the 20-year-old was advised to request a new contract, despite only having signed in January. The suspicions were raised that this was Marseille's advice, attempting to drive a wedge between the two parties. If this is the reason, it worked to perfection for OM, who managed, eventually, to grab the youngster for £12 Million. This left a very sour taste in the mouths of Lille, who complained that Marseille had unfairly approached their player. Other than this drama, there was little on deadline day to get unduly excited about.
Total Paid: £311,700,000
Germany:
Biggest Fee Paid: Mario Gotze - Borussia Dortmund to Bayern Munich (£32.5 Million)
Biggest Fee Recieved: Mario Gotze - Borussia Dortmund to Bayern Munich (£32.5 Million)
Most Active: Bayer Leverkusen, Eintracht Frankfurt and Stuttgart (9 new signings)
Most Spent: Bayern Munich (£52.5 Million)
Review:
Germany, similarly to Italy, has had a relatively quiet summer in terms of transfers. After much initial speculation about the futures of Dortmund pair Mario Gotze and Robert Lewandowski, their fates were sealed very early on, with Gotze joining Bayern Munich for £32.5 Million, and Lewandowski signing a new contract at Signal Iduna Park. Certainly, these two clubs have been the largest spenders in the transfer market, with the highly rated Thiago Alcantara joining Gotze at Bayern Munich, after being wanted by Manchester United, to further strengthen the midfield. For Dortmund, they added to the forward line early by bringing in the pacy Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang from St. Etienne for around £11.5 Million, and then replaced Gotze with Shakhtar Donetsk's notoriously unspellable Henrikh Mkhitaryan for around £20 Million. The Ukrainian had been tracked by Liverpool and Tottenham before moving to Germany.
Other big transfers from Germany include Mario Gomez's decision to leave the European champions in favour of Fiorentina, Luiz Gustavo's £17 Million move to Wolfsburg and Bayer Leverkusen's signing of Hamburg's highly rated youngster Son-Ming Heun, in order to replace the departed Andre Schurrle. In the final few days of the transfer window, the major transfer deal was that of AC Milan's Kevin Prince Boateng to Schalke 04. A fantastic signing for the Germans, as they had needed that extra bit of creativity. Other than that, very little activity occurred on the final day.
Unlike in the other countries, there does not appear to be many obvious winners or losers in the Bundesliga. Both Bayern and Dortmund bought well, but they also lost a couple of top quality players. Schalke and Leverkusen both added well to their squads to move them closer to the top two. Arguably the only loser is Hamburg, as they failed to replace the top-scoring Son after his departure to Leverkusen.
Total Paid: £216,500,000
Conclusion:
All of the nations have spent big this season, with every league being involved in a transfer over £30 Million. This has caused records to be shattered in England, and I suspect around many clubs too. How well these players will perform is yet to be seen, but the price tags placed on many will put more pressure on their shoulders. This year's deadline day was not as dramatic as those of previous years, but the amount of money spent more than makes up for this.
Sunday 1 September 2013
The £85 Million Man: Is Bale Worth It?
In one of the summer's most drawn-out transfer sagas, Welsh winger Gareth Bale has finally got his wish and will don the famous white shirt for Real Madrid this season. In what has been reported as a world record fee of £85.3 Million, eclipsing the £80 Million that Madrid paid Manchester United for Cristiano Ronaldo back in 2008, Bale will have to bear the burden of that enormous fee. In this post, I will be looking back at the history of the world transfer record, and its progression through the decades. I will also be assessing Bale's abilities, asking whether he will be able to live up to that price tag, and, even more basic, whether he was worth that money in the first place?
Transfers between clubs were introduced a short while after player registrations in 1885. Transfer fees soon followed, as clubs realised that their players were financial assets. This led to the transfer record being set at £100 for West Bromwich Albion's Willie Groves, paid by Aston Villa. 12 years later, Middlesbrough would break the £1,000 mark for Sunderland's Alf Common. By 1928, that figure had added another 0, with Bolton Wanderers's David Jack transferring to Herbert Chapman's Arsenal for a fee of £10,890. The 1929 Wall Street Crash prevented the European clubs further breaking the record, but it did little to stem spending on transfer fees, with the next record set just 3 years later. Argentinian side River Plate bought Bernabe Ferreyra from fellow Argentine club Tigre for £23,000, more than doubling the previous record. That record remained until after the Second World War, with Derby County's £24,000 bid for Manchester United's Johnny Morris.
A year later, the record was £30,000, as Aston Villa sold Trevor Ford to Sunderland. After the half way point of the century, the records started to tumble as the price escalated. In 1952, the record had passed the £50,000 mark, with the first of seven consecutive Italian based records. Atalanta's Hans Jeppson was sold to Napoli for £52,000. Within two years, that had increased to £72,000, as AC Milan bought Penarol's Juan Schiaffino. The next landmark was passed in 1961, as Inter Milan's bid for Barcelona's Luis Suarez (not the bitey one) passed the six figure mark, at £152,000. Two years later, another landmark was passed, as Roma paid the first ever quarter of a million pounds fee for Mantova's Angelo Sormani. By 1968, that had doubled, with Pietro Anastasi bringing Varese £500,000 of Juventus's cash. After Johan Cruyff's move to Barcelona in 1973 for a fee of £922,000, the £1 Million mark was finally broken as Napoli paid £1.2 Million for Bologna's Giuseppe Savoldi. This would spark an even more rapid acceleration in fees.
The passing of the £1 Million mark was a significant point in football transfer history, as within ten years of that point, the record had quintupled. A year after Savoldi's transfer, Paolo Rossi added another £500,000 to the record, transferring from Vicenza to Juventus. Then came a pair of records for the same man, just two years apart. The world's best player at the time, and arguably of all time, Diego Maradona, smashed the record in 1982, moving from Argentinian side Boca Juniors to Barcelona for a fee of £3 Million. After the briefest of spells with the Catalan side, he was on the move again two years later, breaking his own record with a £5 Million move to Napoli. That record would not last until the end of the decade however, with Ruud Gullit's 1987 transfer from PSV Eindhoven to AC Milan adding another £1 Million to the record. Just 5 years later, we saw the start of the 'modern era' of transfer fees, with the inaugural £10 Million transfer for Marseille's Jean-Pierre Papin from AC Milan. That record would not last a year, with first Gianluca Vialli's move to Juventus (£12 Million) and then Gianluigi Lentini's to AC Milan (£13 Million).
The final English team to break the world transfer record to date occurred in 1996, with the return of the 'prodigal son' Alan Shearer to his hometown Newcastle United from Blackburn, for a fee of £15 Million. At the time, this transfer was considered to be obscene. Few could have predicted the course the next 15 or so years would take in terms of finances. For each of the next 5 years, the transfer record was repeatedly broken. 1997 saw Brazilian legend Ronaldo move from Barcelona to Inter Milan for a reported £19.5 Million. In 1998, Denilson would add another £2.5 Million to this, taking the total past the £20 Million mark with his move to Real Betis. The following year, Christian Vieri's move from Lazio to Inter Milan blitzed this, with a fee of £32 Million. And still the spending did not stop. The turn of the millenium saw the record broken twice, with firstly Hernan Crespo's move to Lazio from Parma (£35.5 Million), before Luis Figo made the controversial move across the El Clasico line from Barcelona to Real Madrid for £37 Million. This marked the beginning of the Real Madrid dominance in terms of transfer records, as another three would follow.
A year later, in 2001, Zinedine Zidane saw the completion of the famous 'Galacticos' of the early 2000's. His transfer from Juventus for £46.6 Million completed an unbelievable run of spending from the Spanish side, and many believed that the fee commanded by the Italians would never be beaten. It certainly ended the run of yearly record-breaking, leaving a good 8 years before the next record. However, the Real Madrid spending of the late 90s and early 2000's sparked an inflated price for all footballers, and £10-20 Million fees became commonplace in Europe's top leagues. By 2009, financial powerhouses like Chelsea, and then Manchester City were beginning to come to the fore, but the election of Real Madrid chairman Florentino Perez sparked another bout of staggering spending. He firstly spent £56 Million on Brazil's playmaker Kaka, who had led AC Milan to Champions League glory two seasons before, and then obliterated that record just two months later, landing Manchester United's prolific forward Cristiano Ronaldo for a ridiculous £80 Million. This is the record that Gareth Bale has outdone with his transfer today.
Or has he? If we adjust the previous transfer records for inflation since the records were made, we see some vast increases. Here are a few notable changes. The very first transfer record, set by Willie Groves in 1885 at £100, would today be worth £10,417.26. The first £10,000 transfer, set in 1928, David Jack, would now cost £578,804.59, and the 1952 £52,000 transfer of Hans Jeppson would set a modern club back £1,267,432.40. These changes indicate the relative value of players to today's standards, as a £1.2 Million player would be considered a steal. Even Diego Maradona, considered one of the best players ever to have played, cannot challenge the value of his contemporary peers. His 1984 move to Napoli for £5 Million would cost just £13,626,500.00, or less than Wilfried Zaha. Whilst the young Englishman looks a prospect, few would expect him to be in the same league as the Argentine.
As we moved into the modern day era, here we can begin to discover whether Bale really is the world's most valuable player. Alan Shearer's 1996 fee of £15 Million equates to £23,848,500, Luis Figo's 2000 £37 Million transfer becomes £52,784,200, and Zinedine Zidane, the most expensive of the Galaticos at £46.6 Million in 2001, gets even closer at £65,305,240. He beats Kaka (£63 Million), but even he remains a good £20 Million away from the Bale fee. Only Cristiano Ronaldo's £80 Million price is left between Bale and the MVP accolade. However, in the four years that have passed since that transfer, inflation has taken the value of Ronaldo past the £90 Million mark, at a grand total of £90,848,000.00. This makes Ronaldo the most valuable player in the history of association football, but Bale retains the 'highest transfer fee commanded' tag.
Semantics aside, £85.3 Million is a whole lot of money to pay for an individual player. So is the Welshman worth it? I will start by assessing whether Bale will be able to live up to the pressure of the £85.3 Million price tag placed on his shoulders, before comparing his attributes to that of previous greats to determine whether he is worth that relative to other players. A major concern for clubs when agreeing a deal for that amount is whether the numbers will act as a weight on the back of the player in question. I will give an example. Fernando Torres, at both Atletico Madrid and Liverpool, was a scoring machine. Consistently into 20/30 goals a season, his £15 Million transfer from Spain to Merseyside seemed a bargain, and it evidently put no pressure on him. However, Chelsea's January 2011 £50 Million move for the Spaniard seemingly pressurised him. 'El Nino's' spark was gone, and he has yet to fully recover, having failed to trouble the top goalscorers in the Premier League since his big money move down South. The worry is that Bale will react in a similar way. Having arrived at Spurs for a mere £10 Million back in 2007, the winger has had no expectations thrust upon him, and as a result has been able to ride the crest of the wave. Now, he will instantly find every move he makes under intense scrutiny. Some players can handle it, and some cannot.
However, one of his new teammates knows all about the pressure of a big price tag. Cristiano Ronaldo has thrived since his £80 Million move from Man United in 2009, and he will undoubtedly play a significant role in ensuring Bale stays at the top of his game. The Portuguese striker has been in Bale's place, and will be able to give the Welshman valuable advice on dealing with the pressure. I am not saying that Bale will not have wobbles, or find himself out of form at times, but he will have someone that understands his situation, and will be able to help him through the hard times.
But is Bale really worth £85 Million? How do his abilities compare with those of his fellow record breakers? He is certainly no better at passing than Zidane, or any quicker than Ronaldo, or better at finishing than Vieri, but he does have that spark. The ability to create something out of nothing is a rare one indeed, and you see it in so few top players. As for the valuation placed on that ability, I think that unless he single-handledly wins them multiple Champions League titles, which is highly unlikely, he will not come close to paying back that amount. I personally disagree with the idea that any footballer is worth that sum, however, perhaps it is best to say that it is similar to art. It is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it.
Transfers between clubs were introduced a short while after player registrations in 1885. Transfer fees soon followed, as clubs realised that their players were financial assets. This led to the transfer record being set at £100 for West Bromwich Albion's Willie Groves, paid by Aston Villa. 12 years later, Middlesbrough would break the £1,000 mark for Sunderland's Alf Common. By 1928, that figure had added another 0, with Bolton Wanderers's David Jack transferring to Herbert Chapman's Arsenal for a fee of £10,890. The 1929 Wall Street Crash prevented the European clubs further breaking the record, but it did little to stem spending on transfer fees, with the next record set just 3 years later. Argentinian side River Plate bought Bernabe Ferreyra from fellow Argentine club Tigre for £23,000, more than doubling the previous record. That record remained until after the Second World War, with Derby County's £24,000 bid for Manchester United's Johnny Morris.
A year later, the record was £30,000, as Aston Villa sold Trevor Ford to Sunderland. After the half way point of the century, the records started to tumble as the price escalated. In 1952, the record had passed the £50,000 mark, with the first of seven consecutive Italian based records. Atalanta's Hans Jeppson was sold to Napoli for £52,000. Within two years, that had increased to £72,000, as AC Milan bought Penarol's Juan Schiaffino. The next landmark was passed in 1961, as Inter Milan's bid for Barcelona's Luis Suarez (not the bitey one) passed the six figure mark, at £152,000. Two years later, another landmark was passed, as Roma paid the first ever quarter of a million pounds fee for Mantova's Angelo Sormani. By 1968, that had doubled, with Pietro Anastasi bringing Varese £500,000 of Juventus's cash. After Johan Cruyff's move to Barcelona in 1973 for a fee of £922,000, the £1 Million mark was finally broken as Napoli paid £1.2 Million for Bologna's Giuseppe Savoldi. This would spark an even more rapid acceleration in fees.
The passing of the £1 Million mark was a significant point in football transfer history, as within ten years of that point, the record had quintupled. A year after Savoldi's transfer, Paolo Rossi added another £500,000 to the record, transferring from Vicenza to Juventus. Then came a pair of records for the same man, just two years apart. The world's best player at the time, and arguably of all time, Diego Maradona, smashed the record in 1982, moving from Argentinian side Boca Juniors to Barcelona for a fee of £3 Million. After the briefest of spells with the Catalan side, he was on the move again two years later, breaking his own record with a £5 Million move to Napoli. That record would not last until the end of the decade however, with Ruud Gullit's 1987 transfer from PSV Eindhoven to AC Milan adding another £1 Million to the record. Just 5 years later, we saw the start of the 'modern era' of transfer fees, with the inaugural £10 Million transfer for Marseille's Jean-Pierre Papin from AC Milan. That record would not last a year, with first Gianluca Vialli's move to Juventus (£12 Million) and then Gianluigi Lentini's to AC Milan (£13 Million).
The final English team to break the world transfer record to date occurred in 1996, with the return of the 'prodigal son' Alan Shearer to his hometown Newcastle United from Blackburn, for a fee of £15 Million. At the time, this transfer was considered to be obscene. Few could have predicted the course the next 15 or so years would take in terms of finances. For each of the next 5 years, the transfer record was repeatedly broken. 1997 saw Brazilian legend Ronaldo move from Barcelona to Inter Milan for a reported £19.5 Million. In 1998, Denilson would add another £2.5 Million to this, taking the total past the £20 Million mark with his move to Real Betis. The following year, Christian Vieri's move from Lazio to Inter Milan blitzed this, with a fee of £32 Million. And still the spending did not stop. The turn of the millenium saw the record broken twice, with firstly Hernan Crespo's move to Lazio from Parma (£35.5 Million), before Luis Figo made the controversial move across the El Clasico line from Barcelona to Real Madrid for £37 Million. This marked the beginning of the Real Madrid dominance in terms of transfer records, as another three would follow.
A year later, in 2001, Zinedine Zidane saw the completion of the famous 'Galacticos' of the early 2000's. His transfer from Juventus for £46.6 Million completed an unbelievable run of spending from the Spanish side, and many believed that the fee commanded by the Italians would never be beaten. It certainly ended the run of yearly record-breaking, leaving a good 8 years before the next record. However, the Real Madrid spending of the late 90s and early 2000's sparked an inflated price for all footballers, and £10-20 Million fees became commonplace in Europe's top leagues. By 2009, financial powerhouses like Chelsea, and then Manchester City were beginning to come to the fore, but the election of Real Madrid chairman Florentino Perez sparked another bout of staggering spending. He firstly spent £56 Million on Brazil's playmaker Kaka, who had led AC Milan to Champions League glory two seasons before, and then obliterated that record just two months later, landing Manchester United's prolific forward Cristiano Ronaldo for a ridiculous £80 Million. This is the record that Gareth Bale has outdone with his transfer today.
Or has he? If we adjust the previous transfer records for inflation since the records were made, we see some vast increases. Here are a few notable changes. The very first transfer record, set by Willie Groves in 1885 at £100, would today be worth £10,417.26. The first £10,000 transfer, set in 1928, David Jack, would now cost £578,804.59, and the 1952 £52,000 transfer of Hans Jeppson would set a modern club back £1,267,432.40. These changes indicate the relative value of players to today's standards, as a £1.2 Million player would be considered a steal. Even Diego Maradona, considered one of the best players ever to have played, cannot challenge the value of his contemporary peers. His 1984 move to Napoli for £5 Million would cost just £13,626,500.00, or less than Wilfried Zaha. Whilst the young Englishman looks a prospect, few would expect him to be in the same league as the Argentine.
As we moved into the modern day era, here we can begin to discover whether Bale really is the world's most valuable player. Alan Shearer's 1996 fee of £15 Million equates to £23,848,500, Luis Figo's 2000 £37 Million transfer becomes £52,784,200, and Zinedine Zidane, the most expensive of the Galaticos at £46.6 Million in 2001, gets even closer at £65,305,240. He beats Kaka (£63 Million), but even he remains a good £20 Million away from the Bale fee. Only Cristiano Ronaldo's £80 Million price is left between Bale and the MVP accolade. However, in the four years that have passed since that transfer, inflation has taken the value of Ronaldo past the £90 Million mark, at a grand total of £90,848,000.00. This makes Ronaldo the most valuable player in the history of association football, but Bale retains the 'highest transfer fee commanded' tag.
Semantics aside, £85.3 Million is a whole lot of money to pay for an individual player. So is the Welshman worth it? I will start by assessing whether Bale will be able to live up to the pressure of the £85.3 Million price tag placed on his shoulders, before comparing his attributes to that of previous greats to determine whether he is worth that relative to other players. A major concern for clubs when agreeing a deal for that amount is whether the numbers will act as a weight on the back of the player in question. I will give an example. Fernando Torres, at both Atletico Madrid and Liverpool, was a scoring machine. Consistently into 20/30 goals a season, his £15 Million transfer from Spain to Merseyside seemed a bargain, and it evidently put no pressure on him. However, Chelsea's January 2011 £50 Million move for the Spaniard seemingly pressurised him. 'El Nino's' spark was gone, and he has yet to fully recover, having failed to trouble the top goalscorers in the Premier League since his big money move down South. The worry is that Bale will react in a similar way. Having arrived at Spurs for a mere £10 Million back in 2007, the winger has had no expectations thrust upon him, and as a result has been able to ride the crest of the wave. Now, he will instantly find every move he makes under intense scrutiny. Some players can handle it, and some cannot.
However, one of his new teammates knows all about the pressure of a big price tag. Cristiano Ronaldo has thrived since his £80 Million move from Man United in 2009, and he will undoubtedly play a significant role in ensuring Bale stays at the top of his game. The Portuguese striker has been in Bale's place, and will be able to give the Welshman valuable advice on dealing with the pressure. I am not saying that Bale will not have wobbles, or find himself out of form at times, but he will have someone that understands his situation, and will be able to help him through the hard times.
But is Bale really worth £85 Million? How do his abilities compare with those of his fellow record breakers? He is certainly no better at passing than Zidane, or any quicker than Ronaldo, or better at finishing than Vieri, but he does have that spark. The ability to create something out of nothing is a rare one indeed, and you see it in so few top players. As for the valuation placed on that ability, I think that unless he single-handledly wins them multiple Champions League titles, which is highly unlikely, he will not come close to paying back that amount. I personally disagree with the idea that any footballer is worth that sum, however, perhaps it is best to say that it is similar to art. It is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)