There is nothing as fickle, or indeed hypocritical, as a football manager (except perhaps football fans). Jose Mourinho's comments this weekend that referees, pundits and the whole football community are involved in some campaign against Chelsea are about as close to a conspiracy theory as aliens or JFK's assassination. I'll go through all the reasons that this is undoubtedly the case, before looking at the possible alternative reasons that Mourinho could have had for saying what he did, coming directly from the mind of a cynic.
Firstly, let's examine exactly what Mourinho said and the context in which he said it. Following his side's disappointing 1-1 draw with Southampton, the Portuguese manager was understandably livid with the decision by referee Anthony Taylor not to award a penalty for a clear foul by Saints defender Matt Targett. Worse still, he booked Cesc Fabregas for simulation, only adding to the sense of injustice felt by Chelsea. To this point, his anger is totally reasonable. We see a plethora of managers across the Football Leagues fined for outbursts in post-match interviews every year, particularly related to refereeing decisions. To that end, I do understand the difficulty of attempting to keep your emotions in check following a perceived injustice - particularly when you're presented with a camera in your face no more than five minutes after the incident!
However, Jose Mourinho's reaction was on a whole other level. Here are his exact words from his interview with the BBC:
"The media, commentators, other managers are all doing it [putting pressure on referees]. There is a campaign against Chelsea. I don't know why there is this campaign and I do not care.
"Everybody knows it was a penalty. The referee made a mistake, people make mistakes and he made a big mistake. He is a good referee and a good guy, he is young, he has years and years of football ahead of him but it is a big mistake."
This statement is ludicrous. It is, in fact, so outrageously idiotic that Mourinho himself realised how it sounded, as the second paragraph is considerably more measured and controlled. I particularly like the word 'commentators' in there - I think you were meaning 'pundits', Jose? I know as he has a great grip of the English language (certainly far better than my Portuguese), I have little room for mockery or complaint, however I found the notion of Howard Webb watching Match of the Day and being influenced by John Motson incredibly amusing!
Here a just a few reasons from this season that demonstrate just how ridiculous Mourinho's claims are:
1) There's no smoke without fire
If there is any element of truth in the idea that referees are not giving decisions Chelsea's way, it's probably because of their reputation developed over the last few games. Just like we saw from the likes of El Hadji Diouf, Cristiano Ronaldo and Gareth Bale, a reputation for diving often sees you fail to get decisions you really probably should. Following high profile cases of simulation from the Chelsea team (Willian, Diego Costa, Ivanovic and another high profile example that I'll use later), it's hardly surprising that referees and the rest of the footballing world are getting more than a little fed up with their antics. Not enough to warrant conspiracy theories, but the benefit of the doubt has long since vanished.
2) It's not just Chelsea, you know?
Another of my favourite things about football managers is their uncanny ability to be able to completely ignore anything that goes their way or anything that disproves their theory (which is why I'm not holding out much hope that Jose Mourinho is paying attention to what I'm writing - yeah, that's the only reason he wouldn't read this!). Neil Warnock is the master of this, and as a result has got himself into trouble more times than I can count. However, even this season, we have seen examples of exactly what happened to Cesc Fabregas happen to other clubs. The most high profile of these was also at St Mary's just a few short weeks ago. Despite clearly being clattered by Jose Fonte (arguably even more obviously than Saturday's challenge, which ultimately saw a centre back stumbling and colliding with a forward), Sergio Aguero was booked for simulation. We see numerous cases of footballing miscarriages of justice every year - that doesn't make it right, but if it stamps out diving once and for all, it's a price worth paying in my opinion. But no, Jose, it's not just your team it happens to.
3) I'm sure there's a saying involving glass houses and stones...
What makes Mourinho's comments even more ironic is the fact that Chelsea got away with the most obvious example of diving this season. Earlier this month, Hull's visit to Stamford Bridge (the location of this isn't a coincidence) saw Gary Cahill get away with footballing murder. Already on a yellow card (which was bordering on red to say the least), he made a quite ridiculous attempt to win a penalty, throwing himself through the air between two onrushing Hull defenders. The result - zero contact, but no second yellow. So when Jose talks about game-changing moments, he may want to remember a far more significant one that went in his favour.
We have very rarely seen managers completely lose the plot in front of the media. My favourite example of this remains Rafa Benitez's 'FACT' rant - though as a City fan most of what he said is absolutely true! I have seen people suggest that Jose's outburst is up there with him, however, those of you that have read my work before know that I'm far too cynical to believe that Mourinho lost control. He has already proven himself to be an expert in mind games, and is the only man I have ever seen get under the skin of Manuel Pellegrini. This has all the hallmarks of his own attempts to get into the referee's subconscious when the next dubious dive or penalty decisions come up, so we see more of the Cahill examples and less of the Fabregas ones.
To ridicule Mourinho for his comments misses the point of them entirely, and this is why he is so clever. By getting people talking about them ensures they remain in the public's, and perhaps even the referees', minds. I understand that by writing this post, I am somewhat contributing to this, but I rationalise this by saying that by highlighting the potential hidden reasons behind his comments, they will cease to have the desired effect.
Or perhaps Mourinho is just mad - he did make comments about Barcelona receiving favourable decisions thanks to their sponsorship with Unicef once upon a time, after all?
Analysis of sporting events, talking points and controversies.
Tuesday 30 December 2014
Sunday 23 November 2014
Drama Denied: What Was The Double Point?
The Hives put it perfectly - 'hate to say I told you so'. As I mentioned in a critical (and therefore fairly normal) post earlier in the year, I was not all for the double points race being discussed at the time. Having had that race - today's Abu Dhabi Grand Prix, I can safely say I am still not a fan. A season full of twists and turns (even though viewers may have wanted a slightly more competitive field) has, thanks to the double points rule, seemingly been won emphatically. And this season review post will demonstrate that this has simply not been the case.
Though no-one can deny that the Constructors title has been long since over - really since about race five or six - the Driver's Championship has gone right down to the wire, with both Mercedes drivers in with a shout as the lights went out in the desert. It's worth saying that this would still have been the case without double points, though admittedly the pressure on Hamilton would have been non-existent.
However, after all the pre-race talk about avoiding technical issues, it was perhaps inevitable that the title would ultimately be cemented by a catastrophic ERS failure for Nico Rosberg. This left the German well outside the points, while his teammate took the top step in Abu Dhabi to extend his Drivers Championship lead to an impressive 67 points. Much like many football results we see, the final score simply doesn't tell the story, and this must be blamed, at least slightly, on the ludicrous double points final race.
Despite his enormous final margin of victory, the 2014 season started in the worst possible way for Hamilton with a DNF handing Rosberg a 25 point advantage. However, four straight one-two victories for the Briton saw him reel Rosberg back in as the pair headed to Monaco, with the Constructors Championship practically sewn up.
But the famous track saw an ugly twist in race, which threatened to break the two lifelong friends apart. In a move reminiscent of the cynical parking manoeuvre pulled off by Michael Schumacher in 2006 at Rascasse, a dubious "mistake" handed Rosberg pole and ultimately victory, bucking the trend of Hamilton wins and left a bad taste in the mouth. This would not be the only time the pair clashed, with Hamilton again feeling aggrieved at the tactics of his teammate at Spa later in the year.
With Hamilton's win at Yas Marina, Mercedes set a new record for most wins by a Constructor in a single season - 16. The only man to taste success was a surprising one - not one of the several world champions littering the field, but Red Bull new boy Daniel Ricciardo. His first race win in Canada was gifted to him, with both Mercedes drivers struggling with ERS problems - forcing Hamilton out, and Rosberg into second. He was also the beneficiary when the two Mercedes collided in Belgium, whilst poor strategic decision-making and changeable conditions handed the Australian the victory in Hungary. Though he has been fortunate, take nothing away from his performance - to comprehensively beat the four time world champion Sebastien Vettel, in the car he won the titles, both in qualifying and the race, is quite incredible.
Likewise, Valtteri Bottas's performances have also been eye-catching. Though the Finn failed to claim victory, he was a regular on the podium, more than matching his illustrious teammate, Massa. Moving back to the title race, the Mercedes pair swapped victories, with both taking their home races. However, after the incident at Spa, the team's sympathy sat well and truly with Hamilton, with a number of the upper echelons publicly blaming Rosberg for the crash. This clearly had an impact on Hamilton, as the Brit claimed the following five Grand Prix to take the initiative in the title race - 24 points ahead with just two races to go.
While in any normal season, that would almost see the title done and dusted, the threat of double points in Abu Dhabi placed more emphasis on the Brazilian GP. This time, the pressure told on Hamilton, with an uncharacteristic driving error having seemed set to jump his teammate in the pits. The spin left Hamilton 17 ahead going into today's GP in the desert, with the ERS problem for Rosberg killing any threat of final day drama.
So as I have mentioned, I am hardly the biggest fan of the double points rule. I was equally against the extension of the points to 25,17 etc... from the more traditional 10, 8, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 that I grew up with. So, using the older scoring system, how would the season have panned out?
So Bernie wants excitement right to the end? Newsflash Mr Ecclestone - you don't want double points, you don't even want the current 25 for a win scoring system - you want the system you used 10 years ago! Under the old system, Lewis Hamilton and Nico Rosberg would have come into today's race separated by just one point, knowing that the winner would take it all!
Though no-one can deny that the Constructors title has been long since over - really since about race five or six - the Driver's Championship has gone right down to the wire, with both Mercedes drivers in with a shout as the lights went out in the desert. It's worth saying that this would still have been the case without double points, though admittedly the pressure on Hamilton would have been non-existent.
However, after all the pre-race talk about avoiding technical issues, it was perhaps inevitable that the title would ultimately be cemented by a catastrophic ERS failure for Nico Rosberg. This left the German well outside the points, while his teammate took the top step in Abu Dhabi to extend his Drivers Championship lead to an impressive 67 points. Much like many football results we see, the final score simply doesn't tell the story, and this must be blamed, at least slightly, on the ludicrous double points final race.
Despite his enormous final margin of victory, the 2014 season started in the worst possible way for Hamilton with a DNF handing Rosberg a 25 point advantage. However, four straight one-two victories for the Briton saw him reel Rosberg back in as the pair headed to Monaco, with the Constructors Championship practically sewn up.
But the famous track saw an ugly twist in race, which threatened to break the two lifelong friends apart. In a move reminiscent of the cynical parking manoeuvre pulled off by Michael Schumacher in 2006 at Rascasse, a dubious "mistake" handed Rosberg pole and ultimately victory, bucking the trend of Hamilton wins and left a bad taste in the mouth. This would not be the only time the pair clashed, with Hamilton again feeling aggrieved at the tactics of his teammate at Spa later in the year.
With Hamilton's win at Yas Marina, Mercedes set a new record for most wins by a Constructor in a single season - 16. The only man to taste success was a surprising one - not one of the several world champions littering the field, but Red Bull new boy Daniel Ricciardo. His first race win in Canada was gifted to him, with both Mercedes drivers struggling with ERS problems - forcing Hamilton out, and Rosberg into second. He was also the beneficiary when the two Mercedes collided in Belgium, whilst poor strategic decision-making and changeable conditions handed the Australian the victory in Hungary. Though he has been fortunate, take nothing away from his performance - to comprehensively beat the four time world champion Sebastien Vettel, in the car he won the titles, both in qualifying and the race, is quite incredible.
Likewise, Valtteri Bottas's performances have also been eye-catching. Though the Finn failed to claim victory, he was a regular on the podium, more than matching his illustrious teammate, Massa. Moving back to the title race, the Mercedes pair swapped victories, with both taking their home races. However, after the incident at Spa, the team's sympathy sat well and truly with Hamilton, with a number of the upper echelons publicly blaming Rosberg for the crash. This clearly had an impact on Hamilton, as the Brit claimed the following five Grand Prix to take the initiative in the title race - 24 points ahead with just two races to go.
While in any normal season, that would almost see the title done and dusted, the threat of double points in Abu Dhabi placed more emphasis on the Brazilian GP. This time, the pressure told on Hamilton, with an uncharacteristic driving error having seemed set to jump his teammate in the pits. The spin left Hamilton 17 ahead going into today's GP in the desert, with the ERS problem for Rosberg killing any threat of final day drama.
So as I have mentioned, I am hardly the biggest fan of the double points rule. I was equally against the extension of the points to 25,17 etc... from the more traditional 10, 8, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 that I grew up with. So, using the older scoring system, how would the season have panned out?
| Hamilton | Rosberg | |
| Australia | 0 | 10 |
| Malaysia | 10 | 18 |
| Bahrain | 20 | 26 |
| China | 30 | 34 |
| Spain | 40 | 42 |
| Monaco | 48 | 52 |
| Canada | 48 | 60 |
| Austria | 56 | 70 |
| Britain | 66 | 70 |
| Germany | 72 | 80 |
| Hungary | 78 | 85 |
| Belgium | 78 | 93 |
| Italy | 88 | 101 |
| Singapore | 98 | 101 |
| Japan | 108 | 109 |
| Russia | 118 | 117 |
| USA | 128 | 125 |
| Brazil | 136 | 135 |
| Abu Dhabi | 146 | 135 |
So Bernie wants excitement right to the end? Newsflash Mr Ecclestone - you don't want double points, you don't even want the current 25 for a win scoring system - you want the system you used 10 years ago! Under the old system, Lewis Hamilton and Nico Rosberg would have come into today's race separated by just one point, knowing that the winner would take it all!
Wednesday 19 November 2014
England's Newest Centurion: Is Rooney an England Legend?
Despite the long history of England's national football team, it comes as a considerable surprise that just nine individuals hold more than 100 caps. The latest of these, Wayne Rooney, has been at the heart of the side for almost a decade, and in recent years we have seen an arguable overreliance on the combustible forward. But a true England legend alongside the likes of Bobby Moore, David Beckham and Bobby Charlton? I'm not so sure.
Though the caps statistic doesn't lie (Rooney follows an elite list of Peter Shilton, David Beckham, Steven Gerrard, Bobby Moore, Ashley Cole, Frank Lampard, Bobby Charlton and Billy Wright), it's not the only statistic that matters. As a successful striker, Rooney, as with any other forward in world football, is ultimately going to be judged on goals scored. As of writing this, Wayne Rooney sits 3rd on the all-time England scoring list - just three behind Bobby Charlton at the top.
If we dig a little deeper, however, we see that this achievement is not as impressive as it initially appears. Of the eight other England centurions, just one is a striker - Charlton. This brings us onto an additional point. As well as the volume of Rooney's goals, it is also important that the ratio of goals to games is considered. As of writing this, Rooney's record is an average of a goal every 157 minutes. While this is comparable - even slightly better than Bobby Charlton (193 minutes), he is actually behind considerably more than just the two other England goalscorers for volume. Second in the list, Gary Lineker scored an average of a goal every 136 minutes, while 4th place Jimmy Greaves has an incredibly impressive 117 minutes a goal.
On top of this, Rooney also falls behind Michael Owen (155), Nat Lofthouse (95), Steve Bloomer (74), Vivian Woodward (72), Stan Mortensen (98), Tommy Lawton (94), Peter Crouch (99). And that's just those that have scored more than 20 for their country!
So Rooney as a goalscorer is perhaps not all it's been suggested to be cracked up to be. These is further reinforced when you look at the opposition against whom England's current talisman has scored the majority of his goals. Interestingly, though Rooney has played matches against the majority of the world's top footballing nations, he has only scored against four of FIFA's top ten, and has only scored more than once against one - Brazil. This is despite the England man finding the net on more than one occasion against 15 different opponents in his career.
If we look at those nations he has been most clinical against, we see an obvious pattern develop. At the top of the list, Rooney has scored four goals against Croatia (14 world ranking) and San Marino (208), three goals against Switzerland (12) and Kazakhstan (132) and two against Slovakia (24), Iceland (28) Denmark (32), Scotland (37), Poland (44), Bulgaria (59), Montenegro (64), Estonia (88), Belarus (106) and Andorra (202). If we find an average ranking of those he is most prolific against, it comes in at 70, or Antigua and Barbuda in the current rankings.
We also don't tend to remember his performances at major competitions fondly. With the exception of his earliest tournament - a four goal salvo at Portugal's Euro 2004, he has been underwhelming. Germany's World Cup in 2006 saw Rooney attempt to stop Ricardo Carvalho from ever having kids (who can forget Cristiano Ronaldo's wink?!), while the less said about the 2010 and 2014 World Cups the better. Even in 2012, which saw England put in reasonable performances on their way to the quarter finals, Rooney failed to live up to his talismanic billing. He himself has said that until he wins a trophy with England, he cannot eclipse Sir Bobby Charlton as England's greatest. Sorry Wayne, but until you win something as the nation's centrepiece, you won't even be up there for consideration, let alone the top. Bobby Charlton, Bobby Moore, Peter Shilton, Gordon Banks and David Beckham have all had tournaments where they were the heart of the team, but all have kept a high level of performance up consistently, which is more than can be said for Rooney.
However, there is one point that works in the favour of Rooney. All of the above have been involved in great England teams, be it the World Cup winners, the 1990 semi finalists or the 'Golden Generation' of 2002-06. Rooney may have seen the very back end of this era, but the majority of his time with the 3 Lions has been in a position of adversity, where the public expects more than is achievable. Though the failures of the last two World Cups go even further beyond that, it's certainly a mitigating circumstance for Rooney, who has had to carry the majority of the team for too many years.
He's certainly not a legend yet, and I'm struggling to see whether he ever can be. He is certainly among the most talented players England has ever produced, but I can't help but think that pressure, and circumstance, has held him back when playing his country. It is this, and this alone, that Rooney needs to handle better if he is to be talked about in the same breath as Charlton, Moore, Banks and Beckham, regardless of how many goals he scores against San Marino.
Though the caps statistic doesn't lie (Rooney follows an elite list of Peter Shilton, David Beckham, Steven Gerrard, Bobby Moore, Ashley Cole, Frank Lampard, Bobby Charlton and Billy Wright), it's not the only statistic that matters. As a successful striker, Rooney, as with any other forward in world football, is ultimately going to be judged on goals scored. As of writing this, Wayne Rooney sits 3rd on the all-time England scoring list - just three behind Bobby Charlton at the top.
If we dig a little deeper, however, we see that this achievement is not as impressive as it initially appears. Of the eight other England centurions, just one is a striker - Charlton. This brings us onto an additional point. As well as the volume of Rooney's goals, it is also important that the ratio of goals to games is considered. As of writing this, Rooney's record is an average of a goal every 157 minutes. While this is comparable - even slightly better than Bobby Charlton (193 minutes), he is actually behind considerably more than just the two other England goalscorers for volume. Second in the list, Gary Lineker scored an average of a goal every 136 minutes, while 4th place Jimmy Greaves has an incredibly impressive 117 minutes a goal.
On top of this, Rooney also falls behind Michael Owen (155), Nat Lofthouse (95), Steve Bloomer (74), Vivian Woodward (72), Stan Mortensen (98), Tommy Lawton (94), Peter Crouch (99). And that's just those that have scored more than 20 for their country!
So Rooney as a goalscorer is perhaps not all it's been suggested to be cracked up to be. These is further reinforced when you look at the opposition against whom England's current talisman has scored the majority of his goals. Interestingly, though Rooney has played matches against the majority of the world's top footballing nations, he has only scored against four of FIFA's top ten, and has only scored more than once against one - Brazil. This is despite the England man finding the net on more than one occasion against 15 different opponents in his career.
If we look at those nations he has been most clinical against, we see an obvious pattern develop. At the top of the list, Rooney has scored four goals against Croatia (14 world ranking) and San Marino (208), three goals against Switzerland (12) and Kazakhstan (132) and two against Slovakia (24), Iceland (28) Denmark (32), Scotland (37), Poland (44), Bulgaria (59), Montenegro (64), Estonia (88), Belarus (106) and Andorra (202). If we find an average ranking of those he is most prolific against, it comes in at 70, or Antigua and Barbuda in the current rankings.
We also don't tend to remember his performances at major competitions fondly. With the exception of his earliest tournament - a four goal salvo at Portugal's Euro 2004, he has been underwhelming. Germany's World Cup in 2006 saw Rooney attempt to stop Ricardo Carvalho from ever having kids (who can forget Cristiano Ronaldo's wink?!), while the less said about the 2010 and 2014 World Cups the better. Even in 2012, which saw England put in reasonable performances on their way to the quarter finals, Rooney failed to live up to his talismanic billing. He himself has said that until he wins a trophy with England, he cannot eclipse Sir Bobby Charlton as England's greatest. Sorry Wayne, but until you win something as the nation's centrepiece, you won't even be up there for consideration, let alone the top. Bobby Charlton, Bobby Moore, Peter Shilton, Gordon Banks and David Beckham have all had tournaments where they were the heart of the team, but all have kept a high level of performance up consistently, which is more than can be said for Rooney.
However, there is one point that works in the favour of Rooney. All of the above have been involved in great England teams, be it the World Cup winners, the 1990 semi finalists or the 'Golden Generation' of 2002-06. Rooney may have seen the very back end of this era, but the majority of his time with the 3 Lions has been in a position of adversity, where the public expects more than is achievable. Though the failures of the last two World Cups go even further beyond that, it's certainly a mitigating circumstance for Rooney, who has had to carry the majority of the team for too many years.
He's certainly not a legend yet, and I'm struggling to see whether he ever can be. He is certainly among the most talented players England has ever produced, but I can't help but think that pressure, and circumstance, has held him back when playing his country. It is this, and this alone, that Rooney needs to handle better if he is to be talked about in the same breath as Charlton, Moore, Banks and Beckham, regardless of how many goals he scores against San Marino.
Sunday 2 November 2014
Manchester Derby Series: My 10 Most Iconic
The Manchester derby. A game steeped in history. I'm not going to get into the 'which is the greatest derby' debate - around where I'm from, there is no debate, and I'm sure that's the same argument in Liverpool, Athens, Milan or Madrid. This post is very much about the most iconic moments (in my lifetime) of the Manchester derby. I have said this in a number of my previous posts, but I am a lifelong City fan, and as such, the list below is unashamedly weighted in favour of the Blues.
I will say one thing in my defence, however. In my lifetime (23 years and counting), my early experiences of Manchester derbies were negative from my perspective. However, this was always the expected outcome, and as a result, I would not consider many of those games 'iconic' in the relationship. As I got older, I found that United began to struggle more and more against City, perhaps underestimating their local rivals. Since 2008, the dynamic has shifted, and we have seen many more dramatic moments, and these dominate my list.
1. Manchester City 1-1 Manchester United (Maine Road, April 21, 2001)
As I mentioned, the majority of my earliest memories of the Manchester derby are negative, and as a result, perhaps I have willingly forgotten most of them. However, one moment that does stand out in my early years is 'that tackle'. And by tackle, I mean violent assault. A moment completely out of keeping with the rest of the game, petering out towards a dull 1-1 draw. However, Roy Keane's long-standing personal rivalry with Alf-Inge Haaland boiled over in stoppage time with a quite disgraceful kick to the knee. In my opinion, the United man was lucky to escape prison for assault (not being melodramatic - look at the law) and Haaland was never the same player.
2. Manchester City 3-1 Manchester United (Maine Road, November 9, 2002)
My first positive memory. The final Manchester derby to take place at Maine Road was all about one man: Shaun Goater. The legendary City striker followed an early strike from Nicolas Anelka to turn the game decisively in the Blues favour. Capitalising on a Gary Neville mistake that few City fans will let him forget, Goater put City back in front before half time, before lifting a neat finish over Fabien Barthez after an hour to secure the points and claim his 100th goal in City colours.
3. Manchester United 1-2 Manchester City (Old Trafford, February 10, 2008)
With the controversial Thaksin Shinawatra in control of affairs at City, the Blues had spent over £25m on talent including Elano, Bianchi, Corluka and most recently Benjani. It was the latter that would have the biggest impact in this game. However, with a United side including Rooney, Ronaldo, Vidic and Tevez, especially on the 50th anniversary of the Munich air disaster, no-one gave City a hope of a result. However, goals from Darius Vassell and a debut strike from Benjani meant that Joe Hart's superb rearguard action meant that City claimed their first league double over their rivals for 38 years.
4. Manchester United 4-3 Manchester City (Old Trafford, September 20, 2009)
Arguably the most dramatic and thrilling Manchester derby of all time. Heartbreaking from my perspective (along with being a little more than suspect timekeeping), but Michael Owen's 96th minute killed the 'noisy neighbours' challenge. A match with more than a few sub-plots, including Carlos Tevez returning to the home of his former side, but it was Mark Hughes who was left fuming at the final whistle. The prime example of 'Fergie Time' handed United the points and ended City's unbeaten league start.
5. Manchester City 2-1 Manchester United (City of Manchester Stadium, January 19, 2010)
I will say one thing in my defence, however. In my lifetime (23 years and counting), my early experiences of Manchester derbies were negative from my perspective. However, this was always the expected outcome, and as a result, I would not consider many of those games 'iconic' in the relationship. As I got older, I found that United began to struggle more and more against City, perhaps underestimating their local rivals. Since 2008, the dynamic has shifted, and we have seen many more dramatic moments, and these dominate my list.
1. Manchester City 1-1 Manchester United (Maine Road, April 21, 2001)
As I mentioned, the majority of my earliest memories of the Manchester derby are negative, and as a result, perhaps I have willingly forgotten most of them. However, one moment that does stand out in my early years is 'that tackle'. And by tackle, I mean violent assault. A moment completely out of keeping with the rest of the game, petering out towards a dull 1-1 draw. However, Roy Keane's long-standing personal rivalry with Alf-Inge Haaland boiled over in stoppage time with a quite disgraceful kick to the knee. In my opinion, the United man was lucky to escape prison for assault (not being melodramatic - look at the law) and Haaland was never the same player.
2. Manchester City 3-1 Manchester United (Maine Road, November 9, 2002)
My first positive memory. The final Manchester derby to take place at Maine Road was all about one man: Shaun Goater. The legendary City striker followed an early strike from Nicolas Anelka to turn the game decisively in the Blues favour. Capitalising on a Gary Neville mistake that few City fans will let him forget, Goater put City back in front before half time, before lifting a neat finish over Fabien Barthez after an hour to secure the points and claim his 100th goal in City colours.
3. Manchester United 1-2 Manchester City (Old Trafford, February 10, 2008)
With the controversial Thaksin Shinawatra in control of affairs at City, the Blues had spent over £25m on talent including Elano, Bianchi, Corluka and most recently Benjani. It was the latter that would have the biggest impact in this game. However, with a United side including Rooney, Ronaldo, Vidic and Tevez, especially on the 50th anniversary of the Munich air disaster, no-one gave City a hope of a result. However, goals from Darius Vassell and a debut strike from Benjani meant that Joe Hart's superb rearguard action meant that City claimed their first league double over their rivals for 38 years.
4. Manchester United 4-3 Manchester City (Old Trafford, September 20, 2009)
Arguably the most dramatic and thrilling Manchester derby of all time. Heartbreaking from my perspective (along with being a little more than suspect timekeeping), but Michael Owen's 96th minute killed the 'noisy neighbours' challenge. A match with more than a few sub-plots, including Carlos Tevez returning to the home of his former side, but it was Mark Hughes who was left fuming at the final whistle. The prime example of 'Fergie Time' handed United the points and ended City's unbeaten league start.
5. Manchester City 2-1 Manchester United (City of Manchester Stadium, January 19, 2010)
Further to the earlier sub-plot, Tevez had a point to prove in the Carling Cup Semi Final First Leg at home to United. Having been disappointing at the classic at Old Trafford, Tevez got his opportunity to shove United chants back down their throats, stepping up to take a 40th minute penalty after City had fallen behind. After a few words from Wayne Rooney, Tevez almost took the net off with his spot kick before turning the match in the Blues' favour, nodding in on the hour mark. Though United went on to win the two-legged tie, Tevez had made his point to his former employers.
6. Manchester United 2-1 Manchester City (Old Trafford, February 12, 2011)
The Goal of the Premier League - apparently. With the match delicately poised at 1-1 going into the final 15 minutes, Wayne Rooney came up with a brilliant piece of shin-work to claim all three points. Despite my jokes, Rooney as the leading goal scorer in Manchester derby history must have done something right! And the technique has to be appreciated, even if it doesn't come firmly off his boot. Who would have thought that that would have been United's last victory against City at Old Trafford?
6. Manchester United 2-1 Manchester City (Old Trafford, February 12, 2011)
The Goal of the Premier League - apparently. With the match delicately poised at 1-1 going into the final 15 minutes, Wayne Rooney came up with a brilliant piece of shin-work to claim all three points. Despite my jokes, Rooney as the leading goal scorer in Manchester derby history must have done something right! And the technique has to be appreciated, even if it doesn't come firmly off his boot. Who would have thought that that would have been United's last victory against City at Old Trafford?
7. Manchester City 1-0 Manchester United (Wembley, April 16, 2011)
Without any doubt from my perspective, the kick starter for Manchester City's recent success was the victory against United at Wembley in the FA Cup. After being under the cosh for the majority of the first half, an error from Michael Carrick handed Yaya Toure the chance to slide the ball under van der Sar and hand City a return trip to Wembley. Another memory of mine was a disgraceful high challenge by Paul Scholes on Pablo Zabaleta that was slightly reminiscent of the Roy Keane GBH (though without the same intent).
8. Manchester United 1-6 Manchester City (Old Trafford, October 23, 2011)
The greatest derby of my lifetime (although of course I would say that!). One of the only moments that enigmatic striker Mario Balotelli came to the party, with his 'Why Always Me' shirt already an iconic moment in Premier League history. The match that Sir Alex Ferguson claimed was his 'worst moment in football', and the heaviest home defeat for Manchester United since 1955. The final few minutes were quite incredible, with 10-man United ripped apart on multiple occasions, resulting in three injury time goals.
9. Manchester City 1-0 Manchester United (Etihad Stadium, April 30, 2012)
If the 6-1 win at Old Trafford was a statement to the champions at the time, the game in April at the Etihad was the hammer blow. City had been roaring back in the league to bring the eight point gap back to three before the derby just three games from the end, putting huge emphasis on the game. As it was, a thunderous header from Vincent Kompany handed City the inertia and momentum going into the final two games. This goal was possibly just as important as that late late strike from Sergio Aguero against QPR.
10. Manchester City 4-1 Manchester United (Etihad Stadium, September 22, 2013)
With both teams having changed managers going into the new season, this was an entirely different dynamic, particularly for United. And so it proved. This game simply demonstrated the changing dynamic of the relationship between the two clubs, with City firmly on the up and United taking a downward trajectory. The emphatic defeat put further pressure on David Moyes and instantly lifted Manuel Pellegrini to hero status.
The relationship between the two clubs has changed dramatically in my lifetime. From growing up expecting nothing from derby day, and often dreading going to school the following day, I now look at today's derby thinking that anything other than three points is a significant disappointment. City's star seems to have been on a meteoric rise in the last 7 years, while United are firmly in the middle of an identity crisis following the departure of Sir Alex Ferguson.
As a City fan, long may it continue, but it takes a brave person to predict a derby, particularly involving two such large clubs.
As a City fan, long may it continue, but it takes a brave person to predict a derby, particularly involving two such large clubs.
Saturday 1 November 2014
What Makes A Truly Great Stadium?
Behind every great team, there is an iconic stadium. Be it the Bernabeu, the Nou Camp, or Old Trafford, the essence of every club comes from the ground they play on. People often underestimate its importance in football - I have seen grounds change matches, seasons, and even end championship dreams. But when considering the world's best stadium, there is often a lot of discussion.
The first, and most obvious criterion, is aesthetics. There are many stadia around the world that are beautiful examples of architecture - the Emirates in London, the Estadio Azteca in Mexico City or the Etihad in Manchester. As a Man City fan, it should come as little surprise that I add the City stadium to this list, particularly at night. However, my personal favourite for aesthetics has to be the Allianz Arena in Munich. The perfect blend of modern technology mixed with modern architecture, the Bayern stadium has to be up there with the most aesthetically pleasing of all time.
The Etihad at night - one of the more beautiful stadia in world football?
But it is important to consider that looks are not everything. There are many more components to the perfect stadium, some often as important as looks alone.
Firstly, history plays a part. Certainly not as much as Man United and Liverpool fans like to make out, but it certainly is an aspect behind an iconic ground. Seeing some of the most important moments in world football's history does mean that a stadium becomes one of the world's greats. These are almost always not the most aesthetically pleasing - look at the mish-mashed development that is Old Trafford or Liverpool's rather disjointed city centre Anfield ground. Both have seen some of the greatest moments in football, and should certainly be considered. Outside of the UK, the San Siro and Nou Camp have been at the heart of football's dramas, but neither are, in my opinion, particularly attractive. However, as we have begun to see, football clubs with some of the more beautiful grounds have begun to see dramatic moments - who can forget 'Aguerooooooo'?
And secondly, it is important to consider atmosphere. Though the best looking stadia have their advantages, they are also often not the most atmospheric. As I said earlier, I have seen games and titles decided by the atmosphere created in a ground. Here is where the less attractive grounds often have the advantage. It's strange, but the older grounds in the UK tend to keep the atmosphere within better than the newer builds, and give fans the sense of being closer and more integral to the action. The best example I have of this is last season's critical late season match between Crystal Palace and Liverpool at Selhurst Park. 3-0 down, the home fans' enthusiasm was relentless, and ultimately dragged their side back into the game. An incredible comeback ensued to secure a 3-3 draw and destroy the Reds' title hopes.
So, with all those in mind, what makes the perfect stadium? In my eyes, a great stadium has to look appealing. I understand that the historic gates at Anfield have their own appeal, and I actually accept that point, even though the ground itself is not necessarily the most beautiful. Having said that, what does put me right off is the way that stadia like Old Trafford have pretty much killed any of the history of the ground by continually extending sections. The core heart of the historic ground has gone, and in my view, if you're going to build, you may as well make it attractive.
On top of this, it surprises me that science either hasn't been consulted or successfully used when creating a new ground to keep the atmosphere within and rival older grounds. I don't know if its simply nostalgia, but there still seems most enjoyable at historic grounds. Whether that will change, I don't know, but I hope so, as the best of both worlds would make it a ground people want to visit and enjoy once they are there.
Having considered all three of these elements, here is my list of 10 top grounds:
1. Allianz Arena, Bayern Munich
2. Santiago Bernabeu, Real Madrid
3. Nou Camp, Barcelona
4. Estadio do Maracana, Rio di Janeiro
5. Estadio Azteca, Mexico City
6. Anfield, Liverpool
7. Etihad Stadium, Manchester
8. Olympiastadion, Berlin
9. AmsterdamArena, Amsterdam
10. Estadio de Luz, Lisbon
Firstly, history plays a part. Certainly not as much as Man United and Liverpool fans like to make out, but it certainly is an aspect behind an iconic ground. Seeing some of the most important moments in world football's history does mean that a stadium becomes one of the world's greats. These are almost always not the most aesthetically pleasing - look at the mish-mashed development that is Old Trafford or Liverpool's rather disjointed city centre Anfield ground. Both have seen some of the greatest moments in football, and should certainly be considered. Outside of the UK, the San Siro and Nou Camp have been at the heart of football's dramas, but neither are, in my opinion, particularly attractive. However, as we have begun to see, football clubs with some of the more beautiful grounds have begun to see dramatic moments - who can forget 'Aguerooooooo'?
And secondly, it is important to consider atmosphere. Though the best looking stadia have their advantages, they are also often not the most atmospheric. As I said earlier, I have seen games and titles decided by the atmosphere created in a ground. Here is where the less attractive grounds often have the advantage. It's strange, but the older grounds in the UK tend to keep the atmosphere within better than the newer builds, and give fans the sense of being closer and more integral to the action. The best example I have of this is last season's critical late season match between Crystal Palace and Liverpool at Selhurst Park. 3-0 down, the home fans' enthusiasm was relentless, and ultimately dragged their side back into the game. An incredible comeback ensued to secure a 3-3 draw and destroy the Reds' title hopes.
So, with all those in mind, what makes the perfect stadium? In my eyes, a great stadium has to look appealing. I understand that the historic gates at Anfield have their own appeal, and I actually accept that point, even though the ground itself is not necessarily the most beautiful. Having said that, what does put me right off is the way that stadia like Old Trafford have pretty much killed any of the history of the ground by continually extending sections. The core heart of the historic ground has gone, and in my view, if you're going to build, you may as well make it attractive.
On top of this, it surprises me that science either hasn't been consulted or successfully used when creating a new ground to keep the atmosphere within and rival older grounds. I don't know if its simply nostalgia, but there still seems most enjoyable at historic grounds. Whether that will change, I don't know, but I hope so, as the best of both worlds would make it a ground people want to visit and enjoy once they are there.
Having considered all three of these elements, here is my list of 10 top grounds:
1. Allianz Arena, Bayern Munich
2. Santiago Bernabeu, Real Madrid
3. Nou Camp, Barcelona
4. Estadio do Maracana, Rio di Janeiro
5. Estadio Azteca, Mexico City
6. Anfield, Liverpool
7. Etihad Stadium, Manchester
8. Olympiastadion, Berlin
9. AmsterdamArena, Amsterdam
10. Estadio de Luz, Lisbon
Thursday 2 October 2014
Citeh's European Woes: Why Is It Going Wrong?
Four years of Champions League experience, and City have got exactly nowhere. A last 16 appearance, equalled by Celtic and Basel, and bettered by Cypriot minnows APOEL Nicosia in the same time period. So what's gone wrong for the richest club in the world, champions of one of the world's most competitive leagues twice in the last three years?
In fairness, though this is not a complete excuse, a lot has been said about the bad luck City have suffered when it comes to the Champions League draws they have received. In the last four years they have been drawn alongside the runners-up twice and a semi-finalist, and only once have they been among the favourites to emerge from their group. This particularly stark when we compare their misfortune in draws to Chelsea's opening few draws in the Champions League (2003-2006):
Another key aspect to think about is the fact that City have struggled to break down teams who come to the Etihad to defend and counter i.e. good defensive performances. In City's very first Champions League game, City kept good possession against Napoli, but were unable to break through. Frustration eventually took its toll, causing sloppy play and eventually a goal for Edinson Cavani on the counter. They clearly haven't learnt their lessons, as the Roma game was almost a carbon copy of this. Ironically, City tend to perform better when they are the defensive side, with some of their best performances in the Champions League coming away from home. Victories against CSKA Moscow and Villareal and narrow defeats against Real Madrid and Bayern Munich have all showed promise, but demonstrate the very different teams they should use for home and away games.
Manchester City Chelsea
2011 - Bayern Munich, Villareal, Napoli 2003 - Sparta Prague, Besiktas, Lazio
2012 - Real Madrid, Borussia Dortmund, Ajax 2004 - Porto, CSKA Moscow, PSG
2013 - Bayern Munich, CSKA Moscow, V. Plzen 2005 - Liverpool, Real Betis, Anderlecht
2014 - Bayern Munich, CSKA Moscow, AS Roma 2006 - Barcelona, Werder Bremen, Levski Sofia
As you can see from the two draws, on only one occasion (2004) can Chelsea claim to have had as difficult a group as City, but it is also worth bearing in mind that Paris Saint Germain were not the European force that they are now, and as a result finished bottom of the group that year with just one point. Other than that, Chelsea have had a fairly simple journey to the last 16 as group winners, giving them a preferable draw going forward. On the other hand, on the one occasion City did make it out of their group, their second place finish meant they were paired with a Lionel Messi-inspired Barcelona - hardly an easy task!
However, the draw alone should not be to blame. In order to win Europe's premier competition, you have to be prepared to beat the best, whether that is in your group or in the final. So what has been the cause of City's abject failure in Europe? As any player that has been involved in cup matches can attest to, individual errors can have a catastrophic effect on a team's continued involvement. We can certainly see evidence of this from City here. Joe Hart's indifferent form in Europe was most obviously epitomised by his errors during City's home tie against Bayern Munich in 2013, which saw the Blues concede a pair of goals from handling errors, losing the game 3-1. City's front line has also been accused of mis-firing in Europe, with Edin Dzeko often singled out for punishment.
However, it is the current season's City scapegoat that has got my back up most. The reason for this is very simple. On every channel that provides live football there is an ex (and usually bitter) Red passing comment on City's performances - is that fair? I can't imagine Liam Gallagher turning up at Old Trafford to cover the United game for Sky, any more than seeing Shaun Goater do the commentary for Sky. However, while Michael Owen simply makes self-evident statements for BT Sport, Roy Keane berates everyone (not just City) for ITV, and Gary Neville, to his credit, has attempted to become more impartial in his work for Sky Sports, it is Paul Scholes' attempt at punditry for ITV that most irritates me.
Scholes' comments on Yaya Toure's lack of form earlier this season were perhaps a little harsh, particularly considering that the Ivorian had been the first midfielder to score 20 goals in a Premier League season since Frank Lampard in 2010, but he is entitled to his opinion, and were generally fair. However, since then he has made additional comments on the midfielder's performances, before again berating the City man in his punditry. What's the saying? Once is an accident, twice is coincidence, but three times is deliberate.
There is a part of me that looks at this through cynical eyes. As a self-confessed United fan, Scholes would likely do anything to de-stabilise one of their greatest rivals, particularly if he is jealous of their success at present. With the majority of City's key names like Kompany, Silva and Aguero starting the season in excellent form, it is Yaya Toure that is yet to hit the heights we saw from him last year. He is therefore an easy target, and a way to try and put pressure on the Manchester City midfield. Let us not forget, Scholes is a man who almost attempted to stab Pablo Zabaleta with his studs in his last derby match - he is hardly likely to be the epitome of impartiality. So let's all just take his words with a pinch of salt, eh?
After my customary mid-blog rant, back onto the reasons behind City's failings in Europe. I think some of the blame has to be directed at the manager, particularly on the way that City's sides in Europe have been set up. The game against Roma was a prime example. It is almost like both Pellegrini and Mancini before him thought that because they tend to blow away teams at the Etihad in the Premier League, they will automatically do that in the Champions League. As we have seen, this is not the case. The attacking 4-4-2 formation that has tended to be employed has left City woefully exposed on the counter attack, which we saw time and time again against Roma, and with neither Navas nor Toure willing to chase back, the defence were left short on numerous occasions.
However, the draw alone should not be to blame. In order to win Europe's premier competition, you have to be prepared to beat the best, whether that is in your group or in the final. So what has been the cause of City's abject failure in Europe? As any player that has been involved in cup matches can attest to, individual errors can have a catastrophic effect on a team's continued involvement. We can certainly see evidence of this from City here. Joe Hart's indifferent form in Europe was most obviously epitomised by his errors during City's home tie against Bayern Munich in 2013, which saw the Blues concede a pair of goals from handling errors, losing the game 3-1. City's front line has also been accused of mis-firing in Europe, with Edin Dzeko often singled out for punishment.
However, it is the current season's City scapegoat that has got my back up most. The reason for this is very simple. On every channel that provides live football there is an ex (and usually bitter) Red passing comment on City's performances - is that fair? I can't imagine Liam Gallagher turning up at Old Trafford to cover the United game for Sky, any more than seeing Shaun Goater do the commentary for Sky. However, while Michael Owen simply makes self-evident statements for BT Sport, Roy Keane berates everyone (not just City) for ITV, and Gary Neville, to his credit, has attempted to become more impartial in his work for Sky Sports, it is Paul Scholes' attempt at punditry for ITV that most irritates me.
Scholes' comments on Yaya Toure's lack of form earlier this season were perhaps a little harsh, particularly considering that the Ivorian had been the first midfielder to score 20 goals in a Premier League season since Frank Lampard in 2010, but he is entitled to his opinion, and were generally fair. However, since then he has made additional comments on the midfielder's performances, before again berating the City man in his punditry. What's the saying? Once is an accident, twice is coincidence, but three times is deliberate.
There is a part of me that looks at this through cynical eyes. As a self-confessed United fan, Scholes would likely do anything to de-stabilise one of their greatest rivals, particularly if he is jealous of their success at present. With the majority of City's key names like Kompany, Silva and Aguero starting the season in excellent form, it is Yaya Toure that is yet to hit the heights we saw from him last year. He is therefore an easy target, and a way to try and put pressure on the Manchester City midfield. Let us not forget, Scholes is a man who almost attempted to stab Pablo Zabaleta with his studs in his last derby match - he is hardly likely to be the epitome of impartiality. So let's all just take his words with a pinch of salt, eh?
After my customary mid-blog rant, back onto the reasons behind City's failings in Europe. I think some of the blame has to be directed at the manager, particularly on the way that City's sides in Europe have been set up. The game against Roma was a prime example. It is almost like both Pellegrini and Mancini before him thought that because they tend to blow away teams at the Etihad in the Premier League, they will automatically do that in the Champions League. As we have seen, this is not the case. The attacking 4-4-2 formation that has tended to be employed has left City woefully exposed on the counter attack, which we saw time and time again against Roma, and with neither Navas nor Toure willing to chase back, the defence were left short on numerous occasions.
Another key aspect to think about is the fact that City have struggled to break down teams who come to the Etihad to defend and counter i.e. good defensive performances. In City's very first Champions League game, City kept good possession against Napoli, but were unable to break through. Frustration eventually took its toll, causing sloppy play and eventually a goal for Edinson Cavani on the counter. They clearly haven't learnt their lessons, as the Roma game was almost a carbon copy of this. Ironically, City tend to perform better when they are the defensive side, with some of their best performances in the Champions League coming away from home. Victories against CSKA Moscow and Villareal and narrow defeats against Real Madrid and Bayern Munich have all showed promise, but demonstrate the very different teams they should use for home and away games.
My Manchester City Champions League home team (4-2-3-1)
Hart, Clichy, Kompany, Mangala, Zabaleta, Fernandinho, Lampard, Nasri, David Silva, Yaya Toure, Aguero
My Manchester City Champions League away team (4-2-3-1)
Hart, Kolarov, Kompany, Mangala, Zabaleta, Fernandinho, Fernando, David Silva, Yaya Toure, Milner, Aguero
So what are City's prospects going forward? Until they get a bit of luck, either with the draw or refereeing decisions, they are unlikely to progress much further. Confidence among the squad for European games seems at an all time low. Once they have got themselves into the quarter finals or beyond for the first time, they may have a chance. However, until then, Yaya Toure's quote of 'winning it for the fans' seems a million miles away.
Hart, Clichy, Kompany, Mangala, Zabaleta, Fernandinho, Lampard, Nasri, David Silva, Yaya Toure, Aguero
My Manchester City Champions League away team (4-2-3-1)
Hart, Kolarov, Kompany, Mangala, Zabaleta, Fernandinho, Fernando, David Silva, Yaya Toure, Milner, Aguero
So what are City's prospects going forward? Until they get a bit of luck, either with the draw or refereeing decisions, they are unlikely to progress much further. Confidence among the squad for European games seems at an all time low. Once they have got themselves into the quarter finals or beyond for the first time, they may have a chance. However, until then, Yaya Toure's quote of 'winning it for the fans' seems a million miles away.
Sunday 28 September 2014
Louis Van Moyes: Has The 'Dutch Master' Improved Things?
What no difference a year makes... That's the saying isn't it? 12 months ago, David Moyes was bemoaning a fixture list that saw the club record its worst Premier League opening five games - the worst start since 1989/90. Berated, and quite rightly I might add, for the poor results he achieved in that time, but few would have expected that in just one year, that record would be not only in jeopardy, but broken. With hugely decorated and experienced manager Louis van Gaal, fresh off a remarkable third place finish for the Dutch national team at the World Cup, at the helm, it seemed Manchester United were in safe hands. The gamble with Moyes had not paid off, and now was time to resort to a more secure option.
But has van Gaal been the safe bet everyone assumed? After five fixtures of this season, Louis van Gaal's Manchester United were two points worse off than the team led by Moyes. More concerning for the new manager is the fact that when it comes to the fixture list, Moyes has a point. In the opening five fixtures of the ex-Everton manager's reign, United made difficult trips to Manchester City and Liverpool, while hosting Chelsea. If seven points seemed like scant reward from five Premier League matches, especially as defending champions, this season has been nothing short of a disaster. After defeats at home to Swansea and away at newly-promoted Leicester City, along with another disappointing 0-0 draw at Burnley, van Gaal's Manchester United ended up with just five points, and from a far easier set of games.
And that's not even starting to look at the transfer policies. While Moyes is hardly the Archangel Gabriel when it comes to transfer dealings, particularly on deadline day, panic buying Marouane Fellaini for £27m (£4m more than he could have got him for just a few months before), and failing to secure the signature of Ander Herrera after some shambolic goings on in Bilbao. However, it was clear that he never had the full backing of the United back room staff when it came to transfers, with chief executive Ed Woodward denying him the opportunity to splash the cash. However, that has not been a problem for van Gaal. Over £150m has gone out of the door this summer, with Angel di Maria and Luke Shaw accounting for the best part of £100m. While it is not fair to say they are failures just yet, only di Maria has made any kind of immediate impact, and defensively they look shocking.
But why is that? In fairness, part of that is beyond van Gaal's control. After their disappointing last season, three of United's regular back four left the club, with club captain Nemanja Vidic and ageing pair Patrice Evra and Rio Ferdinand opting to cut their losses. That kind of loss would shatter any club's confidence and performance, but I don't think that is entirely to blame for United's current predicament. Tactically, van Gaal and his players have looked inept at times so far this season. Unable to choose between 3, 4 or even 5 at the back, the lack of continuity has had devastating effects on communication in defence and understanding.
Having watched United a few times already this season, they look irresistible going forward at times, but when put under pressure defensively, they crumble. Without the presence of a strong leader at the back, no-one seems to want to take control. As a result, comical moments like numerous defenders going for the same ball, or marking the same man, have been prevalent this season. While some may be quick to blame the exuberance of youth, with the likes of Tyler Blackett and Paddy McNair making their first-team debuts, they have been some of the more consistent performers so far this year (Blackett's performance at Leicester excepted).
So how can United put this right? As much as pundits like Phil Neville suggest continued mega-spending, that will not do anything for the continuity and understanding of the team. Being a City fan, I have seen the impact of attempting to build a team of Galacticos overnight - it simply doesn't work quickly. City took three years to rebuild to form a side that can challenge for the top 4, so for United to expect that a continuing influx of quality players will inevitably lead to their re-coronation at the top of English football, they are very much mistaken. In my opinion, United's best route forward is to accept that this is not simply an isolated season of struggle, and to focus on honing the players they already have, with the addition of a couple of high-profile names a season. The players they have brought in this season are quality, but they need time to adjust.
So is it unfair that van Gaal looks like getting time where Moyes didn't? Absolutely. Had Moyes have made the same purchases that van Gaal has, and struggled in the same way, then the backlash would have been far more severe. The hashtag #MoyesOut was trending on Twitter from November onwards - will van Gaal have the same thing? I very much doubt it, though the joke #LouisvanMoyes has been made by Twitter users. However, it may well be that van Gaal can turn this round. In the meantime, van Gaal's track record and ability to pull big name signings may well prove enough to keep him in a job, regardless of the performances.
Louis van Moyes? The comparison will only please one man, and I think he made a trip to Turkey recently to see about the Galatasaray job.
But has van Gaal been the safe bet everyone assumed? After five fixtures of this season, Louis van Gaal's Manchester United were two points worse off than the team led by Moyes. More concerning for the new manager is the fact that when it comes to the fixture list, Moyes has a point. In the opening five fixtures of the ex-Everton manager's reign, United made difficult trips to Manchester City and Liverpool, while hosting Chelsea. If seven points seemed like scant reward from five Premier League matches, especially as defending champions, this season has been nothing short of a disaster. After defeats at home to Swansea and away at newly-promoted Leicester City, along with another disappointing 0-0 draw at Burnley, van Gaal's Manchester United ended up with just five points, and from a far easier set of games.
And that's not even starting to look at the transfer policies. While Moyes is hardly the Archangel Gabriel when it comes to transfer dealings, particularly on deadline day, panic buying Marouane Fellaini for £27m (£4m more than he could have got him for just a few months before), and failing to secure the signature of Ander Herrera after some shambolic goings on in Bilbao. However, it was clear that he never had the full backing of the United back room staff when it came to transfers, with chief executive Ed Woodward denying him the opportunity to splash the cash. However, that has not been a problem for van Gaal. Over £150m has gone out of the door this summer, with Angel di Maria and Luke Shaw accounting for the best part of £100m. While it is not fair to say they are failures just yet, only di Maria has made any kind of immediate impact, and defensively they look shocking.
But why is that? In fairness, part of that is beyond van Gaal's control. After their disappointing last season, three of United's regular back four left the club, with club captain Nemanja Vidic and ageing pair Patrice Evra and Rio Ferdinand opting to cut their losses. That kind of loss would shatter any club's confidence and performance, but I don't think that is entirely to blame for United's current predicament. Tactically, van Gaal and his players have looked inept at times so far this season. Unable to choose between 3, 4 or even 5 at the back, the lack of continuity has had devastating effects on communication in defence and understanding.
Having watched United a few times already this season, they look irresistible going forward at times, but when put under pressure defensively, they crumble. Without the presence of a strong leader at the back, no-one seems to want to take control. As a result, comical moments like numerous defenders going for the same ball, or marking the same man, have been prevalent this season. While some may be quick to blame the exuberance of youth, with the likes of Tyler Blackett and Paddy McNair making their first-team debuts, they have been some of the more consistent performers so far this year (Blackett's performance at Leicester excepted).
So how can United put this right? As much as pundits like Phil Neville suggest continued mega-spending, that will not do anything for the continuity and understanding of the team. Being a City fan, I have seen the impact of attempting to build a team of Galacticos overnight - it simply doesn't work quickly. City took three years to rebuild to form a side that can challenge for the top 4, so for United to expect that a continuing influx of quality players will inevitably lead to their re-coronation at the top of English football, they are very much mistaken. In my opinion, United's best route forward is to accept that this is not simply an isolated season of struggle, and to focus on honing the players they already have, with the addition of a couple of high-profile names a season. The players they have brought in this season are quality, but they need time to adjust.
So is it unfair that van Gaal looks like getting time where Moyes didn't? Absolutely. Had Moyes have made the same purchases that van Gaal has, and struggled in the same way, then the backlash would have been far more severe. The hashtag #MoyesOut was trending on Twitter from November onwards - will van Gaal have the same thing? I very much doubt it, though the joke #LouisvanMoyes has been made by Twitter users. However, it may well be that van Gaal can turn this round. In the meantime, van Gaal's track record and ability to pull big name signings may well prove enough to keep him in a job, regardless of the performances.
Louis van Moyes? The comparison will only please one man, and I think he made a trip to Turkey recently to see about the Galatasaray job.
Sunday 14 September 2014
Sepp's U-Turn: Is More Video Technology A Good Idea?
When you think of famous and historic U-turn moments, you think of the 10p tax rate, the pasty tax and the poll tax. But video technology in football? Ask me just four years ago, days after the infamous Frank Lampard non-goal, and I'd have said not a chance. However, with Sepp Blatter's announcements at Soccerex last week that he is in support of video challenges, the pendulum seems to have swung full circle.
But why is this? As with many things, you can take the conspiracy or sensible route. The conspiracy? That goal line technology was only introduced once it had benefitted England. After Lampard's goal, not a whisper of discontent. But after Ukraine had a goal wrongly denied against England at the Euros, suddenly Blatter, and Platini (I have ranted often about his potential bias against English football before) are all for it. This theory is supported by Blatter's side-swipe and the FA once his scheme had been announced, namely that the English FA do not respect fair play (ironic when you consider the diving and biting that goes on from players not from these shores) and that they are sore losers following the failed bid for the 2018 World Cup. Funny that Blatter delivered this speech in the heart of England's current footballing capital - know your audience Sepp!
However, the real reason behind the change in heart is perhaps equally cynical, but considerably less likely to make you look like the sore loser Blatter claims we are. It's all about maintaining power. With his term set to come to an end in the upcoming months, and the seeming success of goal-line technology in both club and international football, a bit of bandwagon jumping is required to ensure that Sepp keeps his place at FIFAs top table. I don't believe for an instant that he would be making these statements if he had years of his term left to run.
So if we assume that this is a PR stunt to retain power, why did he pick technology a subject that had been so controversial over the past few years? Because it's been almost unanimously accepted the world over. The goal-line technology has been a revolution in both domestic and international competition (the Karim Benzema goal/no goal debacle at the World Cup ignored), and though technology to a lesser level, the cheers that have greeted the disappearing spray at every Premier League ground since its introduction clearly demonstrates that not all change is negative.
With technology very much in favour at present, it is hardly surprising to see Blatter sling his weight behind it. But I'm not so certain that the idea he came up with for Soccerex is that good. Let me say that I am a huge advocate of technology in sport - tennis and cricket have proven that Hawk-eye style systems work, while rugby league and union have shown that video referees are also successful. However, Blatter's idea that coaches should have a number of challenges to use during each half is, in my opinion, not the best way to handle this.
As we have seen on many occasions, football is a game of taking advantage of momentum. The very phrase that "2-0 is a dangerous scoreline" shows this, as teams frequently level having pulled one back. Often the most exciting moments in football are when one team has their tails up and have momentum on their side - look at the way Man City won their first Premier League title. Should Blatter's system be implemented, shrewd managers will be able to minimise this impact, affording their team the opportunity to recollect their thoughts and go again. If coaches are afforded the opportunity to break up that momentum and slow the game down by making frivolous challenges, it will have a hugely detrimental impact on the game for spectators.
However, as I said before, I am all in favour of technology in football, and I have a suitable solution. Ex-referee Graham Poll, when interviewed about the concept, said that referees can tell from the reaction of the players around them when they've made an incorrect decision. If this is true, there is absolutely no need for coaches to have the power to contest decisions and slow the game down. I would certainly have a video referee, but only so the officials could check that they have made the right call. It may not have saved Poll from handing out three yellow cards to Josep Simunic in the 2006 World Cup, but it will help in many other situations! This would minimise the risk of tactical use, while helping the referee to do their job to the best of their ability.
Should Blatter be re-elected (re-elected in the same way that dictators like Saddam Hussein or Colonel Gaddafi were "re-elected") it will be interesting to see whether this new policy goes any further. Maybe it's just my cynical mind, but I doubt it. As soon as he is safe in his job, this will conveniently go on the back burner, and I suspect we'll see the Swiss take a slowly more technology-sceptic mindset.
So if we assume that this is a PR stunt to retain power, why did he pick technology a subject that had been so controversial over the past few years? Because it's been almost unanimously accepted the world over. The goal-line technology has been a revolution in both domestic and international competition (the Karim Benzema goal/no goal debacle at the World Cup ignored), and though technology to a lesser level, the cheers that have greeted the disappearing spray at every Premier League ground since its introduction clearly demonstrates that not all change is negative.
With technology very much in favour at present, it is hardly surprising to see Blatter sling his weight behind it. But I'm not so certain that the idea he came up with for Soccerex is that good. Let me say that I am a huge advocate of technology in sport - tennis and cricket have proven that Hawk-eye style systems work, while rugby league and union have shown that video referees are also successful. However, Blatter's idea that coaches should have a number of challenges to use during each half is, in my opinion, not the best way to handle this.
As we have seen on many occasions, football is a game of taking advantage of momentum. The very phrase that "2-0 is a dangerous scoreline" shows this, as teams frequently level having pulled one back. Often the most exciting moments in football are when one team has their tails up and have momentum on their side - look at the way Man City won their first Premier League title. Should Blatter's system be implemented, shrewd managers will be able to minimise this impact, affording their team the opportunity to recollect their thoughts and go again. If coaches are afforded the opportunity to break up that momentum and slow the game down by making frivolous challenges, it will have a hugely detrimental impact on the game for spectators.
However, as I said before, I am all in favour of technology in football, and I have a suitable solution. Ex-referee Graham Poll, when interviewed about the concept, said that referees can tell from the reaction of the players around them when they've made an incorrect decision. If this is true, there is absolutely no need for coaches to have the power to contest decisions and slow the game down. I would certainly have a video referee, but only so the officials could check that they have made the right call. It may not have saved Poll from handing out three yellow cards to Josep Simunic in the 2006 World Cup, but it will help in many other situations! This would minimise the risk of tactical use, while helping the referee to do their job to the best of their ability.
Should Blatter be re-elected (re-elected in the same way that dictators like Saddam Hussein or Colonel Gaddafi were "re-elected") it will be interesting to see whether this new policy goes any further. Maybe it's just my cynical mind, but I doubt it. As soon as he is safe in his job, this will conveniently go on the back burner, and I suspect we'll see the Swiss take a slowly more technology-sceptic mindset.
Thursday 4 September 2014
Summer Transfer Window: Winners and Losers
And with the passing of the transfer deadline, the scrummage to secure the final additions to squads is over. For my review of this window, see the story here. But who has come out best? Which clubs are now set out for a tilt at the league, and who is destined for mid-table mediocrity? Or worse, a parachute payment jump into the uncertain waters of the Championship?
In order to determine the winners and losers in the transfer market, I will be marking each team's dealings out of 10 on five different topics: big name (relative to the club), value for money, team balance, player retention and absence of panic buying. From these rankings, I will be able to determine a league table of their transfer dealings. These will almost certainly not be indicative of how the league will go, but do give some indication of how well the clubs, and more importantly, their finances, are run.
Winners
Chelsea - Jose Mourinho knew his transfer targets at the start of the window, and he got his men. Though he may have had to pay a little over the odds for the likes of Fabregas and Diego Costa, the early £30m fees they had to stump up pale in comparison to the ridiculous figures seen out of Manchester United. Calm on deadline day, Chelsea's new recruits balance their team excellently, and they will be a force to be reckoned with come May.
Hull City - Perhaps surprising considering the deadline day chaos to come out of the club, Hull have also had a successful window. Their late signings of Hatem Ben Arfa, Gaston Ramirez and Abel Hernandez add significant strength in depth and could yet prove to be the key in their fight to reach the top half of the table.
Stoke City - Based mostly on the value for money aspect of the test, Stoke's signings up front of Mame Biram Diouf and Bojan will complement the creative talents of Marko Arnautovic behind. Mark Hughes went into the window knowing he needed goals, and if Diouf's stunner against Man City is anything to go by, they now have plenty of those in their front line.
In order to determine the winners and losers in the transfer market, I will be marking each team's dealings out of 10 on five different topics: big name (relative to the club), value for money, team balance, player retention and absence of panic buying. From these rankings, I will be able to determine a league table of their transfer dealings. These will almost certainly not be indicative of how the league will go, but do give some indication of how well the clubs, and more importantly, their finances, are run.
Team
|
Big Name
|
Value
|
Team Balance
|
Player Retention
|
No Panic-buys
|
Total
|
Chelsea
|
9
|
6
|
8
|
7
|
8
|
38
|
Hull City
|
8
|
6
|
7
|
7
|
6
|
34
|
Stoke City
|
7
|
8
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
33
|
Manchester City
|
6
|
5
|
7
|
7
|
8
|
33
|
Newcastle United
|
6
|
7
|
6
|
6
|
8
|
33
|
Arsenal
|
8
|
6
|
5
|
8
|
5
|
32
|
Everton
|
7
|
6
|
6
|
8
|
5
|
32
|
Swansea City
|
6
|
6
|
7
|
6
|
6
|
31
|
Liverpool
|
7
|
6
|
7
|
5
|
5
|
30
|
Sunderland
|
6
|
6
|
6
|
5
|
7
|
30
|
Tottenham Hotspur
|
5
|
6
|
6
|
6
|
7
|
30
|
Queens Park Rangers
|
7
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
5
|
30
|
West Ham United
|
7
|
5
|
5
|
7
|
6
|
30
|
Leicester City
|
5
|
6
|
6
|
6
|
6
|
29
|
Aston Villa
|
2
|
7
|
7
|
7
|
6
|
29
|
Manchester United
|
9
|
4
|
6
|
4
|
5
|
28
|
Crystal Palace
|
4
|
6
|
6
|
7
|
7
|
28
|
West Bromwich Albion
|
5
|
6
|
5
|
5
|
7
|
28
|
Burnley
|
1
|
6
|
6
|
7
|
6
|
26
|
Southampton
|
5
|
5
|
6
|
2
|
4
|
22
|
Winners
Chelsea - Jose Mourinho knew his transfer targets at the start of the window, and he got his men. Though he may have had to pay a little over the odds for the likes of Fabregas and Diego Costa, the early £30m fees they had to stump up pale in comparison to the ridiculous figures seen out of Manchester United. Calm on deadline day, Chelsea's new recruits balance their team excellently, and they will be a force to be reckoned with come May.
Hull City - Perhaps surprising considering the deadline day chaos to come out of the club, Hull have also had a successful window. Their late signings of Hatem Ben Arfa, Gaston Ramirez and Abel Hernandez add significant strength in depth and could yet prove to be the key in their fight to reach the top half of the table.
Stoke City - Based mostly on the value for money aspect of the test, Stoke's signings up front of Mame Biram Diouf and Bojan will complement the creative talents of Marko Arnautovic behind. Mark Hughes went into the window knowing he needed goals, and if Diouf's stunner against Man City is anything to go by, they now have plenty of those in their front line.
Manchester City - Unlike their city neighbours and rivals, City got their transfer dealings well and truly done with before the final days of the window. With a mixture of bargain deals for Bacary Sagna and Frank Lampard, and big ticket transactions like Fernando and Eliaquim Mangala, City's squad is probably the strongest in depth in the league. The prices may have been slightly steep, but there was not a moment of panic from Manuel Pellegrini. But would you ever expect it?!
Newcastle United - Rounding off the top five is the Toon. Despite constant complaints (and in many regards, completely justified) towards owner Mike Ashley, the fact remains that Newcastle have continued to bring in new (albeit consistently French) talent. Remy Cabella and Emanuele Rivière look like excellent acquisitions, and I feel they could be challenging the European places come May.
Losers
Southampton - I don't care what anyone says, you lose five of your biggest assets from the previous season, you're going to struggle. Though the Saints have seemed to dip into the market with some success, it will take time for those players to gel. The panic buying in the final hours only caps a remarkably busy, if a little traumatic, window for Southampton.
Burnley - It's a great shame, but Burnley simply don't have the funds to attract the calibre of players brought in by sides around them. If your biggest signing of the window is George Boyd, a benchwarmers at Hull the previous season, it's less of a marquee and more of a tiny gazebo. That they held onto Danny Ings is somewhat of a success, but I fear the Championship beckons for the ginger Mourinho.
West Bromwich Albion - This was fairly simple. Overpaying on your big name signing, whose name isn't very large anyway? Check. The exit of a number of your key defenders, leaving you threadbare at the back? Check. Bringing in a manager who, though well respected in the game, has little experience of Premier League management? Check. And the prognosis? A season of struggle awaits.
Crystal Palace - Though I can't be too critical of the final days of the transfer window at Selhurst Park, as the upheaval off the field will have affected transfers, the fact remains that the window was a shambles for the Eagles. Bringing Wilfried Zaha in may prove to be an excellent bit of business, but he is a risk. As for the rest, slim pickings. Though they held onto the majority of their key men from last campaign, I'm expecting them to slide slowly down the table.
Manchester United - Controversial? Perhaps, but hear me out. Though they have undoubtedly brought in the biggest names of the window, the expense to which they had to go to get them was absurd. Being a lifelong blue, I have had to put up with many a United fan argue that City have bought their league titles with their huge spending in recent windows, and I have always come back with the same argument. £5 is £5, whether you spend it in 10 minutes or 10 years. United have consistently spent medium amounts on players, and their historical total far exceeds the amount City have spent. The fact that City have spent it in five years is irrelevant - they have used what they have to the best of their ability.
It will be interesting to see if the same hypocrite United fans later their opinions now they are the ones spending. My earlier argument means I cannot be upset at United's spending without being a hypocrite myself, and I have no problem with them flexing their financial muscle. I simply find it amusing that they are spending that amount to buy 4th, rather than the titles that City are accused of buying.
Nevertheless, the fact remains that we have witnessed a multi-record breaking transfer window. Some clubs have made wise calls, others not so much, but it will be interesting to see whether my transfer table gives any indication of the trajectory of the clubs involved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)