Football's 'Best Ever Side' - Really?

For those of you that live in a cave, or don't have access to a TV or the internet, yesterday was the Champions League final. And following a (rather more closely fought than anticipated) 3-1 win for Barcelona, people have as usual got carried away. Calls for the new European champions to be recognised as football's 'best ever side' have emerged, thanks largely to the incredible number of goals scored by the club's front three this year.

For me, this is frankly ludicrous. I'll go into this in more detail later, but far from the being the best side to play football, they're not even the best side I've seen in my lifetime. In fact, they're not even the best Barcelona side I've seen in my lifetime!

Though much has been made of this current side, my favourite Barcelona side remains the Champions League winners of 2009. Managed by Pep Guardiola, this side had matched the feat of the current Barca team, winning La Liga and the Copa del Rey ahead of the meeting with Manchester United in Rome.

Here, it's worth outlining the opposition that the two sides faced. Though Juventus certainly do have some talented players - Tevez, Pirlo, Buffon and Marchisio to name a few - there are a number that are certainly past their best. This was absolutely not the case for the 2009 side. In Manchester United, they had a side that had run away with the English league (and anyone who's watched a season will tell you how difficult that is - unlike Italy), and contained players in their prime. Defensively, the likes of Evra, Vidic and Ferdinand were all seen as being at the pinnacle of the game, and going forward, the side had an embarrassment of riches, with Wayne Rooney, Cristiano Ronaldo and Carlos Tevez forming a formidable partnership, not unlike the current Barca trio.

Despite this, Barcelona simply destroyed United, with Xavi and Iniesta toying with them in the midfield before letting Lionel Messi and Samuel Eto'o take over. Though the final score was only 2-0, it could and perhaps should have been many more, with United unable to penetrate the defence.

Whether that side is my favourite because of the football they played and the fact that a treble was unprecedented for Spanish sides at the time, or simply because they picked apart a Manchester United side that I was thoroughly sick of watching win, I'm not sure. Either way, it cannot be disputed that they were comfortably the best side in the world at that moment - but is that true of the Barcelona side of today?

I'd argue not. I know they say that the best side over 38 games wins the league, so perhaps this Barcelona side is better than Real Madrid. But it is worth noting that only a spectacular collapse from Carlo Ancelotti's men in the mid-season, following an incredible 22-game winning streak, handed Barca the Spanish title. I'd strongly suggest that had the furore around Gareth Bale and his unpopularity with the fans not potentially upset the morale surrounding the squad and the feel-good factor at the club, Real Madrid would be sitting here with three trophies, and we'd be calling for them to be instated as the best team in the world.

I'd also argue that, although they were soundly beaten in the Nou Camp, Bayern Munich have a better squad that the Catalans. They had to complete their two legged tie without the assistance of either Arjen Robben or Franck Ribery, two of the best wingers in the world - imagine if Barca had to go on without both Luis Suarez or Neymar. I can't imagine if the roles had been reversed, we would have seen anything other than a German victory.

So clearly, proclaiming the current side as the best ever to grace the game of football is a tad premature. But to be fair, how many of the current Barcelona side would get into the sides of either 2009 or 2011? Who would I pick as my best Barcelona team of the last six years?

Goalkeeper - Victor Valdes (2011), Right Back - Dani Alves (2011), Centre Back - Carles Puyol (2009), Centre Back - Gerard Pique (2009), Left Back - Jordi Alba (2015), Defensive Midfield - Yaya Toure (2009), Centre Midfield - Xavi (2009), Centre Midfield - Andres Iniesta (2011), Left Wing - Neymar (2015), Centre Forward - Lionel Messi (2011), Right Wing - Luis Suarez (2015)

So with only three players in my best Barcelona team of the best six years, is the current side the best of all time? No. Also, to assume that a Barcelona side of within the previous decade is to totally ignore the incredible club sides put together by Real Madrid in the early 2000's, including the likes of Zidane, Figo, Ronaldo, Beckham and Roberto Carlos, Arsenal's 'Invincibles' team of 2002/2003 or (annoyingly) Manchester United's treble-winning team in 1999. It also neglects the incredible national teams that have been created - think of Spain's 2010 World Cup winners, or the Brazilian sides in either 2002, with the three Rs of Ronaldo, Rivaldo and Ronaldinho, or the side recognised as the greatest World Cup team, the Brazilian team of 1970 including Pele, Jairzinho, Carlos Alberto and Rivellino.

However, the 122 goals scored by Messi, Neymar and Suarez this season cannot be ignored. They certainly have a claim to be the best strike force of all time, but to create an extension to the rest of the team is unfair. Become the first side ever to retain the Champions League next season, as well as completing another domestic and European treble with the same group of players, and then we'll talk.

Premier League 2015: My Awards

I sometimes wonder who picks the best teams of the year in football. After FIFA's farcical inclusion of David Luiz (making the recent nutmegs by Luis Suarez all the more sweet) and Angel di Maria (remember him?) in its Team of the Year in December, the PFA have shown they are not to be outdone, with some rather odd decisions for its Team of the Year just last week.

However, before we get onto that, I'll cover the bases on the PFA Player and Young Player of the Year. Despite my protests regarding the team (and there are a few), I actually agree with both the decisions. Eden Hazard has had an exceptional year, scoring 18 goals in all competitions this season, and laying on an additional 10. More than that, he has been consistent ever since arrived in England. Last season, he scored 16 and assisted seven, while scoring 10 and assisting 14 in his first season in the Premier League. In fact, the largest surprise for me is that this is the Belgian's first individual award, but in those two years he came up against individuals having the seasons of their lives in Bale and Suarez. Nevertheless, it is a deserved success for the Chelsea man, and it's unlikely that this will be the last.

Similarly, Harry Kane is certainly one to watch out for, and his Young Player of the Year award is richly merited. I would note that we should avoid doing what we do so often with young players after an impressive first season (especially those of English descent) and not over-hype. Whilst he has the element of surprise against defenders uncertain of how to deal with him, he will naturally get more chances and goals. However, it will be how he reacts to a goal drought, which every striker inevitably goes through. The best come out stronger, and it will be interesting to see how Kane performs next season. However, it has certainly been a dream season for the Spurs man, being the first Tottenham player to score 30 goals in a season since Gary Lineker (and he went on to be ok!).

Now for the more contentious point: the PFA Team of the Year. I'll start by saying that I agree with the majority - David de Gea has been the league's best goalkeeper, Ryan Bertrand at left back, John Terry as one of the centre backs, a four in midfield of Hazard, Coutinho, Matic and Sanchez, with Kane up front. However, I have a couple of serious issues. Firstly, it's all well and good to favour the champions, but until recently, I don't remember anyone discussing Chelsea's defensive ability. At the start of the season, it was entirely about the performance of Southampton's back four, meaning that the South Coast club are neck and neck with the league leaders when it comes to defensive record. To only have one player in the team is therefore extremely harsh. In my opinion, I would have at least a two-two split, and perhaps even a three-one in favour of the Saints. Nathaniel Clyne and Jose Fonte would both be deserving of inclusion, giving the back four a slightly more red and white look.

Finally, I'm astounded that a side does not include the two joint top scorers in the Premier League. Regardless of whether this is Diego Costa's first season in English football, he hasn't scored as many as Sergio Aguero - that alone should be enough to get the Argentine a place. Also, I'm sure that was a stamping incident earlier in the season that should count against him?

So this is how my team would look:

David de Gea (Manchester United), Ryan Bertrand (Southampton), John Terry (Chelsea), Jose Fonte (Southampton), Nathaniel Clyne (Southampton), Eden Hazard (Chelsea), Phillippe Coutinho (Liverpool), Nemanja Matic (Chelsea), Alexis Sanchez (Arsenal), Harry Kane (Tottenham Hotspur), Sergio Aguero (Manchester City)

There are just a couple of smaller issues to tie off following the end of my (remarkably short) rant regarding the team. Firstly, the Manager of the Year. I'm very much of the opinion that, short of some extraordinary circumstances, the Manager of the Year should normally be the manager of the champions. So it should come as little surprise that my manager of the year is Jose Mourinho. The master tactician has once again proven his ability to win pretty or ugly, and has deservedly led his side to an inevitable title win.

However, I will give a top three, taking into account the successes of managers lower down the table. In second place would be Alan Pardew, after proving himself both at Newcastle and Crystal Palace. Despite hostility from the Geordie fans, Pardew dragged the Magpies into the top 10 of the Premier League, before leaving to take Crystal Palace away from a relegation battle. In fact, such has been the failure of Newcastle since, that Crystal Palace have overtaken the Geordies, and are now almost mathematically guaranteed to finish above them. In third, Ronald Koeman. Few were expecting Southampton, given the astronomical changes made to the club in the summer, to finish in the top half, never mind challenge for Europe. However, the Saints briefly flirted with the idea of Champions League football, before a late lack of form has seemingly denied them. Nevertheless, it's a magnificent achievement for the Dutchman, and a great base to build on next year.

Finally, time for my Goal of the Season. Assuming Eden Hazard doesn't score a 45 yard overhead kick between now and the end of May, I think this is likely to be my top three:

1. Charlie Adam - Chelsea vs Stoke City
There aren't many footballers who would even think about scoring from 60 yards, and even fewer that would have the capabilities to pull it off. Adam does, and he proved it live on TV at Stamford Bridge, lobbing one of the most impressive and talented goalkeepers in the world in the meantime.

2. Phil Jagielka - Everton vs Liverpool
The context of the goal must also be taken into account. In the 91st minute of the season's first Merseyside derby is probably about the best time of all to come up with a wonder goal. I can honestly say I have never seen a better strike of a football from a defender, thumping a half volley into the roof of the net from fully 35 yards.

3. Harry Kane - Tottenham Hotspur vs Arsenal
Like Jagielka's goal, this was also critically important. However, Harry Kane's winning goal in the North London derby was picked for its impressive technique more than its context. As most strikers will tell you, accurately angling a header back where it comes from is incredibly difficult, but Kane made it seem easy, looping his effort well away from the reach of David Ospina. Probably his favourite effort of the season too!

Do Foreign Owners Make Leeds United?

My dad has been a Leeds United fan from an early age, and has probably been against foreign ownership of football clubs since then. It would therefore be of great irritation to him to see his favourite club in its current predicament. After years under the ownership of the 'poisoned dwarf' (my dad's words, not mine) Ken Bates, the entrance of Massimo Cellino, though eccentric, was surely a step in the right direction, right? Well, just 12 months after his acquisition of the club, it seems that is wrong. A year of pandemonium and chaos has followed, seemingly reinforcing my dad's argument regarding foreign owners.

It's worth noting that this is not the only case of foreign owners causing a stir. This has been to varying levels, but some of the country's largest clubs have fallen foul of owners that prioritise the business over the football. Most high profile of these are the two most successful clubs in this country's history: Liverpool and Manchester United.

Chronologically, it was the reds from (not quite) Manchester that were the subject of the first takeover bid. Having been listed on the New York Stock Exchange since 1990, Malcolm Glazer had built up his share of the company between 2003 and 2005, before announcing a formal takeover in the May of the latter year. In total, the acquisition cost around £800m, though this only tells half of the story.

Before the ink had dried on the deal, and before the supporters could get excited about potential financial investment, we worked out how the deal had been financed, and more worryingly, who was carrying the burden. All loans had been secured against the assets of the club, meaning that the financial stability of the club was put in serious danger. In addition, interest payments of up to £60m annually would be owed, piling more and more on top of the club. Like Cellino, Glazer seemed only interested in protecting his own investment, rather than the fortunes of the team and the fans.

Similarly, Liverpool struggled with new American owners. Tom Hicks and George Gillette, who both had histories with sports clubs in the States, decided to take a controlling stake in Liverpool at the beginning of 2007, valuing the business at £218.9m. In a turbulent three years, the pair fell so heavily out of favour due to a lack of incoming transfer activity and a failure to deliver the new stadium that they were called "asset strippers" in Parliament and we eventually willing to take a £144m loss on the club on its 2010 sale. Court cases and legal disputes have rumbled on since, so it seems unlikely that we have heard the end of this story yet.

However, while the heritage of these two clubs has enabled them to manage their losses and survive, there are some clubs that do not have the resources. The most obvious example of this is Portsmouth. A Premier League side, the club won the 2008 FA Cup to secure the unlikeliest of places in Europe for the following season. With new investment from Sulaiman al Fahim, it seemed as though Portsmouth would be in good hands to push on up the table. However, just five years later, the side would have a series of foreign owners, all of whom would receive similar "asset-stripper" descriptions as Hicks and Gillette, leaving the club in the lowest tier of league football and feeling lucky just to be in existence.

However, before I get accused of being xenophobic, there are foreign owners that have progressed their clubs. In recent years, new footballing superpowers have been created by overseas wealth, with Chelsea and Manchester City the most high profile instances.

Chelsea, following years of being the nearly men in terms of achieving Champions League football, were acquired in June 2003 by a relatively unknown oil tycoon, Roman Abramovich. The Russian shelled out hundreds of millions of pounds on players in the early years, bringing titles in successive years in 2005 and 2006 - the club's first in 50 years. Over the next eight years, the club has gone from strength to strength, winning a further one Premier League crown, while adding four FA Cups, three League Cups, a Europa League and the one Abramovich was after, the Champions League.

More recently, my club, Manchester City were thrust into the financial limelight. Following the turbulent reign of Thaksin Shinawatra, the Abu Dhabi United group was found to take the club forward, headed by Sheikh Mansoor. The enormous wealth of the group enabled the Blues to make the seismic transfer of Robinho on the final day of the 2009 summer transfer window, before letting the cash flow freely to acquire some of the most high profile players in the world. To date, this has resulted in two Premier League titles in three years, as well as an FA Cup and a League Cup, but European success has eluded them. As a result, it seems likely that their investors are in it for the long haul.

As well as this, English people can make just as appalling owners of football clubs. Take Mike Ashley for example. If ruining the ambitions of historic club wasn't enough, he's managed two! Having spent three years at university in Newcastle, I'm well aware of how important the club is to the city and how deep the desire for success is from the fans. Never before have I seen the mood of an entire city affected by the result on Saturday, and it is a shame to see the lifeless shell that this side has become under Mike Ashley's leadership. Making a profit is one thing, and with the FFP regulations in full swing, I understand the need to balance the books, but this business sense has to be married to a progress mentality. Sadly, this is something that the Geordies can quite rightly level at Ashley, and he seems unlikely to change this in the near future.

So it appears that the old locally owned football club system has well and truly gone. It's incredible to think that there was a time when Liverpool and Everton were both owned by the same family, who ran the clubs completely independently (and successfully I might add) during the 70s and 80s. Could you imagine those two clubs operating that way in the current system? Or any two clubs - not even those so closely linked? No. As football has become increasingly commercialised, particularly in the UK (for more details of this, check out my blog on the TV rights and English clubs' struggles in Europe), club owners are focusing their energies on making money from their ventures, and as a result, the day to day business is ever-more time consuming. Attempting to take on one club is difficult enough, so two would be near impossible.

So how do we ensure that the right people take over our historic clubs, meaning that assets are not stripped, or worse, the soul of the club is damaged?

Let's have a look at our current system - the 'Fit and Proper Person' test. Introduced in 2004 to prevent corrupt or unsuitable directors of football clubs, the test is performed on any individual that acquires in excess of 30 per cent of a club. In short, the following are considered 'disqualifying events' for owning a Premier League club:

• They have power or influence over another Football League club
• They become prohibited by law from becoming a director (and believe me, there are a lot of offences)
• They are filing for bankruptcy
• They have been a director of a club while it has suffered two or more unconnected events of insolvency
• They have been a director of two or more clubs of which, while they have been a director, has suffered an event of insolvency

However, after eleven years, and numerous examples of (in mine and my dad's opinions) 'unfit directors', we can certainly say that it has not been a rousing success. What is even more worrying is that unlike other legislation, it doesn't learn from its mistakes. I accept that nothing will be perfect the first time around, but I would expect much more than watching the same situations unfold time after time. Surely, the only way of preventing unfit owners is by tightening the regulations, placing them and their intentions for the club under scrutiny.

So, possible additions to the regulations? Setting out a five year plan for the club, which must be adhered to (as much as is humanly possible), a fan vote that, though it does not have the mandate to remove any owner directly, could cause the FA to place the owner on report. Any owner placed on this report is unable to purchase any further clubs in the future - in simple terms, one strike and you're out! Though these measures may seem excessive, it is perhaps the only way to prevent the likes of Glazer, Hicks, Gillette, Ashley and Cellino getting their way, and sucking the life from some of our most historic sporting institutions.

Blue Move: They Won't Be Standing Alone

I'm getting the distinct feeling that success for Manchester City is cyclical at present, rather than consistent. Despite the positive stat of two titles in three seasons, the fact remains that each of their title defences have been woeful. And arguably, the situation that the side finds themselves in is worse than that under Roberto Mancini just two years ago, which ultimately saw the deposition of the Italian. Whereas Mancini finished second (albeit a distant second) to Manchester United in 2012/2013, and reached an FA Cup final (losing to Wigan), Manuel Pellegrini has struggled, slipping into a battle for Champions League qualification, while exiting both cup competitions early.

As a result, questions have been raised around the future of the manager and a number of the players come the summer. I suppose when you have the level of spending power that Manchester City has, this speculation is never far away, but how much is justified? And what should this re-shuffle look like?

I'll start with the outgoings, looking at who, where they may end up and, given the importance of the Financial Fair Play regulations, how much City may be able to recoup for them.

Goalkeepers
Richard Wright
Joined: Summer 2012
Fee: Free
Reason: Good for player development, but not one worth wasting more money than necessarily.
Where: Backroom coaching, maybe not at City, but somewhere
Price: Free

Defenders
Aleksandar Kolorov
Joined: Summer 2011
Fee: £17m from Lazio
Reason: A free kick specialist, but often found wanting defensively. Not justified his fee and time to move on.
Where: Italy or Germany are probable destinations - i'm sure Lazio would have him back for a reduced fee.
Price: £7.5m

Dedryck Boyata
Joined: 2008
Fee: Free (Academy)
Reason: He's been given plenty of time to develop at City, and has yet to show significant signs of progression. Not likely to be a first team regular in the future
Where: Mid-table Premier League is most likely, with the likes of Swansea, West Ham or Sunderland possible destinations.
Price: £3m

Midfielders
Fernando
Joined: Summer 2014
Fee: £16m from Porto
Reason: Has not been good enough either in possession or without. Constantly caught out and looks nothing like the £16m paid.
Where: Porto may be a preferred destination, but Russia or Shakhtar Donetsk could be options.
Price: £8m

Samir Nasri
Joined: Summer 2011
Fee: £25m from Arsenal
Reason: A shame, as I like Nasri, but he has flattered to deceive at times during his stay at the Etihad. All too often comes across as petulant and uncaring, which doesn't demonstrate commitment to the club.
Where: Valencia or Napoli may be possible options, while a return to his home nation may be another option.
Price: £15m

Jesus Navas
Joined: Summer 2013
Fee: £15m from Sevilla
Reason: His pace is outstanding, but his final ball is found lacking. A peripheral figure during his time at City, and I feel a return to Spain may be best.
Where: Given his previous home sickness, Sevilla may be the best destination.
Price: £10m

Yaya Toure
Joined: Summer 2010
Fee: £20m from Barcelona
Reason: Coming towards the twilight in his career. After an exceptional season last time, he simply cannot defend, and has not continued to hit the heights. Time to cash out.
Where: Inter Milan and Roberto Mancini have made their intentions very clear, with the below fee potentially mooted. City should take that now.
Price: £43m

Scott Sinclair
Joined: Summer 2012
Fee: £7.5m from Swansea City
Reason: A poor purchase made in a panic in the final days of a transfer window, Sinclair has not had a fair crack of the whip and would do best to move on.
Where: A mid table Premier League side. His loan spell at Aston Villa has looked to be a fruitful one, so I wouldn't bet against a permanent move.
Price: £5m

Strikers
Edin Dzeko
Joined: January 2011
Fee: £27m from Wolfsburg
Reason: Has shown glimpses of being a top striker, but not consistent. He can score a hat trick one week and be useless the next, and City cannot cope with this long term.
Where: The Bosnian has suitors in a range of different countries, and the likes of Roma, Atletico Madrid and Wolfsburg are all possibles. I would suggest that the latter would be his preferred destination, and they certainly have the cash to throw around.
Price: £15m

Stevan Jovetic
Joined: Summer 2013
Fee: £22m from Fiorentina
Reason: Has been hampered by injury during his time at City, meaning that he has yet to have a long run in the side. His removal from the Champions League squad was the final straw
Where: Juventus has been touted as a possible, but Italy certainly seems the likely country.
Price: £15m

Alvaro Negredo
Joined: Summer 2013
Fee: £16.4m
Reason: Unknown personal reasons meant that his stay in England was a short one.
Where: Valencia
Price: £25m

John Guidetti
Joined: 2008
Fee: Free (Academy)
Reason: Similar to Boyata, has had numerous loan spells and has yet to really hit the highest levels. Has performed well at Celtic, but I feel that is about as high as he is likely to go.
Where: Celtic is certainly possible, but he has enough interest from Holland and Europe to challenge this.
Price: £5m

Staff
Manuel Pellegrini
Joined: Summer 2013
Fee: Free
Reason: A real shame, as I think he's done a fantastic job. I would have to caveat this sacking, however. This should only happen if Pep Guardiola could be prised from Munich - no-one else would do.
Where: Probably back to Spain. The likes of Sevilla or Villarreal may be possibles, while the poor performance of Athletic Bilbao may give him a quick return.
Price: Free

Totals:
Players left: 12
Funds raised: £151.5m

Interestingly, you'll notice that I have not included either James Milner or Micah Richards in that list. With the new quotas proposed (read more about that here), City will need their English players to stay. Milner has continued to be one of their most consistent performers this season, and it would be a great shame to see him leave, while I still believe Richards' true talents were wasted, and that he is a good alternative to Mangala and Demichelis at centre back.

So, with a total of 12 players set to leave, who could City get to replace them? To answer that, you need to consult the financials. With Financial Fair Play having an increasing impact on clubs, breaking even is a must.

The most recent financial results show that City have continued to cut losses, with income also rising by over 22 per cent. The 2014 results show that City, minus the £16m penalty for contravening FFP laws, made a loss of just £7m. They are expected to make a small profit at the end of this financial year (May 2015), giving the club everything they bring in in fees to spend, as well as potentially a little extra.

With an estimated £150m to spend, who could be targets for City this summer as they look to regroup?

Defenders
Here I see minimal additions, with the emphasis likely to be on who they may be able to acquire fairly cheaply. A replacement left back may be an option to limit the impact from the exit of Aleksandar Kolorov, with AC Milan's Mattia De Sciglio or Southampton's Nathaniel Clyne possible. With the Italian side a shadow of its former self, and struggling financially, a deal could be struck for somewhere in the region of £10m. Meanwhile, Bayern Munich's centre back Dante could be available for a cut price, given that the Brazilian is currently playing second fiddle to Javi Martinez and Jerome Boateng in the Bayern side, while failing to make his presence felt in the national team. I don't think this is particularly likely, but it is an option.

Midfielders
Here there will be considerably more movement. The big money move of Yaya Toure means that City need to recruit in the centre of midfield, while the likes of Nasri, Fernando and Navas have not quite lived up to expectation.

There have been rumblings of potential huge money moves, but it's whether City can afford to do them and focus on the Financial Fair Play. Juventus's Paul Pogba and Real Madrid's Gareth Bale have both been linked with a number of Premier League sides, City included, but any deal would surely be worth in excess of £60m for either. Also, it's worth noting that any of these big names are only likely to move to a side with Champions League football, so the remainder of this season is set to have a significant impact on the success over the summer.

However, City simply have to strengthen in the centre, and if Pogba does not become a significant target, then the likes of Ilkay Gundogan or Blaise Matuidi could provide a slightly cheaper options - and by that I mean about £35m. In terms of improving the English contingent in the squad, much has been made of City's pursuit of Everton's Ross Barkley, while contract stalling for both Raheem Sterling and Theo Walcott has led to speculation. However, as we have seen, English players often result in inflated prices, meaning that City may have to part with more cash than the players are worth.

Strikers

With three of the five current strikers expected to depart this summer, the need to strengthen in this area is crucial too. Here, I'd like to see a striker with strength and a quicker striker with proven goalscoring ability. For me, the likes of Gonzalo Higuain could be an option, though Napoli are hardly in a position where they need to sell. Similarly, the likes of Alexandre Lacazette or Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang could be targets, but any of these would sure cost anywhere between £25m and £40m. However, I'd like to take a bit of a risk. With Radamel Falcao out of contract at Monaco come the end of the season, offering him an alternative to his appalling stay across the city may not be a bad idea - particularly for free.

Staff
As I mentioned above, it's a shame that Pellegrini is almost certain to be on his way, but in my eyes, there is only one manager in the planet that I would want. Pep Guardiola has achieved everything in the game in the countries he has managed in, and perhaps now is the time to renew old rivalries with Jose Mourinho. What do you say Pep?

Who I Would Get:
Mattia De Sciglio - £10m
Ilkay Gundogan - £35m
Raheem Sterling - £25m
Paul Pogba - £60m
Radamel Falcao - Free
Alexandre Lacazette - £25m
Pep Guardiola - £10m
Total - £165m

Proposed Manchester City 2015/2016 squad:
Joe Hart, Willy Caballero, Gael Clichy, Mattia De Sciglio, Karim Rekik, Vincent Kompany, Martin Demichelis, Eliaquim Mangala, Micah Richards, Pablo Zabaleta, Bacary Sagna, Fernandinho, Ilkay Gundogan, Raheem Sterling, Paul Pogba, David Silva, James Milner, Marcos Lopez, Bruno Zuculini, Wilfried Bony, Radamel Falcao, Alexandre Lacazette, Sergio Aguero

I mentioned at the start of the article that success at City seems cyclical at present, using this as a negative. If you'd have offered me that ten years ago, I'd have bitten your hand off! However, with the money invested, and (potentially) the squad above available to them next year, they may have built a team capable of achieving consistent success.

The FA's Response: Changing Attitudes?

It's almost like the FA read my last blog post on England. As I made my recommendation to start blooding the younger generation of English players, in order to maintain a more consistent approach in the future, the English governing body made its point. Greg Dyke, who has been a strong proponent of introducing further English quotas, has outlined his plan for the future of not only the Premier League, but the English national side.

If you want to read the full proposal, look here, but I'll just give you the highlights. The headline suggestion is that instead of the eight players currently required to be "home-grown", there will need to be 12, meaning that by 2020, the Premier League will be made up of a minimum 45 per cent of English players. There is also a change to the definition of "home-grown". Rather than the three years that a player must have been registered with the club before his 21st birthday, Dyke wants the three years to have been served before a player's 18th, ensuring that young talent continues to be nurtured by English clubs, instead of simply buying it in. Finally, he included a new requirement that two of these "home-grown' players must have been trained by their current club, meaning that all clubs have to place emphasis on their youth programmes.

So, should this come into operation today, how would this affect the current squads? Having looked at the sides registered by our top flight clubs after the September transfer window, I've outlined the amount of English players in each of their squads below:

Club	Players	Home grown (%)
Arsenal	8/23	35%
Aston Villa	16/25	64%
Burnley	18/24	75%
Chelsea	3/20	15%
Crystal Palace	15/25	60%
Everton	8/25	32%
Hull City	13/25	52%
Leicester City	17/24	71%
Liverpool	9/19	47%
Manchester City	8/24	33%
Manchester United	12/24	50%
Newcastle United	9/25	36%
Queens Park Rangers	19/25	76%
Southampton	9/20	45%
Stoke City	12/25	48%
Sunderland	12/21	57%
Swansea City	12/25	48%
Tottenham Hotspur	6/23	26%
West Bromwich Albion	10/23	43%
West Ham United	14/24	58%
Total	230/469	49%

Now, it's important to remember that this does not include the currently defined 'U-21s', who do not require registration. This may seem irrelevant, but it's worth noting that the likes of Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain, Hector Bellerin and Harry Kane all fit into that bracket, and would all require registration under the new regulations. This may naturally boost the numbers of English players in the Premier League, but it's worth noting that there are only 11 of the 20 sides in the Premier League that would currently satisfy the proposals.

There is also a more significant trend. As we get further and further up the table, the percentage of English players gets less and less. The sides that would currently satisfy the new regulations sit in the following positions: 4th, 8th, 9th, 10th, 11th, 15th, 16th, 17th, 18th, 19th, 20th. With most of these sitting in the bottom half of the table, does this not just suggest that the best players (i.e. the ones that win titles) are not English?

With this not currently being the case, how do we breed the next generation of footballer, and even more so, encourage them to be successful? All of these new regulations may be completely irrelevant if our youth system does not produce the quality of English player we require to be competitive agains the likes of Spain, Germany and Brazil?

So maybe it's more pertinent to consider the national make-up of our youth sides, as this will give a better representation of the impact of these new regulations. As with the first team, I've listed the English contingent below:

Club	Players	Home grown (%)
Arsenal	16/22	73%
Aston Villa	13/18	72%
Burnley	17/27	62%
Chelsea	20/27	74%
Crystal Palace	17/17	100%
Everton	22/29	76%
Hull City	32/33	97%
Leicester City	15/21	71%
Liverpool	9/16	56%
Manchester City	14/29	48%
Manchester United	24/28	86%
Newcastle United	26/34	76%
Queens Park Rangers	7/14	50%
Southampton	15/19	79%
Stoke City	14/20	70%
Sunderland	22/30	73%
Swansea City	24/30	80%
Tottenham Hotspur	16/22	73%
West Bromwich Albion
West Ham United	16/24	67%
Total	339/438	77%

With the exception of West Brom, whose youth side I could not find, all bar Manchester City have youth sides with at least 50 per cent home grown players, giving rise to the hope that greater regulations around minimum English quotas will make a significant difference. This, coupled with the kind of investment that the likes of City are putting into their youth setups, shows that youth football has become a priority, and with English talent currently dominating the academies up and down the land, it looks like a positive step.

Another recent event that may significantly impact the way that our youth development works is the recent enormous rise in TV rights for the Premier League clubs. With clubs now set to receive a significant pay packet, there will be more to invest on our younger talent. However, the growth in funding for Premier League clubs inevitably inhibits the lower league sides from producing their own players. The likes of Wilfried Zaha, Scott Sinclair and Will Hughes, who came through the Championship youth system are likely to become less and less frequent, as the bigger clubs continue to steal the best talent. Though the Premier League points to the £1bn that the lower league clubs will share from 2016, it is worth pointing out that despite a rise of 70 per cent in overall TV rights fees, the lower leagues have only seen a 30 per cent rise in their cut - maybe not so generous after all?

However, will these make any significant difference to the national team? Or even the performance of our clubs in Europe, as outlined in my previous article? Well, in terms of the national team, it will inevitably help us produce a greater calibre of player, and more consistently. However, it is perhaps our own arrogance that makes us believe that we are in the same bracket as Spain and Germany when it comes to creating players. We are typically impatient, meaning that players are not given the chance to develop when it comes to the national team, and often to their downfall.

Ultimately, we need to accept that we are not good enough when it comes to football. We may have created the game, but we are no longer the kings of it. As a result, just 23 English players played Champions League football last year, compared to 76 from Spain, 51 from Germany and 55 from Brazil. We would be naive to think that we can change that substantially overnight, but it is certainly true that we can bolster those numbers, so perhaps a quota of English players is a good first step.

But now I'm going to be facetious and use a political argument (the election is just a matter of weeks away!). Can you imagine any other industry in the country proposing this? And further still, it being widely accepted? If I turned round and made a public comment that 'XX sector should reserve 50 per cent of English jobs for English people', I'd be signed up to the BNP and ostracised by practically everyone else! But chuck in a ball and a net, and people are falling over one another to support what may otherwise be branded as racist and discriminatory!

Ok, back to the serious argument. I do support the ideas to an extent, though I do suspect it will have a negative impact on the quality of the Premier League. However, this may not be a bad thing when it comes to competing in Europe. Let me explain why. A lower quality Premier League means lower TV rights and prize money for domestic competition. As I mentioned in my earlier post, it is this financial disparity between the Premier League and the Champions League that may have a detrimental impact on the performance of English sides, even if only subconsciously. This proposal may make Europe a larger priority, and we may at last return to seeing English clubs in the latter stages.

This argument is strengthened by the announcement made by UEFA last week. Clearly Michel Platini had been reading my blog too (or so I'd like to think!), as both of the major competitions in have raised their prize money for competitors. For the Champions League sides, all will now share £872m - up from £696m - or an average of £8.7m each, which represents a 38 per cent increase. In the Europa League, it is an even bigger jump, nearly doubling from £972,000 to £1.7m per team. With Europe offering a larger financial reward, and the potential for the domestic game to lower its rewards, could we begin to see a greater emphasis placed on these competitions?

In terms of the national side, I think there is a better alternative to the quotas. In most of the top European nations, leading sides are allowed to submit 'B' teams, who compete at a slightly lower level. These are not like reserve team games, as they are extremely competitive and against teams that are seeking promotion, and offer younger players some game time in conditions similar to those of the normal team. This has seen the likes of Xavi and Iniesta come through the ranks at Barcelona, and was part of the reason for the recent success of the German national side. As such, I would look to implement such as system in England, possibly around Conference level.

The ideas presented by Greg Dyke are not bad ones, and certainly have their advantages when it comes to European competition, but if we're expecting us to take the world stage by storm in the next few years, then we're deluded. It will be a long, slow process to take England back towards the top, but maybe this is a good first step.

The Premier League and Europe: A Subconscious Uncoupling?

And so, a devastating fortnight for English clubs in Europe draws to a close. For the second time in three years, we have no representative in the Champions League beyond the last 16. Even more worryingly, it's the fourth time in five seasons that no English side has made it to the quarters of the Europa League. And never before have both happened in conjunction. So what has gone wrong? How has a league extolled for its pace and power, ranked as one of the top two leagues in the world, deteriorated when it comes to the European competitions?

However, as the stats above suggest, twas not always thus. Between 2004/2005 and 2008/2009, we had at least one English side in the Champions League final every year, and two in 2007/2008! That was less than ten years ago, and I'm struggling to understand what's changed in the intervening period.

Or maybe it's a trend thing. Here, I find a little bit more evidence. From the introduction of the Champions League, there was a six-season period where no Premier League side made it out of the group stages. However, this was the early 90s. The Premier League was not seen as the all-conquering force in world football that it is today, with the enormous spending power available. Equally, it's worth noting that just one side entered the competition from the English league. Compare that to the capitulation that saw three exit the Champions League in the past two weeks, and you see how unfair the comparison between the two is.

So, we've seen that English clubs are struggling to find their great historic form in the Champions League at present, but is it any different when we look at Europe's secondary club competition? Do we have previous heights that we simply aren't hitting?

The short answer - no. Unlike the Champions League, where England at least has an illustrious past, the country has had just eight teams get to the quarter-finals or beyond - and three of those came in the same season! (2012-13 for those who care). According to this recent history, it's hardly a surprise to see English clubs fail to make the cut.

What's more worrying is who the English clubs are being beaten by. For this, I want to look a bit more closely at this season now. In the Champions League, Liverpool failed to make it out of a group consisting of the Spanish side in third place last year (albeit Real Madrid), a Swiss side and a Hungarian debutant. Although the other three managed it to make it through groups far harder than that (bear in mind City's group of Bayern Munich, Roma and CSKA Moscow), they perished to the French champions, runners up and Spanish runners up. This has left a octet of three Spanish sides, two French teams, a German, an Italian and a Portuguese. Now, the three Spanish and the German I can accept, but the other five are all eminently beatable by the likes of Chelsea, City and Arsenal. So the questions remains, why didn't they?

The Europa League is even worse. FA Cup runners-up Hull were beaten before the competition even began, dumped out on away goals by Belgian side Lokeren. Though both of our entrants into the group stages made their way safely through to the Round of 32, where they were joined by Liverpool,  both the Anfield club and Tottenham were dumped out at this stage, losing to Besiktas and Fiorentina respectively. Finally, Everton's annihilation at the hands of Ukraine giants Dynamo Kiev (can't you almost feel the sarcasm?) caps a simply horrendous season in Europe for English clubs. Again, look at at who's left. Two Italians, two Ukrainians, a Spaniard, a Russian, a German and a Belgian. Of those, I would perhaps rank three (Wolfsburg, Sevilla and Napoli) more highly than the likes of Spurs and Everton. But with none of those teams playing our sides, how do we not have more representatives in the last eight?

Perhaps we need to look at the mindset of British clubs when it comes to the European game. Here, there are a couple of potential factors. However, as my title suggests, these are by no means deliberate choices made by English clubs to the detriment of performances in Europe, merely an unintended consequence.

Firstly, just look at the respective value of league and European competitions for English clubs. Last season, champions Manchester City received £24.7m for winning the Premier League title, with additional TV fees taking the total received by the Blues to a whopping £96.5m. Just to prove that English football does not unfairly benefit the champions, fourth placed Arsenal claimed a total of £92.8m. Bear in mind that this is before the mammoth TV rights deal from BT and Sky that sees the Premier League pocket in excess of £5.1bn. If we compare that to the total received for Champions League participation and progression, we see a stark difference. Liverpool's exit in the group stages earned the club just £7.67m in prize money and TV rights, while last season's winners of the competition, Real Madrid, secured £41.5m. The Europa League difference is even more stark. Spurs, who finished sixth in the Premier League, made almost £90m in domestic competition, whilst only securing £4.27m for their participation in the Europa League. With this difference, it would surely come as no surprise for clubs to, either consciously or subconsciously, focus more heavily on domestic competition.

In comparison, foreign clubs do not have the same financial incentive at home. Barring Barcelona and Real Madrid, who combined secure almost half of the annual La Liga TV rights, currently valued at around £482m, the rest are relative paupers, with current champions Atletico Madrid securing just £31m - pittance when compared to the Premier League. It's a similar story in Italy, where Juventus take home a financial package to rival England, but second placed Roma manage only £52m, just over half that of the Turin side. In Germany, it is even more obvious, with the likes of Bayern Munich, Borussia Dortmund and Bayer Leverkusen all taking around £18m in TV rights. With such a large disparity, it is hardly surprising to see teams from these nations taking a greater interest in European competitions, and also explains the rise of Eastern European nations, who without Champions League and Europa League money would perhaps struggle financially.

In terms of a conscious effort to prioritise the league in England, we can see evidence of this with squad selection from the likes of Spurs and Everton in some Europa League ties, with the Londoners in particular coming under scrutiny for fielding seemingly weakened sides. However, this is not the case for Europe's premier competition. With much made of Roman Abramovic's desire for European glory, none of the English participants have obviously favoured domestic competition - demonstrating that either this is a subconscious element, or needs explaining by some other means.

The second factor is a simple one. The fact remains that English sides are still not playing to the style of the European game. If you look at recent winners of both the Champions League and Europa League, neither have used power over pace. Arguably the best European side for some time, the Barcelona from the late 000s/early 2010s, had not a single truly powerful player, with Gerard Pique and Carles Puyol the only ones to add real steel to the play. Flair has always been the key factor in Europe, as demonstrated by the goalscoring abilities of both Lionel Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo.

And yet, English sides continue to buy tall, powerful players. Take Manchester City, for example. This January, requiring a striker, their eyes turned to Wilfried Bony, a man famed for his strength and power, but not for his speed. This signing more than any other signifies the inherent importance placed on the Premier League over the Champions League, even if they do not make that conscious decision themselves.

English sides have traditionally been powerful, in order to cope with the more robust elements of the English game, particularly when facing lower league opposition. To this end, I think it will be quite different to marry the two objectives going forward. Therefore, from a purely business standpoint, it makes no sense to look to win the Champions League at the expense of the Premier League, regardless of what Roman Abramovic may say. A subconscious uncoupling it may have been, but it would be to the detriment of English clubs' finances to reconnect with European competition any time soon.

England's XI: Consistently Inconsistent?

And so, despite a frantic Premier League season, which sees congested races for both the Champions League and to avoid relegation, our attention turns to the national team. Just for that few times a year when fans can stop acting like idiots to antagonise one another (for a good example of this, please refer to Aston Villa fans' outrageous and ridiculous pitch invasion in their FA Cup quarter final against West Brom), and act like idiots together (ok, not a great step forward, but every little helps!).

However, for fans of England, there has been very little to cheer in recent years. The team has gone progressively backwards (arguably since 1990), culminating is the abysmal showing at the 2014 World Cup. For those of you that don't remember, allow me to share the statistical highlights. Two goals. One point. The worst English World Cup campaign since 1958. Feeling suitably morbid? Then we'll continue.

Since the Brazil aberration, England have done what England do best - given their fans false hope of a recovery. Six straight wins since the World Cup, albeit against the likes of San Marino and Estonia, has inevitably lifted the spirits of England fans - who have to be some of the most overly optimistic supporters on the face of the planet.

But what is the reason behind England's recent decline? As much as club sides and the lack of 'home-grown talent' often take the blame, deservedly so in many cases, I believe I may have uncovered an additional reason. If we look at the last three long-term managers of the national side, we see a clear trend. As with Louis van Gaal's much maligned Manchester United side this season, constant chopping and changing of players and systems can have a disastrous impact on form and performance. Here, England have previous. In his 37 games in charge, Roy Hodgson has used a remarkable 60 players - in just three years! This averages out at introducing 1.62 new players every match, which cannot be good for securing a consistent team.

However, I mentioned that this is not a Hodgson-specific issue. Fabio Capello, Steve McClaren and Sven-Goran Eriksson also all regularly rotated their squads, selecting a disproportionate amount of players for the number of matches played. If we discard Steve McClaren, who selected 45 players in his 18 woeful games in charge of the national side, there is an ongoing trend. Sven selected 67 in his 72 games, at an average of 1.07 new players per game, while Capello's average is 1.5 new players per game, having used 63 men in his 42 game reign. If we add in Hodgson's current average, we see that since 2001, England have been introducing more players per game. It cannot simply be coincidence that Sven's two World Cup resulted in quarter-final appearances, Fabio Capello's one saw them escape the group, while Hodgson's, well we can't forget that! But naturally, instead of looking closer to home, we blame the foreigners!

So, getting back to the crux of the article, who would I select for the current England squad that may end the problems with consistency? And who would start the upcoming games against Lithuania and Italy?

Though I've bemoaned the constant chopping and changing of the previous England administrations, I will make a couple of additions to the list. However, I would expect that this side will be around for at least the next five years, taking us back to the 'Golden Generation' mentality that we had under Sven.

My England Squad:

Goalkeepers: Joe Hart (Manchester City), Fraser Forster (Southampton), Jack Butland (Stoke City)

Defenders: Luke Shaw (Manchester United), Ryan Bertrand (Southampton), Gary Cahill (Chelsea), Calum Chambers (Arsenal), Phil Jones (Manchester United), John Stones (Everton), Nathaniel Clyne (Southampton), Kieran Gibbs (Arsenal)

Midfielders: Raheem Sterling (Liverpool), Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain (Arsenal), Jordan Henderson (Liverpool), Jack Wilshere (Arsenal), Adam Lallana (Liverpool), Ross Barkley (Everton), Theo Walcott (Arsenal)

Forwards: Wayne Rooney (Manchester United), Daniel Sturridge (Liverpool), Danny Welbeck (Arsenal), Harry Kane (Tottenham Hotspur)

The most telling thing about this squad? In five years, just five of the above will be over 30 years old, and those include two goalkeepers, who can continue late into their thirties (just look at Brad Friedel and Mark Schwarzer!). As a result, barring injuries, this can certainly be the bedrock squad for the next few years, and while I wouldn't expect England to trouble the winner's enclosure, this is certainly a squad capable of escaping the group stages at any competition!

As for my first XI, here's who I would start if all were fit:

Hart, Bertrand, Cahill, Chambers, Clyne, Sterling, Henderson, Lallana, Walcott, Rooney, Sturridge

For me, Hart will remain England's number one for the next five years, while the form of both Saints wing-backs give me encouragement for both of their futures. For centre-back, while Gary Cahill adds steel, it was a toss-up between Chambers and Jones, with the Arsenal man's age and potential counting in his favour.

In midfield, there are not many surprises - the Liverpool connection between Sterling, Henderson and Lallana was Spain-esque, a technique that has been proven to work in the past, while Theo Walcott just edged out his club mate Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain.

Up front, common sense prevailed. There can be no doubt that Harry Kane is having a sparkling season, but he has not yet done enough to displace either of Rooney or Sturridge at present. However, with Rooney at 29 years old, have we found the successor? Only time will tell, but the signs are there that England may have found its next number 9 (or is that 10?).

One Man Team: How Much Of A Miss Was Aguero?

We all remember these words: 'Balotelli... Aguerooooooooooooo!' Martin Tyler's commentary of the famous final day of the 2011/2012 season has been immortalised over the last few years, but it's the goalscorer who wrote himself into City folklore. Since joining from Atletico Madrid for a club record £38m in July 2011, Aguero has been an integral cog in the City machine. The record Premier League goalscorer, eclipsing his countryman Carlos Tevez, Aguero has scored an impressive 69 goals in 110 City games.

As a result, I have to admit, as soon as I saw Sergio Aguero hit the deck in the third minute of City's game with Everton in December, I feared for the Blues' season. Such has been the form the little Argentine has been in this season, he had carried them through the tough spots, most notably in Europe.

This has led to so many pundits calling City a one-man team. However, we have seen numerous examples - perhaps more than in recent seasons - of numerous clubs seeming overly reliant on one player. With Aguero back to full fitness, was this the case with City, and is it any worse than any of their competition?

Before I look at statistics, it is important to consider the form of Man City during Aguero's injury. In the seven games including the one he departed early against Everton, City were unbeaten, winning six. Even more impressively, City scored 12 goals without a recognised striker, conceding just three. That seems to indicate that although Aguero has been a key player for City, carrying them through certain games, he is not the be all and end all.

But let's look at the stats, shall we? Interestingly, as I showed before, City have performed exceptionally well as a team since the Argentine has been unavailable. This form is certainly far superior from anything seen while Aguero was playing, averaging 2.6 points per game in the league without him while only managing 2.0 points per game with him. This certainly doesn't support the notion of a one-man team, though the return of David Silva from injury certainly will have helped City's cause.

On a more individual level, as a striker, Aguero's primary role is to score goals. Certainly, he has been the most in-form Premier League striker this season, rivalled only for this role by Diego Costa's excellent start to the year and Harry Kane's storming mid-season. But has he been so dominant in the Manchester City scoring stakes that suggests he has an abnormal amount of influence going forward?

Up to 6 December, the day Aguero was injured, Manchester City had scored 29 Premier League goals. Of those, the little Argentine had scored 14 - almost half. On top of this, Aguero also contributed to over 50 per cent of City's Champions League goals, dragging them through what appeared to be an impossible task in their group.

While that seems like a significant proportion of goals for an individual to score, it's worth looking at whether it is unusual, either for Manchester City, or the whole of the Premier League. Last year, Yaya Toure's 20 Premier League goals represented just 19.6 per cent of the total, though with injury denying Aguero for most of last season, this is perhaps not the most representative. In City's first title-winning season, Aguero scored just a quarter of their goals in the league, almost half of his current contribution this season.

But are City's rivals any better? Below is a table with the top Premier League goalscorers of each team, and their contributions in percentage to the total scoring charts:

Arsenal: Alexis Sanchez - 13/52 (25%)
Aston Villa: Christian Benteke - 4/15 (27%)
Burnley: Danny Ings - 9/24 (38%)
Chelsea: Diego Costa - 17/53 (32%)
Crystal Palace: Mile Jedinak and Dwight Gayle - 5/30 (17%)
Everton: Romelu Lukaku - 7/28 (25%)
Hull: Nikica Jelavic - 8/25 (32%)
Leicester: Leonardo Ulloa - 7/22 (32%)
Liverpool: Steven Gerrard and Raheem Sterling - 6/38 (16%)
Manchester City: Sergio Aguero - 17/59 (29%)
Manchester United: Wayne Rooney and Robin van Persie - 10/45 (22%)
Newcastle United: Papiss Cisse - 11/32 (34%)
Queens Park Rangers: Charlie Austin - 15/27 (55%)
Southampton: Graziano Pelle - 8/33 (24%)
Stoke City: Mame Biram Diouf, Jonathan Walters and Peter Crouch - 7/33 (21%)
Sunderland: Steven Fletcher and Adam Johnson - 4/22 (18%)
Swansea City: Wilfried Bony - 9/32 (28%)
Tottenham Hotspur: Harry Kane - 14/43 (33%)
West Bromwich Albion: Saido Berahino - 12/23 (52%)
West Ham United: Diafra Sakho - 9/36 (25%)

As you can see, based on the statistics, Manchester City actually rank eighth in terms of 'one-men teams' for scoring, with both Chelsea and Tottenham higher on that list. However, it is surprising to see that Arsenal not higher on that scale, as Alexis Sanchez has been seen as the leading light in their season. However, with Charlie Austin and Saido Berahino most prominent in the 'one-man team' stakes, perhaps, because the emphasis is not placed as heavily on the mid-table to relegation threatened teams, they are not placed under the same level of scrutiny as those higher up?

Clearly, Sergio Aguero has been Manchester City's most important player this season - even more so than some of their rivals - but there is certainly credence in the claims that this season has seen an increasing number of clubs relying on an individual to perform. While we have seen Arsenal and Chelsea discussed in the media, the likes of Leicester, West Brom and QPR have all seen players carry their seasons. Maybe Aguero isn't the only one-man teamer around, but he certainly is the most high profile. When fully fit and in form, he is arguably in the top five players in the world. I only wished he stayed fit for longer.

Borussia Dortmund: The Ultimate Game of Two Halves?

After a frankly appalling start to the Bundesliga season, there were many that were secretly tipping Borussia Dortmund for the drop this year. I was not one of them, but we'll get to that later. Having lost 10 of the opening 17 games in the league, Dortmund entered the winter break heavily entrenched in a relegation dog-fight. However, despite a home defeat to high flying Augsburg immediately after the break, the BVB have fought back, winning impressively away at Freiburg and at home to Mainz in their last two outings - just the second time Dortmund have won back to back games in the league this season.

It's important to put this collapse into perspective. Just four years ago, Dortmund won the first of two Bundesliga titles, with the likes of Robert Lewandowski, Mats Hummels and Mario Gotze playing integral roles. It's not even like there has been an obvious decline since, with the BVB reaching their first Champions League final in 2013, seeing off the likes of Real Madrid along the way, and finishing emphatic runners-up to Bayern Munich in the two seasons since their last title wins. To see them in the relegation zone come Christmas then was a considerable shock, and led to significant head-scratching over the poor performances.

As I mentioned at the start, tongues were even wagging to suggest the imminent relegation of the previous title winners, particularly due to the fact that they could seem to buy a win at home. This was most evident in October, when Dortmund failed to take a single point from their five games, including demoralising defeats at home to relegation rivals Hamburg and Hannover. The statistics for the first half of the season were astonishing for a team of their standard. Just four wins. Just 18 goals. And just 15 points. But why were they so bad?

Much has been said about Dortmund's unfortunate injury list, and it's certainly true that they have not had the luck of the green. At one time or another, they have been without Roman Weidenfeller, Lukas Pisczek, Mats Hummels, Neven Subotic, Ilkay Gundogan, Lars Bender, Henrikh Mkhitaryan, Marco Reus, Ciro Immobile and Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang. However, even without these, it's not as though they have a particularly poor team. Certainly they have not been without all of them for the whole period. So let's take the most important five out - Weidenfeller, Hummels, Gundogan, Reus and Aubameyang. That would still leave a team of Langerak, Schmelzer, Subotic, Ginter, Durm, Bender, Kagawa, Mkhitaryan, Blaszcyowski, Ramos, Immobile - certainly good enough for mid-table at worst!

This leads me to my core argument behind the poor form, and the reason why I never believed they would be relegated. The demise of Dortmund simply demonstrates the significance of momentum in top-level football. We've seen this in the Premier League this year with Southampton in the positive sense, but nowhere has there been a better example of the reverse than at Signal Iduna Park. One loss tends to breed another, and unless you have a reaction quickly, you almost get into the habit of performing poorly again and again. Perhaps this is due to the additional pressure that is placed on every game, but whatever it is, it certainly would explain Dortmund's performances. This would also explain the relatively strong performances in Europe, as the pressure would be taken off for the Champions League games, and heaped on when they returned to domestic football.

So, with the BVB seemingly on the up with the pair of Bundesliga victories since the resumption of the season, are we about to see the most extreme example of the old footballing cliche: a game of two halves? The winter break seems to have enabled Dortmund to take stock and recharge, and have come back fresh. So, with that being said, what is a realistic aim? If we assume that I am correct, and Dortmund are in no significant danger of relegation, how high can they go? As we have seen, the four wins that Werder Bremen have enjoyed have lifted the side from the relegation zone to eighth, so the bottom half of the table is certainly close. As a result, I see no reason that Borussia Dortmund cannot make that spot their own.

However, beyond that, it is difficult to see them breaking into the European spots. There is a 12 point gap between Dortmund and Borussia Monchengladbach who currently occupy third place, which I feel would require the BVB to win almost all of their games to overhaul. A tricky task, and one that I just cannot anticipate. In my opinion, it's sixth at best for Dortmund, though I'm sure that Jurgen Klopp would accept tenth!

The significant problem that I foresee for Dortmund is keeping hold of some of their top players. With Champions League football for next season nothing more than a pipe dream, the likes of Reus, Hummels and Aubameyang could be heading for the exit door to pursue their careers from next season, which could have a significant impact on the long term future of Dortmund. It's certainly going to be an interesting one to watch for the remainder of this season and over the summer.

Half Time Report: World Team of 2014

The final post in my 'Half Time Report' series follows my blogs rounding up the European activity this year and my Premier League team of 2014. More importantly, this week's FifPro XI came under considerable criticism for its inclusion of, among others, David Luiz.

With this in mind, I thought it would be a good idea to put together my World Team of the Year. Same principle as my Premier League one, but across all leagues.

World Team of the Year (4-3-3)

Goalkeeper - Manuel Neuer (Bayern Munich) FIFPro XI - Manuel Neuer (Bayern Munich)
The first goalkeeper to be nominated for the Ballon d'Or since Gianluigi Buffon in 2006, this selection is probably one of the more obvious. The German keeper has had undoubtedly the best year of his illustrious career to date, claiming not only Bundesliga and German cup medals, but the Holy Grail of world football - the World Cup. Since then, the Bayern Munich goalie has been awarded the German player of the year, and has conceded just four league goals, with Sergio Aguero the only player to score more than once in a game against him!

Left back - Marcelo (Real Madrid) FIFPro XI - Thiago Silva (Paris Saint Germain)
A difficult position, this. No-one has particularly stood out at left back this year, with even the World Cup-winning German national team struggling to nail down a designated full back. However, following a seasons that saw his club side win the domestic and European cup double, including a vital goal in the Champions League final, and playing a pivotal role in his national side reaching the World Cup semi-finals on home soil, I felt Marcelo was most deserving.

Centre back - Diego Godin (Atletico Madrid) FIFPro XI - Sergio Ramos (Real Madrid)
For me, this was a surprise omission from the FifPro XI side. A towering centre back, Godin has had a remarkable 2014, captaining his Atletico Madrid side to their first La Liga title in XX years and to within a minute of Champions League glory, including scoring what would have been the winning goal. Though his Uruguayan side left the World Cup under a cloud thanks to Luis Suarez, Godin gave a good account of himself, and despite losing a number of key players in the summer, he has led Atletico into another title race this year.

Centre back - Jerome Boateng (Bayern Munich) FIFPro XI - David Luiz (Paris Saint Germain)
My replacement for arguably the most ridiculous inclusion into the FIFPro XI side. David Luiz has moved from a side under performing over the last few seasons, winning nothing last year with Chelsea despite high expectations, to Paris Saint Germain, a side that should be walking the title and domestic cup competitions. However, six months in, PSG find themselves behind both Lyon and Marseille - so in what universe has David Luiz been performing strongly? Oh, and there is also the little matter of the 7-1 thumping by Germany in the World Cup!

Anyway, enough of the negatives - Jerome Boateng has (and I bite my tongue as I say this) gone from strength to strength since he left Manchester City for Bayern Munich, becoming a first team regular and leading his side to another Bundesliga title and cup win. He has also nailed down a position for the national side, helping the German's to that historic World Cup win in July.

Right back - Philipp Lahm (Bayern Munich) FIFPro XI - Philipp Lahm (Bayern Munich)
Another fairly straight forward decision. As with the left back position, there has been a lack of stand out right-backs this year, but Philipp Lahm deserves to be in the team. Though often deployed as a defensive midfielder, his home is as a defensive wide man. As captain of both Bayern Munich and Germany, he has led sides to success both domestically and nationally. What a way to cap an outstanding career!

Left midfielder - Eden Hazard (Chelsea) FIFPro XI - Angel Di Maria (Real Madrid/Manchester United)
This was the other inclusion to the FifPro team that baffled me. Angel Di Maria, though a good player in Real Madrid's 'La Decima' campaign, was by no means a lynchpin. Since his move to Manchester United, he has shown glimpses of his brilliance, but injury and inconsistency has limited his effectiveness so far this season. With this in mind, I can't help but think that it is the outrageous price tag put on his head that has tipped the balance in his favour.

However, my choice is a more sensible one. The only inclusion from the Premier League, Eden Hazard has come on considerably in the last 12 months. Unlike many in this team, the Belgian has not got the same amount of trophies in the cabinet from the last year, but he has been a critical part of the success of both his club and national side - a role he has taken on with distinction so far this year. Should his form continue in this vein for the remainder of the season, I have little doubt that trophies will follow.

Central midfielder - James Rodriguez (AS Monaco/Real Madrid) FIFPro XI - Andres Iniesta (Barcelona)
The exclusion that most surprised me. Arguably the 'Player of the Tournament' at this summer's World Cup (why they gave that honour to Lionel Messi escapes me!), Rodriguez as a midfielder grabbed the Golden Boot and the Puskas Award for his incredible volley against Uruguay. This paved the way for his big money move to Real Madrid, where he has slotted seamlessly into the all-star side. Though like Hazard, he has yet to win a trophy in 2014, his individual achievements more than make up for this, and he deserves his place.

Right midfielder - Toni Kroos (Bayern Munich/Real Madrid) FIFPro XI - Toni Kroos (Bayern Munich/Real Madrid)
Like James Rodriguez, Toni Kroos's consistency, both at Bayern Munich and the World Cup, earned him a move to Madrid. Though not for the same multiples, there can be no denying that the young German has had a significant impact since arriving at the Bernabeu, and with a World Cup winner's medal already in his locker, there is no reason why the midfielder cannot go on to claim some of football's most historic trophies in the coming years.

Left forward - Cristiano Ronaldo (Real Madrid) FIFPro XI - Cristiano Ronaldo (Real Madrid)
A deserving winner of this year's Ballon d'Or, Cristiano Ronaldo has a goals to games ratio that is simply frightening. Though accusations of 'but how would be perform on a wintery night at Stoke' have been levelled at Lionel Messi, the same cannot be said for Ronaldo. Been there, done that, swapped the t-shirt. It is only a genuine shame that he carries his national team quite so heavily, making it unlikely he will claim football's biggest prize. I do wonder how well Portugal might have done if Ronaldo had been part of the side with Luis Figo and the like at the height of his powers - the results would have been frightening!

Centre forward - Lionel Messi (Barcelona) FIFPro XI - Lionel Messi (Barcelona)
A fairly quiet year by Lionel Messi's standard - though it is worth noting that he reached a World Cup final, scoring over 40 goals along the way! He hasn't quite had the same drive and momentum as a few seasons ago, with injury beginning to curtail his playing time and affecting form. Awarded the 'Player of the Tournament' (though this is disputed), he got Argentina out of tough spots time after time and dragged them kicking and screaming into the latter stages. Though his club side has had a disappointing season, leading to questions about the little Argentine's future, I remain convinced he will be a Barcelona player, scoring ridiculous amounts of goals for years to come.

Right forward - Arjen Robben (Bayern Munich) FIFPro XI - Arjen Robben (Bayern Munich)
Having watched Manchester City play Bayern Munich in the Champions League this season, I can honestly say that Robben is the only player that, every time he received the ball, I almost expected to score. Having helped Bayern to dominate the Bundesliga, the Dutch master terrorised the world champions Spain in Group C of the World Cup, scoring twice and running Sergio Ramos ragged all game in the 5-1 crushing. The ball looks forever glued to his feet, and though you can often accuse him of being greedy at times, you can hardly blame him when he scores so often. I'm sure Jose Mourinho will be looking at Robben as 'the one that got away' for Chelsea.

Bench: Thibaut Courtois (Atletico Madrid/Chelsea), Sergio Ramos (Real Madrid), Yaya Toure (Manchester City), Neymar (Barcelona), Gareth Bale (Real Madrid), Diego Costa (Atletico Madrid/Chelsea), Sergio Aguero (Manchester City)

Unlike the FIFPro XI announced on Monday, I think there can be little complaints about my alternative - though I would say that! Interestingly, only six of my side made it into the official team, demonstrating the strength of a number of teams around the world. Though my team is made up of just four teams, there are justifiable replacements for a number of these positions (just not David Luiz or Angel Di Maria!).

Who would make your team?