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?).
Analysis of sporting events, talking points and controversies.
Showing posts with label Cup. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Cup. Show all posts
Saturday, 14 March 2015
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.
Sunday, 8 December 2013
World Cup 2014 Draw: 1982 Revisited?
After a month's sabbatical (whilst I attempted to find my full-time career, which I am glad to say I have), I am back and writing! And what an event to restart my blogs with. Despite it feeling like a matter of nano-seconds since the extra-time volley from Andres Iniesta secured Spain's first World Cup success, Brazil 2014 is just around the corner. With the South American state being the undisputed mecca of world football (international at least), each of the 32 qualifiers will have been hoping for a kind draw to prolong their experience of the footballing carnival atmosphere. And on Friday (alongside rather muted claims of racism), the sides discovered their fates.
For England, after a hard-fought campaign, whose place in the finals were once again decided on just the final day against Poland, hopes of a kind draw were particularly strong. Going through a period widely described as a 'transition period' (I hate that phrase), after struggling in South Africa and in a seemingly simple qualifying group for Brazil, little is expected for the Three Lions this time around. At least in the minds of the sane anyway. In a BBC poll taken directly before the draw was made, a delusional 5.2% of people tipped England to win the World Cup. That made them 8th favourites! If we look at this positively, at least 95% of the British people can be considered sane. But to place England in the top quarter of teams is ridiculous. As we saw in the pair of friendlies last month, both Germany and Chile are better than us. I think we can also safely assume that we cannot be expected to compete with sides like Spain, Brazil, Argentina, and with rising sides like Uruguay, Columbia and Belgium all seeming to have far too much momentum for Roy Hodgson's men, 8th seems unlikely. Outside that list, European giants in Portugal, Italy, France and Holland. A kind draw was imperative.
And so onto the draw, and my predictions for each of the groups:
Group A: Brazil, Croatia, Mexico, Cameroon
One of my favourite groups. Competitive throughout, and though the hosts may have the advantage, the second spot is well and truly up for grabs. None of the three sides had particularly good qualifying campaigns, with all struggling in the playoffs. I would expect Brazil to progress as group winners, and purely on experience I will pick Mexico for spot number two.
Group B: Spain, Holland, Chile, Australia
I feel so sorry for the Aussies. Though they may be obliterating our cricket side down under, but they have been dealt a ridiculous hand for the World Cup. The reigning champions and the runners up, with the Alexis Sanchez-inspired Chile, makes up an incredibly tough task. Though for the neutrals this group will be interesting, as I could conceivably see Holland exit at this stage, the two Europeans are favourites to progress.
Group C: Columbia, Greece, Ivory Coast, Japan
One of the more cut-and-dried groups. Though Japan may seem capable of springing a surprise, Ivory Coast and Columbia must be favourites to progress. Unfortunately for Greece, despite their recent improvement, I can see them getting the dreaded nul point in Brazil.
Group D: Uruguay, England, Costa Rica, Italy
Though 5.2% (and I suspect more) of England fans will not want to admit it, this too appears to be a fairly obvious choice. Uruguay, with one of the greatest strike forces in world football (for those of you that do not follow football, that is Paris Saint Germain's Edinson Cavani and Liverpool's Luis Suarez. But if you don't follow football, that probably means nothing to you either!) And Italy, the side that eliminated England from Euro 2012, and with a rejuvenated Mario Balotelli since his move to Milan. Though Costa Rica will be the proverbial whipping boys of the group, I expect England to suffer their first group stage exit since 1982.
Group E: Switzerland, Ecuador, France, Honduras
The group that England wanted. And typical it should fall to France. So enigmatic in international competitions in recent years, we have seen France reach the final of two of the last five World Cups, but they have also perished in the group stage of the same amount. The other three have never really had much success in recent years, with Switzerland's rise into the top 8 of world football being greeted with derision by many. I think that France will return to their best to take top spot, and after a hard scrap, I wouldn't be surprised to see Ecuador in second.
Group F: Argentina, Bosnia-Herzagovina, Iran, Nigeria
At least we will be able to see the skills of Lionel Messi and Sergio Aguero on show, because Argentina should cruise through this group, scoring plenty of goals in the process. The competition's only debutants, Bosnia, should also feel relatively confident about their chances to progress, as neither Iran nor Nigeria fill international football sides with dread. I think those two will progess, and the Bosnian fairytale can continue.
Group G: Germany, Portugal, Ghana, USA
Another intriguing prospect. The two European giants will be the favourites to progress, but we have seen what happens to Portugal when Ronaldo gets isolated. The Iberians are too often reliant on the Real Madrid striker, and I would imagine that Ghana, though not back by a continent like 4 years ago, will be there to capitalise should the Portuguese stutter.
Group H: Belgium, Algeria, Russia, South Korea
Belgium's meteoric rise has been commented on by many, as they have been the side to slip under the radar for the majority of the qualifying campaign. With the likes of Eden Hazard, Vincent Kompany, Romelu Lukaku and Simon Mignolet, they have some of the Premier League's best players, and I would expect them to progress easily here. Russia would be my second choice, as though we hear little of them in the years between, they seem to turn up for international competitions.
As I mentioned, England have not failed to progress from a World Cup group since 1982. However, I would argue that they have not had a weaker squad since that point than the one we find ourselves with at present. Though the future looks promising, with youngsters like Ross Barkley, Jack Wilshere and Ravel Morrison making headlines in the Premier League this season, we may have to go through a spell of under-performing before we return to the knockout phases once more.
For England, after a hard-fought campaign, whose place in the finals were once again decided on just the final day against Poland, hopes of a kind draw were particularly strong. Going through a period widely described as a 'transition period' (I hate that phrase), after struggling in South Africa and in a seemingly simple qualifying group for Brazil, little is expected for the Three Lions this time around. At least in the minds of the sane anyway. In a BBC poll taken directly before the draw was made, a delusional 5.2% of people tipped England to win the World Cup. That made them 8th favourites! If we look at this positively, at least 95% of the British people can be considered sane. But to place England in the top quarter of teams is ridiculous. As we saw in the pair of friendlies last month, both Germany and Chile are better than us. I think we can also safely assume that we cannot be expected to compete with sides like Spain, Brazil, Argentina, and with rising sides like Uruguay, Columbia and Belgium all seeming to have far too much momentum for Roy Hodgson's men, 8th seems unlikely. Outside that list, European giants in Portugal, Italy, France and Holland. A kind draw was imperative.
And so onto the draw, and my predictions for each of the groups:
Group A: Brazil, Croatia, Mexico, Cameroon
One of my favourite groups. Competitive throughout, and though the hosts may have the advantage, the second spot is well and truly up for grabs. None of the three sides had particularly good qualifying campaigns, with all struggling in the playoffs. I would expect Brazil to progress as group winners, and purely on experience I will pick Mexico for spot number two.
Group B: Spain, Holland, Chile, Australia
I feel so sorry for the Aussies. Though they may be obliterating our cricket side down under, but they have been dealt a ridiculous hand for the World Cup. The reigning champions and the runners up, with the Alexis Sanchez-inspired Chile, makes up an incredibly tough task. Though for the neutrals this group will be interesting, as I could conceivably see Holland exit at this stage, the two Europeans are favourites to progress.
Group C: Columbia, Greece, Ivory Coast, Japan
One of the more cut-and-dried groups. Though Japan may seem capable of springing a surprise, Ivory Coast and Columbia must be favourites to progress. Unfortunately for Greece, despite their recent improvement, I can see them getting the dreaded nul point in Brazil.
Group D: Uruguay, England, Costa Rica, Italy
Though 5.2% (and I suspect more) of England fans will not want to admit it, this too appears to be a fairly obvious choice. Uruguay, with one of the greatest strike forces in world football (for those of you that do not follow football, that is Paris Saint Germain's Edinson Cavani and Liverpool's Luis Suarez. But if you don't follow football, that probably means nothing to you either!) And Italy, the side that eliminated England from Euro 2012, and with a rejuvenated Mario Balotelli since his move to Milan. Though Costa Rica will be the proverbial whipping boys of the group, I expect England to suffer their first group stage exit since 1982.
Group E: Switzerland, Ecuador, France, Honduras
The group that England wanted. And typical it should fall to France. So enigmatic in international competitions in recent years, we have seen France reach the final of two of the last five World Cups, but they have also perished in the group stage of the same amount. The other three have never really had much success in recent years, with Switzerland's rise into the top 8 of world football being greeted with derision by many. I think that France will return to their best to take top spot, and after a hard scrap, I wouldn't be surprised to see Ecuador in second.
Group F: Argentina, Bosnia-Herzagovina, Iran, Nigeria
At least we will be able to see the skills of Lionel Messi and Sergio Aguero on show, because Argentina should cruise through this group, scoring plenty of goals in the process. The competition's only debutants, Bosnia, should also feel relatively confident about their chances to progress, as neither Iran nor Nigeria fill international football sides with dread. I think those two will progess, and the Bosnian fairytale can continue.
Group G: Germany, Portugal, Ghana, USA
Another intriguing prospect. The two European giants will be the favourites to progress, but we have seen what happens to Portugal when Ronaldo gets isolated. The Iberians are too often reliant on the Real Madrid striker, and I would imagine that Ghana, though not back by a continent like 4 years ago, will be there to capitalise should the Portuguese stutter.
Group H: Belgium, Algeria, Russia, South Korea
Belgium's meteoric rise has been commented on by many, as they have been the side to slip under the radar for the majority of the qualifying campaign. With the likes of Eden Hazard, Vincent Kompany, Romelu Lukaku and Simon Mignolet, they have some of the Premier League's best players, and I would expect them to progress easily here. Russia would be my second choice, as though we hear little of them in the years between, they seem to turn up for international competitions.
As I mentioned, England have not failed to progress from a World Cup group since 1982. However, I would argue that they have not had a weaker squad since that point than the one we find ourselves with at present. Though the future looks promising, with youngsters like Ross Barkley, Jack Wilshere and Ravel Morrison making headlines in the Premier League this season, we may have to go through a spell of under-performing before we return to the knockout phases once more.
Tuesday, 15 October 2013
England Series: The Developing - The Future's Bright?
In the build-up to Tuesday's do-or-die fixture at home to Poland, I have been running an England mini-series, looking at the talking points that have haunted the England side's preparations, and looking at their chances going forward. A few weeks ago, I gave my opinion on Greg Dyke's comments that England should be looking to reach the semi-finals of the Euro 2020 competition, and win the World Cup in 2022 in Qatar. This assumes that the groundwork is already in place for England to become a viable winner of trophies, as Spain's 'Golden Age' really began a decade or so previously, with the change of several rules regarding training of youngsters. Using the State of the Game report, as well as evidence from the current England squad and the lower leagues, I will examine just how much creedence can be given to Dyke's claims. I dismissed them a few weeks ago-was I wrong to?
After a year and a half of relentless qualification matches, England find themselves on the brink of getting to yet another major tournament. After a morale boosting victory against Montenegro on Friday (the review of which can be found here), only Poland stand between our country and a place in Brazil next year. Whilst few (including the majority of the FA) expect us to achieve any real success in Rio, the plans above indicate that victory is expected in the coming decades. Having seen 'The State of the Game' report, this final post of my six-part England series considers the future of English football, asking whether the majority of our next few tournaments' teams will be found from the top teams, or if the lower leagues could be the place where we will begin finding the next generation of our national team.
Bearing in mind the target for an England victory is the Qatar World Cup in 2022, I wonder just how many of our current crop of players will still be around come that competition. Given that this World Cup is nearly a decade away, it is quite obvious that only players under the age of 25 currently will realistically have any chance of playing in Qatar. This obviously rules out the older members of our current squad, with the likes of Lampard, Gerrard and Cole more likely to retire within the next five years. More surprising is the amount of players that we will not realistically have at our disposal in ten years. If we take the cut-off point as being 25, with anyone older than that unlikely to travel to the Middle East, I will now list the ages and players that will not be there.
31-Phil Jagielka, Jermain Defoe, Joleon Lescott
30-Ben Foster
29-Glen Johnson
28-Leighton Baines, Ashley Young
27-Wayne Rooney, Gary Cahill, James Milner
26-Joe Hart, Aaron Lennon
As you can see, the vast majority of this group are first-team players, all of which will be missed massively, and all of which will need to be replaced. Arguably the only first team players that will remain, having discarded these, are Kyle Walker (23), Andros Townsend (21), Phil Jones (21), Jack Wilshere (21), Tom Cleverley (23), Theo Walcott (24), Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain (20), Daniel Sturridge (24) and Danny Welbeck (22). Whilst these are all good players, it leaves a considerable hole in the English team. Who could we possibly replace our outgoing stars with?
As I discussed in my last post, 'The State of the Game' report has shown that only 32% of the minutes played in the Premier League were played by Englishmen, compared to Spaniards making up 59% in their home country, and Germans making up 50%. This certainly leaves us at a disadvantage when it comes to producing young, bright talent. However, are there any talented youngsters currently breaking into the top flight that we could potentially earmark at this early stage? Andros Townsend is certainly one of these, as he has proven himself to be worth more to Spurs than £30 Million man Erik Lamela in the early part of the season, earning himself his first England call up for the match on Friday. However, even he would be turning 30 as the 2022 tournament kicked off. Perhaps the best thing to is to look at the younger age-groups in English national football. Looking at the U-21s and U-19s, I have produced perhaps 7 names that may be of England fans for the future, that will all be towards the peak of their careers come 2022.
Southampton's James Ward-Prowse, a product of the Saints' excellent youth system, is only 18, and has already been playing semi-regular football in the Premier League. With a handful of appearances this season already, I see no reason why the youngster cannot kick on and challenge for an England place in the near future. Ravel Morrison, once of Manchester United, and now plying his trade for West Ham is another. A name that recently has been hyped up, and one that Sir Alex Ferguson even tipped for stardom. At 20, he has perhaps taken a little while longer to develop than initially expected, but if he maintains the form that he has shown at the beginning of this season, I see no reason why the central midfielder couldn't push Jack Wilshere all the way for a starting place in Qatar. The same applies to Wilfried Zaha. The recent Manchester United signing burst onto the international scene earlier this year, with a single cap to his name. He has perhaps become another casualty of the 'bigger club', where competition for places stunts the growth of young talents. Nevertheless, he still has plenty of time to prove himself, and oust Theo Walcott from his position. He will be competing with two more exciting wingers, however. Liverpool's Raheem Sterling, who had such a fantastic season for the Merseyside club last year, and Norwich's Nathan Redmond, who looks every inch a great winger this season, will also be vying for starting places. Ross Barkley ends the wealth of talented midfielders that England are cultivating, as the 19 year-old Evertonian has shown just how good a player he is over the last two seasons at Goodison Park, and I would not be surprised to see him get a cap in the near future. Finally, up-front, West Brom's Saido Berahino looks a positive prospect. Having scored a stunning finish at Old Trafford, the youngster has been scoring bagfuls in the League Cup, and he could be another to make the jump to international level. I have purposefully left out Adnan Januzaj, as I personally do not believe that the United winger should choose to represent England, having lived elsewhere and formed bonds with another country for the majority of his life.
As we can see, midfield seems to be an area that England have covered for the Qatar World Cup. Up-front, Saido Berahino can add to the likes of Daniel Sturridge, Danny Welbeck and even Andy Carroll, if he forces his way back into the fold. However, based purely on Premier League youngsters, the squad is perilously thin on goalkeepers and defenders. Can promising players from the lower leagues solve this?
Quite simply, no. There are perhaps only four names of players plying their trades in the Championship or below that may make it into the England squad any time in the near future. Though he technically is owned by Stoke, Jack Butland has played the vast majority of his career at Championship level, currently playing for Barnsley. He is an excellent goalkeeper, but one that has not quite reached his true potential as yet. The same could not be said for Tom Ince. The 21-year-old is lighting up the Championship at the minute, and has already been the subject of a bid from Liverpool. I fully expect to see him in and around the England squad within the next few years. Similarly, Will Hughes is another exceptional prospect. The 18-year-old Derby County man has had to fend off interest from the two Manchester clubs and Chelsea to keep playing regular football, and I suspect that he is a real talent for the future. The final name is Danny Ings. Though not consistent enough to really merit significant hype, the Burnley man has had his best season so far, scoring goals for fun in England's second tier. It will be the step up to the Premier League that decides whether he will be international class, or if he will go the same way as David Nugent.
From this analysis, it looks as though the lower leagues actually have a smaller role to play in the shaping of English talent than the Premier League. This would be a concern if it were true, but I think it is not. If we look at many of the names that have just been discussed, along with the names that will still be around the England squad in 2022, we see a significant amount of lower league involvement in their progress. Looking at the names in the current squad, Kyle Walker spent time at Sheffield United, Tom Cleverley had spells at Watford and Leicester, both Alex Oxlade Chamberlain and Theo Walcott began their careers at Southampton, Danny Welbeck had a brief stay at Preston and Andros Townsend played at 8 different football league clubs! The Football League, then, has contributed to many of our current internationals. But what about those for the future? Have they all come from Premier League youth academies?
The future prospects also show signs of Football League involvement. Of those mentioned above, only James Ward-Prowse and Raheem Sterling have been brought up entirely by Premier League clubs, playing only in the top division. Ravel Morrison had a season-long loan at Birmingham, whilst Nathan Redmond began his career there, leaving only this summer. Saido Berahino spent time on loan at Northampton Town, whilst Ross Barkley also went out on loan to Leeds and Sheffield Wednesday. Wilfried Zaha spent almost the entirety of his fledgling career at Crystal Palace, helping them to the Premier League in 2013. So what role do the lower leagues play in the development of the England squad? The fact that the 'State of the Game' report indicates that the Championship's English players make up 70.5% of the minutes played in the second tier last season, up 7% on 2007/8, tells us that the Championship is rapidly becoming a cauldron for young, British talent. This is especially true when you consider the amount of loan signings that we can see from Premier League clubs to Football League ones. This means that the Football League, and the Championship in particular, will be a significant contributor to any England side of the future.
Can the lower leagues help England win the 2022 World Cup? In my opinion, unless Barnet or someone help discover the new Lionel Messi or Cristiano Ronaldo, I doubt it. We need a complete change of our grassroots system, and a much more nurturing attitude to our young English players. The loan system is valuable, but we need plenty of young English players, like Barkley and Wilshere playing regularly in the Premier League. Should we overhaul the system, we can win the 2022 World Cup. However, I feel that we are still some way from an overhaul, and therefore, still some way from ending our near-50 year hoodoo.
After a year and a half of relentless qualification matches, England find themselves on the brink of getting to yet another major tournament. After a morale boosting victory against Montenegro on Friday (the review of which can be found here), only Poland stand between our country and a place in Brazil next year. Whilst few (including the majority of the FA) expect us to achieve any real success in Rio, the plans above indicate that victory is expected in the coming decades. Having seen 'The State of the Game' report, this final post of my six-part England series considers the future of English football, asking whether the majority of our next few tournaments' teams will be found from the top teams, or if the lower leagues could be the place where we will begin finding the next generation of our national team.
Bearing in mind the target for an England victory is the Qatar World Cup in 2022, I wonder just how many of our current crop of players will still be around come that competition. Given that this World Cup is nearly a decade away, it is quite obvious that only players under the age of 25 currently will realistically have any chance of playing in Qatar. This obviously rules out the older members of our current squad, with the likes of Lampard, Gerrard and Cole more likely to retire within the next five years. More surprising is the amount of players that we will not realistically have at our disposal in ten years. If we take the cut-off point as being 25, with anyone older than that unlikely to travel to the Middle East, I will now list the ages and players that will not be there.
31-Phil Jagielka, Jermain Defoe, Joleon Lescott
30-Ben Foster
29-Glen Johnson
28-Leighton Baines, Ashley Young
27-Wayne Rooney, Gary Cahill, James Milner
26-Joe Hart, Aaron Lennon
As you can see, the vast majority of this group are first-team players, all of which will be missed massively, and all of which will need to be replaced. Arguably the only first team players that will remain, having discarded these, are Kyle Walker (23), Andros Townsend (21), Phil Jones (21), Jack Wilshere (21), Tom Cleverley (23), Theo Walcott (24), Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain (20), Daniel Sturridge (24) and Danny Welbeck (22). Whilst these are all good players, it leaves a considerable hole in the English team. Who could we possibly replace our outgoing stars with?
As I discussed in my last post, 'The State of the Game' report has shown that only 32% of the minutes played in the Premier League were played by Englishmen, compared to Spaniards making up 59% in their home country, and Germans making up 50%. This certainly leaves us at a disadvantage when it comes to producing young, bright talent. However, are there any talented youngsters currently breaking into the top flight that we could potentially earmark at this early stage? Andros Townsend is certainly one of these, as he has proven himself to be worth more to Spurs than £30 Million man Erik Lamela in the early part of the season, earning himself his first England call up for the match on Friday. However, even he would be turning 30 as the 2022 tournament kicked off. Perhaps the best thing to is to look at the younger age-groups in English national football. Looking at the U-21s and U-19s, I have produced perhaps 7 names that may be of England fans for the future, that will all be towards the peak of their careers come 2022.
Southampton's James Ward-Prowse, a product of the Saints' excellent youth system, is only 18, and has already been playing semi-regular football in the Premier League. With a handful of appearances this season already, I see no reason why the youngster cannot kick on and challenge for an England place in the near future. Ravel Morrison, once of Manchester United, and now plying his trade for West Ham is another. A name that recently has been hyped up, and one that Sir Alex Ferguson even tipped for stardom. At 20, he has perhaps taken a little while longer to develop than initially expected, but if he maintains the form that he has shown at the beginning of this season, I see no reason why the central midfielder couldn't push Jack Wilshere all the way for a starting place in Qatar. The same applies to Wilfried Zaha. The recent Manchester United signing burst onto the international scene earlier this year, with a single cap to his name. He has perhaps become another casualty of the 'bigger club', where competition for places stunts the growth of young talents. Nevertheless, he still has plenty of time to prove himself, and oust Theo Walcott from his position. He will be competing with two more exciting wingers, however. Liverpool's Raheem Sterling, who had such a fantastic season for the Merseyside club last year, and Norwich's Nathan Redmond, who looks every inch a great winger this season, will also be vying for starting places. Ross Barkley ends the wealth of talented midfielders that England are cultivating, as the 19 year-old Evertonian has shown just how good a player he is over the last two seasons at Goodison Park, and I would not be surprised to see him get a cap in the near future. Finally, up-front, West Brom's Saido Berahino looks a positive prospect. Having scored a stunning finish at Old Trafford, the youngster has been scoring bagfuls in the League Cup, and he could be another to make the jump to international level. I have purposefully left out Adnan Januzaj, as I personally do not believe that the United winger should choose to represent England, having lived elsewhere and formed bonds with another country for the majority of his life.
As we can see, midfield seems to be an area that England have covered for the Qatar World Cup. Up-front, Saido Berahino can add to the likes of Daniel Sturridge, Danny Welbeck and even Andy Carroll, if he forces his way back into the fold. However, based purely on Premier League youngsters, the squad is perilously thin on goalkeepers and defenders. Can promising players from the lower leagues solve this?
Quite simply, no. There are perhaps only four names of players plying their trades in the Championship or below that may make it into the England squad any time in the near future. Though he technically is owned by Stoke, Jack Butland has played the vast majority of his career at Championship level, currently playing for Barnsley. He is an excellent goalkeeper, but one that has not quite reached his true potential as yet. The same could not be said for Tom Ince. The 21-year-old is lighting up the Championship at the minute, and has already been the subject of a bid from Liverpool. I fully expect to see him in and around the England squad within the next few years. Similarly, Will Hughes is another exceptional prospect. The 18-year-old Derby County man has had to fend off interest from the two Manchester clubs and Chelsea to keep playing regular football, and I suspect that he is a real talent for the future. The final name is Danny Ings. Though not consistent enough to really merit significant hype, the Burnley man has had his best season so far, scoring goals for fun in England's second tier. It will be the step up to the Premier League that decides whether he will be international class, or if he will go the same way as David Nugent.
From this analysis, it looks as though the lower leagues actually have a smaller role to play in the shaping of English talent than the Premier League. This would be a concern if it were true, but I think it is not. If we look at many of the names that have just been discussed, along with the names that will still be around the England squad in 2022, we see a significant amount of lower league involvement in their progress. Looking at the names in the current squad, Kyle Walker spent time at Sheffield United, Tom Cleverley had spells at Watford and Leicester, both Alex Oxlade Chamberlain and Theo Walcott began their careers at Southampton, Danny Welbeck had a brief stay at Preston and Andros Townsend played at 8 different football league clubs! The Football League, then, has contributed to many of our current internationals. But what about those for the future? Have they all come from Premier League youth academies?
The future prospects also show signs of Football League involvement. Of those mentioned above, only James Ward-Prowse and Raheem Sterling have been brought up entirely by Premier League clubs, playing only in the top division. Ravel Morrison had a season-long loan at Birmingham, whilst Nathan Redmond began his career there, leaving only this summer. Saido Berahino spent time on loan at Northampton Town, whilst Ross Barkley also went out on loan to Leeds and Sheffield Wednesday. Wilfried Zaha spent almost the entirety of his fledgling career at Crystal Palace, helping them to the Premier League in 2013. So what role do the lower leagues play in the development of the England squad? The fact that the 'State of the Game' report indicates that the Championship's English players make up 70.5% of the minutes played in the second tier last season, up 7% on 2007/8, tells us that the Championship is rapidly becoming a cauldron for young, British talent. This is especially true when you consider the amount of loan signings that we can see from Premier League clubs to Football League ones. This means that the Football League, and the Championship in particular, will be a significant contributor to any England side of the future.
Can the lower leagues help England win the 2022 World Cup? In my opinion, unless Barnet or someone help discover the new Lionel Messi or Cristiano Ronaldo, I doubt it. We need a complete change of our grassroots system, and a much more nurturing attitude to our young English players. The loan system is valuable, but we need plenty of young English players, like Barkley and Wilshere playing regularly in the Premier League. Should we overhaul the system, we can win the 2022 World Cup. However, I feel that we are still some way from an overhaul, and therefore, still some way from ending our near-50 year hoodoo.
Monday, 14 October 2013
England Series: What Does 'The State of the Game' Mean For The National Team?
In the build-up to Tuesday's do-or-die fixture at home to Poland, I will be running an England mini-series, looking at the talking points that have haunted the England side's preparations, and looking at their chances going forward. A few weeks ago, I gave my opinion on Greg Dyke's comments that England should be looking to reach the semi-finals of the Euro 2020 competition, and win the World Cup in 2022 in Qatar. This assumes that the groundwork is already in place for England to become a viable winner of trophies, as Spain's 'Golden Age' really began a decade or so previously, with the change of several rules regarding training of youngsters. Using the State of the Game report, as well as evidence from the current England squad and the lower leagues, I will examine just how much creedence can be given to Dyke's claims. I dismissed them a few weeks ago-was I wrong to?
28th February 1999. The last time any Premier League side fielded an entire XI of English players. The team: Aston Villa. The match: Coventry City vs Villa. The scoreline: 4-1. Which perhaps explains why it has never happened since. Nevertheless, it is slightly worrying when you consider that less than a third of the Premier League minutes played were by English players, after staggering decline of English players in the Premier League. This is the reality as described by the BBC State of the Game report last week. However, is it really any different around the continent? With the influx of players from Europe and, especially, South America, is it really that surprising that the leagues have been diluted? This post will compare the plight of the English game to other European leagues, before assessing why this has occurred, in order to see just how much of an English specific problem this is. Finally, by assessing the performance of the England team in the recent World Cup Qualifiers, we can further compare them as a footballing force to other European nations.
First, I think it would be useful to outline the core findings of this report. The BBC State of the Game report is taken once every 5 years, in order to get a basic lay of the land during the intermittent period. The 2013 report stated that the percentage of minutes played by English players in the Premier League has dipped below a third of the overall minutes played. The 32.26% that English players have played this season is a dip on the 2007/8 stat of 35.43%, and, as a result, is the lowest ever on record. This has prompted many in the game to make statements about how worrying this should be considered, almost blaming the Premier League for the lack of English talent. Personally, I believe that they have the cause and effect the wrong way around. Whilst the influx of foreign players inevitably affects the national squad, it is not the fault of other players if England as a nation are not the force they once were. If the league wants to compete with the other European leagues (e.g. Spain, Italy and Germany), they need to be providing the best talent. If that is not from England, as is the case at the minute, it is not the fault of the league.
One way of looking to see the influence of South American and African imports is to look at competing European leagues. Are imports really more prevalent in the Premier League than in the Bundesliga or La Liga? The State of the Game report indicates that perhaps there is an English-specific problem. La Liga, the league of the current World Cup holders, and winner of the last three major international tournaments available in Europe, Spain, shows that 59% of the minutes played were played by Spaniards. Meanwhile, in Germany, the Bundesliga's statistics are vastly similar to that of their Spanish counterparts, with Germans making up 50% of the minutes played. This clearly indicates that the Premier League relies far more on players from abroad than homegrown talents.
So why is there such a gap between the continental leagues and the Premier League? On the face of it, it doesn't make sense, as many of the big money transfers over the last few summers have been from Spanish or German clubs, not buying Spanish or German players. Looking purely at this season's transfers, whilst Real Madrid did sign two Spanish youngsters for large sums (Isco and Illaramendi), the majority of their transfer outlay were on foreign players (Bale, Casemiro and Carvajal). Barcelona's only signing was Brazilian Neymar, indicating that foreign players do still play a significant role when it comes to Spanish transfers. The same is true for the Bundesliga, where big name signings like Henrikh Mkhitaryan, Luis Gustavo, Thiago Alcantara and Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang were also brought in from abroad. However, whilst the big name transfers and the big teams are the ones more frequently focused on, the teams that really give the indication of the study are those further down the table. Looking at Spain, we can see that there are only two teams outside of the El Clasico pair that spent more than £20 Million on players. Similarly, in Germany, only three teams outside of the top two spent past that margin. Generally speaking, foreign players tend to be more expensive, so those that have spent large sums have generally brought in foreign talent. However, if we look at Premier League teams outside the Manchester clubs, eleven of the 18 clubs have spent beyond £20 Million in this recent transfer window. In England, there has been the school of thought that the better English players are rare and overpriced, and therefore too expensive for smaller clubs to buy, making foreign players a more affordable alternative. However, we can also see that the majority of big-name transfers have been foreign, with the likes of Willian, Lamela, Eriksen, Ozil and Osvaldo all coming in for large fees. This perhaps goes some way to explaining exactly why we have seen a decline in the percentage of minutes played by English players in the Premier League.
However, to what extent does this affect the England national team more than that of other nations? Do the players in the national squads get regular game time? Underneath I will lay out what I consider to be each of the nations' top squads (all 4-4-2 formation). This way we can see whether each of the sides' starting line-ups are playing regularly.
Spain: Casillas, Jordi Alba, Sergio Ramos, Pique, Arbeloa, Pedro, Xavi, Iniesta, Fabregas, Soldado, Negredo
Germany: Neuer, Lahm, Boateng, Hummels, Jansen, Muller, Ozil, Schweinsteiger, Kroos, Kiessling, Gomez
England: Hart, Walker, Cahill, Jagielka, Baines, Walcott, Gerrard, Lampard, Milner, Rooney, Sturridge
Looking at these XI's, we can see that in Spain's case, every single one of the names mentioned play week-in, week-out, with 9 of the 11 coming from the El Clasico pair. The other pair, both strikers, now play every match for their sides Tottenham and Manchester City respectively. This is a similar story for Germany. Every one of their XI plays on a weekly basis, with 7 of their players coming from Bayern Munich or Borussia Dortmund. For England, whilst the majority play every match, there are a few that have found they are in strong competition for their place at club level. Gary Cahill and Frank Lampard at Chelsea have both, at one time or another, found themselves ousted in favour of either David Luiz (in Cahill's case) or Ramires/Kevin De Bruyne (in Lampard's). James Milner has also found it difficult to break into the Manchester City midfield. Though he often starts the important matches, he is usually used as a bit-part player, covering for the likes of Jesus Navas and Fernandinho. Before the start of the season, even Wayne Rooney's place was not guaranteed at United, with the Englishman playing second fiddle to Robin van Persie for the majority of last season. His performances so far this season have won him his place back, but this shows that the influx of foreign players is affecting the national team. The differences are far more stark when we consider those that would be expecting to be on the bench. Spain's bench is an embarrasment of riches, with the likes of Valdes, Jesus Navas, David Silva, Juan Mata, Santi Cazorla all playing regular football. Germany's bench is much the same, with Adler, Khedira, Gotze, Mertesacker and Draxler in their first-team squads. Looking at those players pushing for the bench for England, Fraser Forster and Andros Townsend illustrate the rare exceptions to the rule. Players like Jack Wilshere, Danny Welbeck, Tom Cleverley, Phil Jones, Chris Smalling and Jermain Defoe all have a battle on their hands to retain their place, with many of them having to settle for benchwarmer for part of the season. This will have a disastrous effect on the strength in depth of the squad, as without match practice, the England team will be left far behind by their European rivals, as has been the case in recent years.
How does the English game rectify this? As I stated earlier, the Premier League prides itself on being (arguably) the best league in the world, and with that status comes a lot of money. The league can only work with what they are given, and if the problems with the English players begin at the very bottom, as I suspect, there is where we need to start. Enforcing 'minimum English' rules will only be to the detriment of the Premier League, as we will inevitably see the top talent elsewhere. What we have to do is train the English top talents properly here. By bettering our training techniques, teaching technical ability over 'win at all costs', we should see some of the better players rise to the top at junior level. By nurturing our players properly, and teaching them the skills they need to succeed, there is no reason why we cannot follow Spain's example and have a 'Golden Generation'. We just need to get the grassroots organised correctly first.
28th February 1999. The last time any Premier League side fielded an entire XI of English players. The team: Aston Villa. The match: Coventry City vs Villa. The scoreline: 4-1. Which perhaps explains why it has never happened since. Nevertheless, it is slightly worrying when you consider that less than a third of the Premier League minutes played were by English players, after staggering decline of English players in the Premier League. This is the reality as described by the BBC State of the Game report last week. However, is it really any different around the continent? With the influx of players from Europe and, especially, South America, is it really that surprising that the leagues have been diluted? This post will compare the plight of the English game to other European leagues, before assessing why this has occurred, in order to see just how much of an English specific problem this is. Finally, by assessing the performance of the England team in the recent World Cup Qualifiers, we can further compare them as a footballing force to other European nations.
First, I think it would be useful to outline the core findings of this report. The BBC State of the Game report is taken once every 5 years, in order to get a basic lay of the land during the intermittent period. The 2013 report stated that the percentage of minutes played by English players in the Premier League has dipped below a third of the overall minutes played. The 32.26% that English players have played this season is a dip on the 2007/8 stat of 35.43%, and, as a result, is the lowest ever on record. This has prompted many in the game to make statements about how worrying this should be considered, almost blaming the Premier League for the lack of English talent. Personally, I believe that they have the cause and effect the wrong way around. Whilst the influx of foreign players inevitably affects the national squad, it is not the fault of other players if England as a nation are not the force they once were. If the league wants to compete with the other European leagues (e.g. Spain, Italy and Germany), they need to be providing the best talent. If that is not from England, as is the case at the minute, it is not the fault of the league.
One way of looking to see the influence of South American and African imports is to look at competing European leagues. Are imports really more prevalent in the Premier League than in the Bundesliga or La Liga? The State of the Game report indicates that perhaps there is an English-specific problem. La Liga, the league of the current World Cup holders, and winner of the last three major international tournaments available in Europe, Spain, shows that 59% of the minutes played were played by Spaniards. Meanwhile, in Germany, the Bundesliga's statistics are vastly similar to that of their Spanish counterparts, with Germans making up 50% of the minutes played. This clearly indicates that the Premier League relies far more on players from abroad than homegrown talents.
So why is there such a gap between the continental leagues and the Premier League? On the face of it, it doesn't make sense, as many of the big money transfers over the last few summers have been from Spanish or German clubs, not buying Spanish or German players. Looking purely at this season's transfers, whilst Real Madrid did sign two Spanish youngsters for large sums (Isco and Illaramendi), the majority of their transfer outlay were on foreign players (Bale, Casemiro and Carvajal). Barcelona's only signing was Brazilian Neymar, indicating that foreign players do still play a significant role when it comes to Spanish transfers. The same is true for the Bundesliga, where big name signings like Henrikh Mkhitaryan, Luis Gustavo, Thiago Alcantara and Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang were also brought in from abroad. However, whilst the big name transfers and the big teams are the ones more frequently focused on, the teams that really give the indication of the study are those further down the table. Looking at Spain, we can see that there are only two teams outside of the El Clasico pair that spent more than £20 Million on players. Similarly, in Germany, only three teams outside of the top two spent past that margin. Generally speaking, foreign players tend to be more expensive, so those that have spent large sums have generally brought in foreign talent. However, if we look at Premier League teams outside the Manchester clubs, eleven of the 18 clubs have spent beyond £20 Million in this recent transfer window. In England, there has been the school of thought that the better English players are rare and overpriced, and therefore too expensive for smaller clubs to buy, making foreign players a more affordable alternative. However, we can also see that the majority of big-name transfers have been foreign, with the likes of Willian, Lamela, Eriksen, Ozil and Osvaldo all coming in for large fees. This perhaps goes some way to explaining exactly why we have seen a decline in the percentage of minutes played by English players in the Premier League.
However, to what extent does this affect the England national team more than that of other nations? Do the players in the national squads get regular game time? Underneath I will lay out what I consider to be each of the nations' top squads (all 4-4-2 formation). This way we can see whether each of the sides' starting line-ups are playing regularly.
Spain: Casillas, Jordi Alba, Sergio Ramos, Pique, Arbeloa, Pedro, Xavi, Iniesta, Fabregas, Soldado, Negredo
Germany: Neuer, Lahm, Boateng, Hummels, Jansen, Muller, Ozil, Schweinsteiger, Kroos, Kiessling, Gomez
England: Hart, Walker, Cahill, Jagielka, Baines, Walcott, Gerrard, Lampard, Milner, Rooney, Sturridge
Looking at these XI's, we can see that in Spain's case, every single one of the names mentioned play week-in, week-out, with 9 of the 11 coming from the El Clasico pair. The other pair, both strikers, now play every match for their sides Tottenham and Manchester City respectively. This is a similar story for Germany. Every one of their XI plays on a weekly basis, with 7 of their players coming from Bayern Munich or Borussia Dortmund. For England, whilst the majority play every match, there are a few that have found they are in strong competition for their place at club level. Gary Cahill and Frank Lampard at Chelsea have both, at one time or another, found themselves ousted in favour of either David Luiz (in Cahill's case) or Ramires/Kevin De Bruyne (in Lampard's). James Milner has also found it difficult to break into the Manchester City midfield. Though he often starts the important matches, he is usually used as a bit-part player, covering for the likes of Jesus Navas and Fernandinho. Before the start of the season, even Wayne Rooney's place was not guaranteed at United, with the Englishman playing second fiddle to Robin van Persie for the majority of last season. His performances so far this season have won him his place back, but this shows that the influx of foreign players is affecting the national team. The differences are far more stark when we consider those that would be expecting to be on the bench. Spain's bench is an embarrasment of riches, with the likes of Valdes, Jesus Navas, David Silva, Juan Mata, Santi Cazorla all playing regular football. Germany's bench is much the same, with Adler, Khedira, Gotze, Mertesacker and Draxler in their first-team squads. Looking at those players pushing for the bench for England, Fraser Forster and Andros Townsend illustrate the rare exceptions to the rule. Players like Jack Wilshere, Danny Welbeck, Tom Cleverley, Phil Jones, Chris Smalling and Jermain Defoe all have a battle on their hands to retain their place, with many of them having to settle for benchwarmer for part of the season. This will have a disastrous effect on the strength in depth of the squad, as without match practice, the England team will be left far behind by their European rivals, as has been the case in recent years.
How does the English game rectify this? As I stated earlier, the Premier League prides itself on being (arguably) the best league in the world, and with that status comes a lot of money. The league can only work with what they are given, and if the problems with the English players begin at the very bottom, as I suspect, there is where we need to start. Enforcing 'minimum English' rules will only be to the detriment of the Premier League, as we will inevitably see the top talent elsewhere. What we have to do is train the English top talents properly here. By bettering our training techniques, teaching technical ability over 'win at all costs', we should see some of the better players rise to the top at junior level. By nurturing our players properly, and teaching them the skills they need to succeed, there is no reason why we cannot follow Spain's example and have a 'Golden Generation'. We just need to get the grassroots organised correctly first.
England Series: What The Montenegro Game Says
In the build-up to Tuesday's do-or-die fixture at home to Poland, I will be running an England mini-series, looking at the talking points that have haunted the England side's preparations, and looking at their chances going forward. A few weeks ago, I gave my opinion on Greg Dyke's comments that England should be looking to reach the semi-finals of the Euro 2020 competition, and win the World Cup in 2022 in Qatar. This assumes that the groundwork is already in place for England to become a viable winner of trophies, as Spain's 'Golden Age' really began a decade or so previously, with the change of several rules regarding training of youngsters. Using the State of the Game report, as well as evidence from the current England squad and the lower leagues, I will examine just how much creedence can be given to Dyke's claims. I dismissed them a few weeks ago-was I wrong to?
England vs Sheffield. That's how I thought best described the contest on Friday. Montenegro, a country populated by just 600,000 people, around the size of Sheffield, should have posed no threat to England, who outnumber them by 100 to 1. However, such has been the decline of England as a footballing nation over the last half century, we were unsure whether we would have the strength to beat the Montenegrin side. To be fair to the Eastern Europeans, Montenegro were the only country, having played them on two or more occasions, that England had never beaten. The history of the fixture, albeit only relatively recent, seemed to illustrate the difficulty of the task. Everyone will remember the game in Podgorica back in 2011, where Wayne Rooney was sent off in a 2-2 draw, an event that would force the England striker out of the first two Euro 2012 games.
This task was made somewhat more difficult by the additional pressure placed upon the final two matches of the World Cup Qualification Group. Despite remaining undefeated in Group H, England were not assured of qualification for the 2014 World Cup in Brazil. Too many draws (Poland (a) Ukraine (h&a) and Montenegro (a)) had seen the chasing pack latch onto the 1966 champions, meaning that two wins from their final two matches were required to guarantee qualification. The inconsistency of England, coupled with the aforementioned poor record against the recently formed Montenegrin side (carried by the likes of Mirko Vucinic and Stevan Jovetic) meant that the valuable three points were by no means guaranteed. However, after a slow and methodical first half, England got into their stride to run out comfortable 4-1 winners. This came as a massive relief to all around the ground, and places even more emphasis on tomorrow's game with the Poles.
England, as a footballing nation, tend to leave the public in a constant bipolar state. When we win, everyone proclaims that we are certainties for the World Cup or European Championship. When we lose, the press and the public come down on the team like a ton of bricks. After this weekend's result, I have identified 5 things that we can learn from the Montenegro game, in order to keep our expectations more on an even keel.
1) Don't Get Carried Away
Before I get into the more positive aspects of our play that we can take forward with us into further competitive matches, I will offer a word of warning. Though we have ended the only unbeaten record of any country who has played multiple games against us, this is no time to get ahead of ourselves. We have to refrain from our usual practice of over-hyping that performance. Yes, we played well, but it is important to remember that this was only Montenegro. A side that currently sits in 27th place in the FIFA World Rankings. Whilst this is a good result, it is not one that marks a significant step forward. England should be expecting to beat those around them and slightly ahead. Should they beat Portugal or Chile in a competitive game, then we can say they are moving forwards. However, giving our players an sense of invincibility could have catastrophic effects, in the short term (against Poland tomorrow) or more long term (the World Cup).
2) We Can Be Patient
Friday's game, for one of the first times in my memory, was one in which England were successfully patient. Ordinarily in must-win matches, England come out of the traps quickly, hounding the opposition's area. If we score an early goal, normally, an England win follows. However, should the 20 minute mark come and go without a goal, England's passing begins to become sloppy, and they end up inviting pressure on themselves. The crowd become restless, and this translates onto the pitch. England become more and more frustrated, often resulting in exactly the opposite result of their initial aim. A story we have seen on numerous occasions against smaller nations, particularly at Wembley.
However, the game against Montenegro saw England keep their cool. Despite being unable to break the stubborn wall of Montenegrin defenders in the opening half hour, England remained solid. Though the tempo did dip on occasion, they were never threatened defensively, and they did not let their heads go down. This paid off early in the second half, when Wayne Rooney was given the chance to give the Three Lions the lead. Rarely does he squander such an opportunity. Once the first went in, it was clear that others would follow. That they did, with only a brief scare after Damjanovic deflected in a wayward shot. Nevertheless, the performance showed great maturity from England, and one that I cannot recall be so evident previously.
3) Trust In Young Talent
At Friday lunchtime, the news broke that Spurs's young winger Andros Townsend would start his first game for England. This brought about widespread criticism, myself included, as I did not believe that testing out such an inexperienced player in such an important match would reap the rewards. How wrong was I? The 22 year old thrust the words of his dissenters back down their throats with a superb display from first whistle to last. Working tirelessly to break up the play and put England back on the front foot, the midfielder was excellent creatively when he got the chance, setting up many of our better chances. Having played so well, he capped his debut off with the perfect coup de gras: the goal of the night. With England slightly rocking after Damjanovic's improvised goal to take the lead back to 1, Townsend picked the ball up 25 yards from goal and let fly. The ball flew beyond the Montenegrin keeper to hand England their two-goal cushion back, and ensure that they would take the three points. A stunning debut for the winger, who I doubt could have dreamed of such a start to the season for both club and country.
4) We Have More Than Plan A
Credit must also go to the manager. Having had a turbulent week in the press, after Harry Redknapp's autobiography criticised the selection process of Hodgson, he would have been under intense scrutiny had he failed to win the game against Montenegro. His decision to hand the debut to Andros Townsend was completely vindicated, as was his decision to begin with a extremely positive lineup. Starting with three up front was an extremely risky tactic, and it paid off for Hodgson this time. Though he may not be as fortunate against other opponents, it would be unfair to claim that it was merely luck that saw England through the game. Hodgson is blamed when it may otherwise have been attributed to misfortune, so I see no reason why we should not praise him when it could be described as good fortune. His tactical knowledge enabled him to make small changes at half time, and these changes had an immediate impact. Pressure will remain on the former Fulham man on Tuesday, but his management of the situation on Friday can instil some confidence in his ability to take the team forward.
5) Defensive Partnerships Are Emerging
Finally, whilst this was something that I spotted predominantly during the Ukraine away game, it was clearly evident just how well Phil Jagielka and Gary Cahill have got to know each others' games at the heart of the England defence. The understanding between the pair was exceptional, and reminded me of the partnership that a young Rio Ferdinand and John Terry used to provide during the 'Golden Era' of English football. Whilst they are yet to be fully tested, they are certainly showing signs of connection, which will only be good moving forward. Baines also had an outstanding game on the left, and I feel that England have a ready made replacement for the aging Ashley Cole, who is perhaps past his best. The only area that remains of some concern, especially when considering the near future, is the right back position. Whilst Kyle Walker is an excellent attacking prospect, as well as a reasonable defender, the problem comes when attempting to play a more offensive winger (like Andros Townsend) with him on the right. Whilst against opposition like Montenegro this tactic may work, I would expect to see the like of James Milner on the right more often against the stronger sides, as he provides defensive cover for when the young right back bombs forward. Nevertheless, the England defence are finally showing signs of solidarity and stability, and this can only be a positive thing.
England have done, in Hodgson's own words 'half the job'. Having seen off Montenegro, the task does not get any easier. The home match against Poland may seem in England's favour at first glance, but players like Robert Lewandowski and Jakub Blaszczykowski will pose a significant threat to England. No-one wants a repeat performance of Croatia 2007! A win is essential. If we play as we did in the Montenegro game, taking into account the above 5 points, I feel we have enough to win the game. Take our foot off the gas for just a second, however, and we may see our World Cup dreams slip away.
England vs Sheffield. That's how I thought best described the contest on Friday. Montenegro, a country populated by just 600,000 people, around the size of Sheffield, should have posed no threat to England, who outnumber them by 100 to 1. However, such has been the decline of England as a footballing nation over the last half century, we were unsure whether we would have the strength to beat the Montenegrin side. To be fair to the Eastern Europeans, Montenegro were the only country, having played them on two or more occasions, that England had never beaten. The history of the fixture, albeit only relatively recent, seemed to illustrate the difficulty of the task. Everyone will remember the game in Podgorica back in 2011, where Wayne Rooney was sent off in a 2-2 draw, an event that would force the England striker out of the first two Euro 2012 games.
This task was made somewhat more difficult by the additional pressure placed upon the final two matches of the World Cup Qualification Group. Despite remaining undefeated in Group H, England were not assured of qualification for the 2014 World Cup in Brazil. Too many draws (Poland (a) Ukraine (h&a) and Montenegro (a)) had seen the chasing pack latch onto the 1966 champions, meaning that two wins from their final two matches were required to guarantee qualification. The inconsistency of England, coupled with the aforementioned poor record against the recently formed Montenegrin side (carried by the likes of Mirko Vucinic and Stevan Jovetic) meant that the valuable three points were by no means guaranteed. However, after a slow and methodical first half, England got into their stride to run out comfortable 4-1 winners. This came as a massive relief to all around the ground, and places even more emphasis on tomorrow's game with the Poles.
England, as a footballing nation, tend to leave the public in a constant bipolar state. When we win, everyone proclaims that we are certainties for the World Cup or European Championship. When we lose, the press and the public come down on the team like a ton of bricks. After this weekend's result, I have identified 5 things that we can learn from the Montenegro game, in order to keep our expectations more on an even keel.
1) Don't Get Carried Away
Before I get into the more positive aspects of our play that we can take forward with us into further competitive matches, I will offer a word of warning. Though we have ended the only unbeaten record of any country who has played multiple games against us, this is no time to get ahead of ourselves. We have to refrain from our usual practice of over-hyping that performance. Yes, we played well, but it is important to remember that this was only Montenegro. A side that currently sits in 27th place in the FIFA World Rankings. Whilst this is a good result, it is not one that marks a significant step forward. England should be expecting to beat those around them and slightly ahead. Should they beat Portugal or Chile in a competitive game, then we can say they are moving forwards. However, giving our players an sense of invincibility could have catastrophic effects, in the short term (against Poland tomorrow) or more long term (the World Cup).
2) We Can Be Patient
Friday's game, for one of the first times in my memory, was one in which England were successfully patient. Ordinarily in must-win matches, England come out of the traps quickly, hounding the opposition's area. If we score an early goal, normally, an England win follows. However, should the 20 minute mark come and go without a goal, England's passing begins to become sloppy, and they end up inviting pressure on themselves. The crowd become restless, and this translates onto the pitch. England become more and more frustrated, often resulting in exactly the opposite result of their initial aim. A story we have seen on numerous occasions against smaller nations, particularly at Wembley.
However, the game against Montenegro saw England keep their cool. Despite being unable to break the stubborn wall of Montenegrin defenders in the opening half hour, England remained solid. Though the tempo did dip on occasion, they were never threatened defensively, and they did not let their heads go down. This paid off early in the second half, when Wayne Rooney was given the chance to give the Three Lions the lead. Rarely does he squander such an opportunity. Once the first went in, it was clear that others would follow. That they did, with only a brief scare after Damjanovic deflected in a wayward shot. Nevertheless, the performance showed great maturity from England, and one that I cannot recall be so evident previously.
3) Trust In Young Talent
At Friday lunchtime, the news broke that Spurs's young winger Andros Townsend would start his first game for England. This brought about widespread criticism, myself included, as I did not believe that testing out such an inexperienced player in such an important match would reap the rewards. How wrong was I? The 22 year old thrust the words of his dissenters back down their throats with a superb display from first whistle to last. Working tirelessly to break up the play and put England back on the front foot, the midfielder was excellent creatively when he got the chance, setting up many of our better chances. Having played so well, he capped his debut off with the perfect coup de gras: the goal of the night. With England slightly rocking after Damjanovic's improvised goal to take the lead back to 1, Townsend picked the ball up 25 yards from goal and let fly. The ball flew beyond the Montenegrin keeper to hand England their two-goal cushion back, and ensure that they would take the three points. A stunning debut for the winger, who I doubt could have dreamed of such a start to the season for both club and country.
4) We Have More Than Plan A
Credit must also go to the manager. Having had a turbulent week in the press, after Harry Redknapp's autobiography criticised the selection process of Hodgson, he would have been under intense scrutiny had he failed to win the game against Montenegro. His decision to hand the debut to Andros Townsend was completely vindicated, as was his decision to begin with a extremely positive lineup. Starting with three up front was an extremely risky tactic, and it paid off for Hodgson this time. Though he may not be as fortunate against other opponents, it would be unfair to claim that it was merely luck that saw England through the game. Hodgson is blamed when it may otherwise have been attributed to misfortune, so I see no reason why we should not praise him when it could be described as good fortune. His tactical knowledge enabled him to make small changes at half time, and these changes had an immediate impact. Pressure will remain on the former Fulham man on Tuesday, but his management of the situation on Friday can instil some confidence in his ability to take the team forward.
5) Defensive Partnerships Are Emerging
Finally, whilst this was something that I spotted predominantly during the Ukraine away game, it was clearly evident just how well Phil Jagielka and Gary Cahill have got to know each others' games at the heart of the England defence. The understanding between the pair was exceptional, and reminded me of the partnership that a young Rio Ferdinand and John Terry used to provide during the 'Golden Era' of English football. Whilst they are yet to be fully tested, they are certainly showing signs of connection, which will only be good moving forward. Baines also had an outstanding game on the left, and I feel that England have a ready made replacement for the aging Ashley Cole, who is perhaps past his best. The only area that remains of some concern, especially when considering the near future, is the right back position. Whilst Kyle Walker is an excellent attacking prospect, as well as a reasonable defender, the problem comes when attempting to play a more offensive winger (like Andros Townsend) with him on the right. Whilst against opposition like Montenegro this tactic may work, I would expect to see the like of James Milner on the right more often against the stronger sides, as he provides defensive cover for when the young right back bombs forward. Nevertheless, the England defence are finally showing signs of solidarity and stability, and this can only be a positive thing.
England have done, in Hodgson's own words 'half the job'. Having seen off Montenegro, the task does not get any easier. The home match against Poland may seem in England's favour at first glance, but players like Robert Lewandowski and Jakub Blaszczykowski will pose a significant threat to England. No-one wants a repeat performance of Croatia 2007! A win is essential. If we play as we did in the Montenegro game, taking into account the above 5 points, I feel we have enough to win the game. Take our foot off the gas for just a second, however, and we may see our World Cup dreams slip away.
Saturday, 12 October 2013
England Series: Joe Hart: Over-Reliance Breeds Complacency
In the build-up to Tuesday's do-or-die fixture at home to Poland, I will be running an England mini-series, looking at the talking points that have haunted the England side's preparations, and looking at their chances going forward. A few weeks ago, I gave my opinion on Greg Dyke's comments that England should be looking to reach the semi-finals of the Euro 2020 competition, and win the World Cup in 2022 in Qatar. This assumes that the groundwork is already in place for England to become a viable winner of trophies, as Spain's 'Golden Age' really began a decade or so previously, with the change of several rules regarding training of youngsters. Using the State of the Game report, as well as evidence from the current England squad and the lower leagues, I will examine just how much creedence can be given to Dyke's claims. I dismissed them a few weeks ago-was I wrong to?
However, I will start with the talking points that have hit the headlines in the run-up to last night's match with Montenegro. The British media use rather wild expectations, with often contradictory arguments, when portraying our footballers and England as a footballing nation. I have long since despaired of the fact that, whenever a major tournament or big game is on the horizon, the British (mainly tabloid) media tend to overhype the abilities of our players. This leads to many people (ridiculous optimists, as I prefer to call them) claiming every World Cup year that 'we're going to win it'. Arguably the most ludicrous of these was Chris Kamara's claims on 8 Out Of 10 Cats last year. Ok, he was releasing his own England single (God knows why), and therefore had to be a little more optimistic about England's chances than I ever am, but he attempted to convince 5 comedians that England realistically had a chance of winning Euro 2012. A tall order at the best of times, but, with the team that England had assembled last year, it was almost laughable to hear his claims. Although not quite as laughable as some of the comebacks that Jimmy Carr and the like had for him! However, for those of you that have read the title of this blog and thought I am going wildly off topic, just bear with me. It will become clear. The most annoying aspect to the British media regarding English football is that, as a result of holding these ridiculously optimistic expectations, assuming that England will steamroller any nation in their path, they then lambast any player that does not meet their (overhyped) demands. This usually refers to how much they get paid (I know it's a lot, but it's private money, the full argument of which I will not get into here), how irrelevant what they are doing is (despite the coverage the media gives it and the money it brings to the economy every year) etc etc. This has the inevitable effect of sapping the confidence of any player that finds themselves on the recieving end of this pressure, as they know that every move they make is being scrutinised under ridiculous standards. As we will see, just one mistake is often sufficient to see a player's international career ended by bad press.
Goalkeepers, historically, have a extremely bad press whenever they make a mistake. That is because, inevitably, whenever they make a mistake, a goal usually is the end result. This is the situation that they signed up for when they accepted the position, and therefore should expect more media scrutiny than that of a central midfielder. However, I feel that the disparity in blame apportioned to goalkeepers to that given to strikers that miss guilt-edged chances is unfair. Both cost their sides a goal, so there is no problem in terms of comparison. Equally, I think the person that gives away possession that costs a goal should be treated similarly. Nevertheless, I think that the extent of public scrutiny given to any footballer will have a self-fulfilling prophecy effect on most individuals. They will take more risks to put themselves back in the media's good books, and as a result, will often fail, leading to further dirision. This is not really repeated by any other national media around the world, and I refuse to believe that this does not have an effect. The amount of pressure placed upon any footballer for individual mistakes is unfair, and should be stopped. However, there are too many examples, especially to goalkeepers, in recent years that suggests that the practice will continue for the foreseeable future.
The expansion of the mass media has led to this scrutiny, which is why all examples are within the last 20 years or so. The first that I can remember: David Beckham's media assassination after the 1998 World Cup. His sending off in the crucial game against Argentina led the papers to crucify the young winger, subjecting him to abuse that no person should ever have to go through. The Sun headline of 'Sorry Lads, No Tits, Only Beckham' is particularly memorable, and is indicative of the abuse that the England man went through. A weaker person would have crumbled-fortunately Beckham responded to become the player we all know today. It did not end his England career. Three former England goalkeepers were not so fortunate. In 2002, after another World Cup exit, this time at the hands of eventual winners Brazil, the media formed a lynch-mob to end the England career of David Seaman. After being at fault for the now-infamous Ronaldinho free-kick, Seaman was hounded out of his position in the England squad. Similar fates have since befallen Scott Carson (England vs Croatia, 2008), Steve McLaren ('The Wally With The Brolly', England vs Croatia, 2008) and Rob Green (England vs USA, 2010). None of these individuals have been involved in the England squad since, and this can only be attributed to the media. I am a firm believer that a mistake can be forgiven, as long as the person learns from it. The media's reaction to the mistakes means that the individual is not given the time to learn anything, as they are usually ousted.
This is the fate that could also await Joe Hart. The current England number 1 was the prime beneficiary of Rob Green's demise in 2010 (after the short reliance on the aging David James), and has secured the goalkeeper's jersey from that point. He began his career at lower league Shrewsbury Town, before a rapidly improving Manchester City spotted the talented youngster in 2006. His £100,000 fee seems like an absolute steal now, especially considering the £15 Million that neighbours United shelled out on David De Gea in 2011. His early years for City were spent mostly on loan, first at Tranmere and then Blackpool, before he finally got his hands on the Man City jersey in 2008. After a good first season for City, where he made his first England appearance in a friendly against Trinidad and Tobago in that June. He also started the following season in good form, but, with the arrival of Shay Given from Newcastle, he found himself out in the cold at City. He therefore decided to go out on loan to Birmingham City for the 2009/2010 season. It would prove to be the best decision of his career. In his breakthrough season, he helped the recently promoted Birmingham set a club record 12 Premier League matches unbeaten, and earned himself a place in the PFA Team of the Year. Though he narrowly missed out on an individual award, to be nominated at all was a great achievement. Since he returned to City, he has solidified the goalkeeper's jersey, winning the Golden Glove award (most clean sheets) for the last three years.
However, his more recent form has given the media, and the fans, plenty of reasons to criticise him. Whilst his reflexes are excellent, he is often prone to a mistake. Earlier mistakes for City against Blackburn in 2010 and Leicester in 2011, and Poland in 2012 for England, led to many stating that his 'cocky' demeanour was adversely affecting his game. He retaliated with an excellent 2011/2012 season, leading City to their first top flight title in 44 years, but those mistakes have resurfaced more recently. Beginning with a howler in the England/Scotland game, allowing James Morrison's effort to slip over the line, before a ragged start to the Premier League season with City, with mistakes against Cardiff and Aston Villa, before a nightmare in the Champions League against Bayern Munich. This has led for many pundits (Roy Keane) and the media to call for Hart to be replaced, with Celtic's Fraser Forster the most likely replacement. This pressure leaves Hart at a crossroads, with an important decision to make. With the additional pressure, does he try harder to produce exceptional performances, that we all know he is capable of, and risk making further mistakes, or does he attempt to slide under the radar with unspectacular, but simple performances? Unfortunately, the latter has become far more difficult to do, with every goal conceded now blown up and scrutinised to the n'th degree. Romelu Lukaku's goal for Everton at the weekend is a good example of this. Whilst this was essentially a one-on-one situation from 10 yards, a penalty, Hart's inability to save was criticised (unfairly in my view) by some. It is something he will have to put up with for the foreseeable future.
But, in Hart's case, is it even fair? For every mistake he has made, he has made countless match-saving stops. As a City fan, I can think of several matches where Hart's athleticism and brilliance has saved a point, or three, at one time or another. I will give two examples of this that are clearest in the memory. The opening of the 2010/2011 season saw City travel to Spurs, where a quite incredible display of goalkeeping, to deny Huddlestone, Kranjcar, and, most memorably, an incredible snapshot from Jermain Defoe, to preserve a point for the Blues. The second example occurred just last season, which illustrates just how short-termist and fickle football pundits, fans and the media are. The home game against Borussia Dortmund in the Champions League saw Hart make flying save after save, denying Reus and Lewandowski on numerous occasions. He was the only reason City managed to pick a point up from that game, and showed just how good a goalkeeper he is. For England, he has also shown his quality. At Euro 2012 he was consistently strong, making good saves in each of the group games, and ensuring that Italy could not score in the quarter final. The game where I feel he showed his club form was in the friendly game against Brazil. Saving shot after shot in a Brazil-dominated first half, Hart even managed to deny Ronaldinho from the penalty spot, before making another excellent save from Fred later in the half. This allowed England to get a foothold in the game, eventually taking the lead. Though they could not hang on, they were indebtted to Hart for the draw.
One thing that could be levelled at Hart is a sense of complacency. This is partially his fault, and partially due to the circumstances that he finds himself in. As both his club, and his country, rely on him heavily in goal, with little in the way of alternatives. For City, Costel Pantilimon is an adequate cup keeper, meaning that City need Hart to remain fit and in form to be successful. For England, only Fraser Forster has looked like putting any sort of pressure on Hart for the jersey, as his competition has been few and far between. This will instil a sense of invincibility in the player involved, as when they believe their place is safe, there is no need to go the extra mile to impress. This has the end result of getting complacent, which almost inevitably leads to poor performances and mistakes. This is the situation that Joe Hart finds himself in, and he desperately needs to get out of it. City signing an adequate back-up keeper (Given would be a good choice) would help his club form, and Forster's recent rise could be the best thing for England, as Hart will feel that pressure for his place that he needs to be at his best.
Nevertheless, the voracity of the criticism that Hart has been receiving in recent weeks is just wrong, as he has not done enough wrong to be deserving of such abuse. He has the backing of both his club, and national managers (which is not entirely surprising when considering the paragraph above), and he will continue to be top dog for both for the time being. In order to rectify the situation, Hart needs the pressure from another goalkeeper, but he does not need the additional pressure from the media's unrealistic ambitions. To strive perfection is acceptable, but to expect it is unfair. The British media seems particularly culpable of being optimistic, and pessimistic, when it most suits them, and this has a knock-on effect on our players. We need to be a little more realistic in our expectations before we start applying them to people.
However, I will start with the talking points that have hit the headlines in the run-up to last night's match with Montenegro. The British media use rather wild expectations, with often contradictory arguments, when portraying our footballers and England as a footballing nation. I have long since despaired of the fact that, whenever a major tournament or big game is on the horizon, the British (mainly tabloid) media tend to overhype the abilities of our players. This leads to many people (ridiculous optimists, as I prefer to call them) claiming every World Cup year that 'we're going to win it'. Arguably the most ludicrous of these was Chris Kamara's claims on 8 Out Of 10 Cats last year. Ok, he was releasing his own England single (God knows why), and therefore had to be a little more optimistic about England's chances than I ever am, but he attempted to convince 5 comedians that England realistically had a chance of winning Euro 2012. A tall order at the best of times, but, with the team that England had assembled last year, it was almost laughable to hear his claims. Although not quite as laughable as some of the comebacks that Jimmy Carr and the like had for him! However, for those of you that have read the title of this blog and thought I am going wildly off topic, just bear with me. It will become clear. The most annoying aspect to the British media regarding English football is that, as a result of holding these ridiculously optimistic expectations, assuming that England will steamroller any nation in their path, they then lambast any player that does not meet their (overhyped) demands. This usually refers to how much they get paid (I know it's a lot, but it's private money, the full argument of which I will not get into here), how irrelevant what they are doing is (despite the coverage the media gives it and the money it brings to the economy every year) etc etc. This has the inevitable effect of sapping the confidence of any player that finds themselves on the recieving end of this pressure, as they know that every move they make is being scrutinised under ridiculous standards. As we will see, just one mistake is often sufficient to see a player's international career ended by bad press.
Goalkeepers, historically, have a extremely bad press whenever they make a mistake. That is because, inevitably, whenever they make a mistake, a goal usually is the end result. This is the situation that they signed up for when they accepted the position, and therefore should expect more media scrutiny than that of a central midfielder. However, I feel that the disparity in blame apportioned to goalkeepers to that given to strikers that miss guilt-edged chances is unfair. Both cost their sides a goal, so there is no problem in terms of comparison. Equally, I think the person that gives away possession that costs a goal should be treated similarly. Nevertheless, I think that the extent of public scrutiny given to any footballer will have a self-fulfilling prophecy effect on most individuals. They will take more risks to put themselves back in the media's good books, and as a result, will often fail, leading to further dirision. This is not really repeated by any other national media around the world, and I refuse to believe that this does not have an effect. The amount of pressure placed upon any footballer for individual mistakes is unfair, and should be stopped. However, there are too many examples, especially to goalkeepers, in recent years that suggests that the practice will continue for the foreseeable future.
The expansion of the mass media has led to this scrutiny, which is why all examples are within the last 20 years or so. The first that I can remember: David Beckham's media assassination after the 1998 World Cup. His sending off in the crucial game against Argentina led the papers to crucify the young winger, subjecting him to abuse that no person should ever have to go through. The Sun headline of 'Sorry Lads, No Tits, Only Beckham' is particularly memorable, and is indicative of the abuse that the England man went through. A weaker person would have crumbled-fortunately Beckham responded to become the player we all know today. It did not end his England career. Three former England goalkeepers were not so fortunate. In 2002, after another World Cup exit, this time at the hands of eventual winners Brazil, the media formed a lynch-mob to end the England career of David Seaman. After being at fault for the now-infamous Ronaldinho free-kick, Seaman was hounded out of his position in the England squad. Similar fates have since befallen Scott Carson (England vs Croatia, 2008), Steve McLaren ('The Wally With The Brolly', England vs Croatia, 2008) and Rob Green (England vs USA, 2010). None of these individuals have been involved in the England squad since, and this can only be attributed to the media. I am a firm believer that a mistake can be forgiven, as long as the person learns from it. The media's reaction to the mistakes means that the individual is not given the time to learn anything, as they are usually ousted.
This is the fate that could also await Joe Hart. The current England number 1 was the prime beneficiary of Rob Green's demise in 2010 (after the short reliance on the aging David James), and has secured the goalkeeper's jersey from that point. He began his career at lower league Shrewsbury Town, before a rapidly improving Manchester City spotted the talented youngster in 2006. His £100,000 fee seems like an absolute steal now, especially considering the £15 Million that neighbours United shelled out on David De Gea in 2011. His early years for City were spent mostly on loan, first at Tranmere and then Blackpool, before he finally got his hands on the Man City jersey in 2008. After a good first season for City, where he made his first England appearance in a friendly against Trinidad and Tobago in that June. He also started the following season in good form, but, with the arrival of Shay Given from Newcastle, he found himself out in the cold at City. He therefore decided to go out on loan to Birmingham City for the 2009/2010 season. It would prove to be the best decision of his career. In his breakthrough season, he helped the recently promoted Birmingham set a club record 12 Premier League matches unbeaten, and earned himself a place in the PFA Team of the Year. Though he narrowly missed out on an individual award, to be nominated at all was a great achievement. Since he returned to City, he has solidified the goalkeeper's jersey, winning the Golden Glove award (most clean sheets) for the last three years.
However, his more recent form has given the media, and the fans, plenty of reasons to criticise him. Whilst his reflexes are excellent, he is often prone to a mistake. Earlier mistakes for City against Blackburn in 2010 and Leicester in 2011, and Poland in 2012 for England, led to many stating that his 'cocky' demeanour was adversely affecting his game. He retaliated with an excellent 2011/2012 season, leading City to their first top flight title in 44 years, but those mistakes have resurfaced more recently. Beginning with a howler in the England/Scotland game, allowing James Morrison's effort to slip over the line, before a ragged start to the Premier League season with City, with mistakes against Cardiff and Aston Villa, before a nightmare in the Champions League against Bayern Munich. This has led for many pundits (Roy Keane) and the media to call for Hart to be replaced, with Celtic's Fraser Forster the most likely replacement. This pressure leaves Hart at a crossroads, with an important decision to make. With the additional pressure, does he try harder to produce exceptional performances, that we all know he is capable of, and risk making further mistakes, or does he attempt to slide under the radar with unspectacular, but simple performances? Unfortunately, the latter has become far more difficult to do, with every goal conceded now blown up and scrutinised to the n'th degree. Romelu Lukaku's goal for Everton at the weekend is a good example of this. Whilst this was essentially a one-on-one situation from 10 yards, a penalty, Hart's inability to save was criticised (unfairly in my view) by some. It is something he will have to put up with for the foreseeable future.
But, in Hart's case, is it even fair? For every mistake he has made, he has made countless match-saving stops. As a City fan, I can think of several matches where Hart's athleticism and brilliance has saved a point, or three, at one time or another. I will give two examples of this that are clearest in the memory. The opening of the 2010/2011 season saw City travel to Spurs, where a quite incredible display of goalkeeping, to deny Huddlestone, Kranjcar, and, most memorably, an incredible snapshot from Jermain Defoe, to preserve a point for the Blues. The second example occurred just last season, which illustrates just how short-termist and fickle football pundits, fans and the media are. The home game against Borussia Dortmund in the Champions League saw Hart make flying save after save, denying Reus and Lewandowski on numerous occasions. He was the only reason City managed to pick a point up from that game, and showed just how good a goalkeeper he is. For England, he has also shown his quality. At Euro 2012 he was consistently strong, making good saves in each of the group games, and ensuring that Italy could not score in the quarter final. The game where I feel he showed his club form was in the friendly game against Brazil. Saving shot after shot in a Brazil-dominated first half, Hart even managed to deny Ronaldinho from the penalty spot, before making another excellent save from Fred later in the half. This allowed England to get a foothold in the game, eventually taking the lead. Though they could not hang on, they were indebtted to Hart for the draw.
One thing that could be levelled at Hart is a sense of complacency. This is partially his fault, and partially due to the circumstances that he finds himself in. As both his club, and his country, rely on him heavily in goal, with little in the way of alternatives. For City, Costel Pantilimon is an adequate cup keeper, meaning that City need Hart to remain fit and in form to be successful. For England, only Fraser Forster has looked like putting any sort of pressure on Hart for the jersey, as his competition has been few and far between. This will instil a sense of invincibility in the player involved, as when they believe their place is safe, there is no need to go the extra mile to impress. This has the end result of getting complacent, which almost inevitably leads to poor performances and mistakes. This is the situation that Joe Hart finds himself in, and he desperately needs to get out of it. City signing an adequate back-up keeper (Given would be a good choice) would help his club form, and Forster's recent rise could be the best thing for England, as Hart will feel that pressure for his place that he needs to be at his best.
Nevertheless, the voracity of the criticism that Hart has been receiving in recent weeks is just wrong, as he has not done enough wrong to be deserving of such abuse. He has the backing of both his club, and national managers (which is not entirely surprising when considering the paragraph above), and he will continue to be top dog for both for the time being. In order to rectify the situation, Hart needs the pressure from another goalkeeper, but he does not need the additional pressure from the media's unrealistic ambitions. To strive perfection is acceptable, but to expect it is unfair. The British media seems particularly culpable of being optimistic, and pessimistic, when it most suits them, and this has a knock-on effect on our players. We need to be a little more realistic in our expectations before we start applying them to people.
Saturday, 31 August 2013
UEFA Super Cup 2013: What A Difference A Year Makes
What a difference a year makes... 8742 little hours... After their complete obliteration at the hands of Atletico Madrid, and in particular Radamel Falcao, in the UEFA Super Cup in 2012, Chelsea this time lined up against Bayern Munich for the same trophy last night. Unlike last year, in which Chelsea had started the night as Champions League champions, and favourites, last night the Londoners began as distinct outsiders, and Europa League holders. With Bayern Munich sweeping all aside on their route to the Champions League title last year, and with the highly sought-after Pep Guardiola now at the helm, there were few that suggested that Chelsea would realistically win. However, with Mourinho back at his spiritual home, Chelsea were quietly confident. And history was on their side...
Last May, Chelsea were in a vastly similar position, in which they lined up against a heavily favoured Bayern Munich side. This was not for the UEFA Super Cup, but for the most impressive European accolade available, the Champions League. Further supporting Munich's tag of favourites was the fact that they were playing on home soil, at the Allianz Arena. The early predictions looked fairly accurate, as the Bavarians set about their English opponents. Chances came and went, with Olic, Gomez and Robben all coming close, with the latter rapping the post with a low drive. Chelsea offered little in the way of forward motion, with Solomon Kalou having their best opportunity. However, as the game moved towards the last ten minutes, Bayern upped the pace, which paid off almost immediately. Toni Kroos placed an excellent cross to the far post, which was met by Muller. His downwards header bounced off the floor and into the roof of the net, handing Bayern a valuable 1-0 lead. With time ticking down, Chelsea won a corner. Another fantastic delivery from Juan Mata found Didier Drogba, who powered the header past Manuel Neuer to send the game into extra time.
In extra time, the pattern of Bayern dominance continued. Just 5 minutes into the extra period, a poor challenge by Drogba on Franck Ribery earned the Bavarians a penalty. However, Robben's spot-kick was poor and easily saved by Cech. The rest of the extra time was tight and uneventful, meaning that the game went to the lottery of a penalty shootout. After Bayern scored their first, Mata could only find Neuer, handing the Germans the advantage. The next four penalties were all scored, including one by Manuel Neuer himself. Ivica Olic was the next man up, but his tame penalty was saved by Cech to his left. After Ashley Cole levelled the match at 3-3, Bastien Schweinsteiger would take the critical penalty. The Bayern captain could only hit the post, meaning that Drogba had the chance to win the Champions League for Chelsea. The Ivorian striker, who had already agreed to move to China with Shanghai Shenhua, knew that this would be his last kick as a Chelsea player. Placing the ball confidently, he sent Neuer the wrong way to win the trophy for the Londoners. Just one year and a few months later, few would see the replay being as similar.
However, it is worth examining the recent history of this Super Cup. Bearing in mind the reputation of the respective competitions from which the two clubs qualify, you would always expect the Champions League winners to be victorious in these games. However, if we look at the last ten matches in the Super Cup, the record is much more even than would be anticipated. Based on the last 10 editions, including last night, the score is Champions League 5 Europa League 5. Even more startling is the fact that the winner has alternated between the Champions League winner and Europa League winner for the last 10 years. Particularly surprising results over the last decade include the 2006 final, in which Sevilla demolished a Ronaldinho inspired Barcelona side 3-0. The 2010 final was also shocking, as the Jose Mourinho managed Inter Milan side was comprehensively beaten by Atletico Madrid, with goals from Forlan and Aguero condemning Mourinho to his second Super Cup defeat. It remains the only trophy that Mourinho has competed for and not won. Last year's final also involved Atletico, as they destroyed the Chelsea side 4-1, with a first half hat-trick from Falcao.
With the evidence of the last decade, it should not have come as too much of a surprise that Chelsea performed admirably during last night's encounter. From the beginning, they made it clear that they would not simply defend, and that they were highly capable on the break. This was proven just 8 minutes in, as a lightning fast counter from Eden Hazard found new-boy Andre Schurrle. The German's cut-back fell neatly into the path of Fernando Torres, who expertly volleyed past the helpless Neuer. Every year there is speculation over whether the Spaniard would reclaim his form, but this finish implies that form is temporary but class in permanent. After the goal, Chelsea had to withstand some heavy pressure from the German champions, but they continued to pose a threat on the break. As the half-time break drew close, Brazilian midfielder Ramires picked up a silly yellow card for a challenge on Ribery, which would come back to haunt him later. Nevertheless, the English side managed to hang onto their lead going into half-time.
Mourinho's team talk would have been very much along the lines of 'keep going, and do not concede early'. But this team talk went out of the window within two minutes of the restart. After a good attacking start, Chelsea lost the ball to Franck Ribery. He jinked inside a couple of defenders before unleashing a powerful shot. Though the shot was close to the goalkeeper, and error by Cech allowed the ball to fly off his hands and into the net to level the scores. Chances then came by for both sides, with Oscar wasting the best one for the Londoners. However, the game turned after 85 minutes. After a poor touch, Bayern substitute Mario Gotze went into a challenge second favourite with Ramires. The Brazilian's challenge was robust, and arguably two footed, leaving the German prostrate on the floor. This prompted a second yellow card for the midfielder, leaving Chelsea in trouble. The remainder of the match took place in Chelsea's half, with long range shots peppering Cech's goal. But the breakthrough did not come, meaning that another 1-1 draw after 90 minutes, and another 30 minutes of extra time.
Extra time started with a bang for the English side, as they reclaimed the lead just three minutes into the extra period. Eden Hazard, who had dominated the Bayern defence all game, managed to skip inside of Phillip Lahm and fire a shot towards goal. Similarly to Bayern's goal, questions must be asked about the goalkeeper, who failed to deal with the shot, allowing it to fly past him. Having claimed the lead, Chelsea then decided to shut up shop, defending deeply and requiring their goalkeeper to redeem himself. And that he did, making stunning saves to deny Mandzukic from point blank range. As time ran out, the shots were coming in from long range, and Bayern had resorted putting crosses into Chelsea's box. It looked impossible to break through the wall of blue defenders, until the very last kick of the game. A hopeful ball was flicked on by Mandzukic to the feet of Javi Martinez, and the Spanish international managed to beat Cech at his near post to ensure that the contest went to penalties.
Remembering the events of May 2012, both sides would have been well aware of each other. This time, the penalties began with 8 consecutive successful penalties, taking the contest effectively into sudden death. After Xherdan Shaqiri found the net (just) for Bayern, the weight fell onto the shoulders of Romelu Lukaku. After a stuttering start, the penalty was weak, and easily saved by Neuer. This ensured that Bayern earned revenge on their English opponents, and claimed the Super Cup, retaining the incredible alternating run between Champions League/Europa League clubs. Chelsea will take solace in the fact that Bayern are currently considered the best team in the world, and Chelsea were within one kick of beating them. This will not prevent the agony for Lukaku and the rest of the squad, but it does show just how far the Londoners have come.
Last May, Chelsea were in a vastly similar position, in which they lined up against a heavily favoured Bayern Munich side. This was not for the UEFA Super Cup, but for the most impressive European accolade available, the Champions League. Further supporting Munich's tag of favourites was the fact that they were playing on home soil, at the Allianz Arena. The early predictions looked fairly accurate, as the Bavarians set about their English opponents. Chances came and went, with Olic, Gomez and Robben all coming close, with the latter rapping the post with a low drive. Chelsea offered little in the way of forward motion, with Solomon Kalou having their best opportunity. However, as the game moved towards the last ten minutes, Bayern upped the pace, which paid off almost immediately. Toni Kroos placed an excellent cross to the far post, which was met by Muller. His downwards header bounced off the floor and into the roof of the net, handing Bayern a valuable 1-0 lead. With time ticking down, Chelsea won a corner. Another fantastic delivery from Juan Mata found Didier Drogba, who powered the header past Manuel Neuer to send the game into extra time.
In extra time, the pattern of Bayern dominance continued. Just 5 minutes into the extra period, a poor challenge by Drogba on Franck Ribery earned the Bavarians a penalty. However, Robben's spot-kick was poor and easily saved by Cech. The rest of the extra time was tight and uneventful, meaning that the game went to the lottery of a penalty shootout. After Bayern scored their first, Mata could only find Neuer, handing the Germans the advantage. The next four penalties were all scored, including one by Manuel Neuer himself. Ivica Olic was the next man up, but his tame penalty was saved by Cech to his left. After Ashley Cole levelled the match at 3-3, Bastien Schweinsteiger would take the critical penalty. The Bayern captain could only hit the post, meaning that Drogba had the chance to win the Champions League for Chelsea. The Ivorian striker, who had already agreed to move to China with Shanghai Shenhua, knew that this would be his last kick as a Chelsea player. Placing the ball confidently, he sent Neuer the wrong way to win the trophy for the Londoners. Just one year and a few months later, few would see the replay being as similar.
However, it is worth examining the recent history of this Super Cup. Bearing in mind the reputation of the respective competitions from which the two clubs qualify, you would always expect the Champions League winners to be victorious in these games. However, if we look at the last ten matches in the Super Cup, the record is much more even than would be anticipated. Based on the last 10 editions, including last night, the score is Champions League 5 Europa League 5. Even more startling is the fact that the winner has alternated between the Champions League winner and Europa League winner for the last 10 years. Particularly surprising results over the last decade include the 2006 final, in which Sevilla demolished a Ronaldinho inspired Barcelona side 3-0. The 2010 final was also shocking, as the Jose Mourinho managed Inter Milan side was comprehensively beaten by Atletico Madrid, with goals from Forlan and Aguero condemning Mourinho to his second Super Cup defeat. It remains the only trophy that Mourinho has competed for and not won. Last year's final also involved Atletico, as they destroyed the Chelsea side 4-1, with a first half hat-trick from Falcao.
With the evidence of the last decade, it should not have come as too much of a surprise that Chelsea performed admirably during last night's encounter. From the beginning, they made it clear that they would not simply defend, and that they were highly capable on the break. This was proven just 8 minutes in, as a lightning fast counter from Eden Hazard found new-boy Andre Schurrle. The German's cut-back fell neatly into the path of Fernando Torres, who expertly volleyed past the helpless Neuer. Every year there is speculation over whether the Spaniard would reclaim his form, but this finish implies that form is temporary but class in permanent. After the goal, Chelsea had to withstand some heavy pressure from the German champions, but they continued to pose a threat on the break. As the half-time break drew close, Brazilian midfielder Ramires picked up a silly yellow card for a challenge on Ribery, which would come back to haunt him later. Nevertheless, the English side managed to hang onto their lead going into half-time.
Mourinho's team talk would have been very much along the lines of 'keep going, and do not concede early'. But this team talk went out of the window within two minutes of the restart. After a good attacking start, Chelsea lost the ball to Franck Ribery. He jinked inside a couple of defenders before unleashing a powerful shot. Though the shot was close to the goalkeeper, and error by Cech allowed the ball to fly off his hands and into the net to level the scores. Chances then came by for both sides, with Oscar wasting the best one for the Londoners. However, the game turned after 85 minutes. After a poor touch, Bayern substitute Mario Gotze went into a challenge second favourite with Ramires. The Brazilian's challenge was robust, and arguably two footed, leaving the German prostrate on the floor. This prompted a second yellow card for the midfielder, leaving Chelsea in trouble. The remainder of the match took place in Chelsea's half, with long range shots peppering Cech's goal. But the breakthrough did not come, meaning that another 1-1 draw after 90 minutes, and another 30 minutes of extra time.
Extra time started with a bang for the English side, as they reclaimed the lead just three minutes into the extra period. Eden Hazard, who had dominated the Bayern defence all game, managed to skip inside of Phillip Lahm and fire a shot towards goal. Similarly to Bayern's goal, questions must be asked about the goalkeeper, who failed to deal with the shot, allowing it to fly past him. Having claimed the lead, Chelsea then decided to shut up shop, defending deeply and requiring their goalkeeper to redeem himself. And that he did, making stunning saves to deny Mandzukic from point blank range. As time ran out, the shots were coming in from long range, and Bayern had resorted putting crosses into Chelsea's box. It looked impossible to break through the wall of blue defenders, until the very last kick of the game. A hopeful ball was flicked on by Mandzukic to the feet of Javi Martinez, and the Spanish international managed to beat Cech at his near post to ensure that the contest went to penalties.
Remembering the events of May 2012, both sides would have been well aware of each other. This time, the penalties began with 8 consecutive successful penalties, taking the contest effectively into sudden death. After Xherdan Shaqiri found the net (just) for Bayern, the weight fell onto the shoulders of Romelu Lukaku. After a stuttering start, the penalty was weak, and easily saved by Neuer. This ensured that Bayern earned revenge on their English opponents, and claimed the Super Cup, retaining the incredible alternating run between Champions League/Europa League clubs. Chelsea will take solace in the fact that Bayern are currently considered the best team in the world, and Chelsea were within one kick of beating them. This will not prevent the agony for Lukaku and the rest of the squad, but it does show just how far the Londoners have come.
Sunday, 25 August 2013
The 2013 Challenge Cup Final: Living Up To The Hype
With this year's Challenge Cup Final taking place in the shadow of the upcoming Rugby League World Cup, players from both Wigan and Hull would both have been looking to illustrate to selectors exactly why they deserve a place in the squad for this autumn. However, the hype around this particular match goes far deeper than just the prospect of improving an individual's chances. All of the headlines in the days leading up to the British rugby league showpiece have been harking back to the classic 1985 final between the two teams. On that day, in a topsy-turvey contest, it was the Warriors that came out victorious. The game had it all, with drama, wonderful tries and a sting in the tail. With Wigan 28-12 ahead with just 16 minutes left, they looked to be cruising, especially after a scintillating try from Brett Kenny, who went the length of the Wembley pitch before touching down. However, Hull were not dead yet, fighting back to make it a 1 score game, with tries from Leuluai and another stunner from Divorty, along with penalties from Crooks. This took the score to 28-24, with the most unlikely of comebacks on the cards. But time ran out on the Black and Whites, leaving them to rue the 5 missed conversion attempts that they had throughout the match. And today, Wigan and Hull resumed that rivalry, with the expectation heavily on the match to live up to the standard of 28 years ago.
In setting up the repeat of that historic contest, both sides have had to come through arduous examinations of their credentials. As Super League sides are given byes through to the fourth round, there is an obvious advantage of being in the top tier of British rugby league. For Wigan, a home tie against Championship side Leigh kicked off their Challenge Cup campaign. An emphatic win for the Super League team, with tries from Charnley (3), Richards (3), Tomkins (4) and Williams ensuring a 60-10 win. In the fifth round they travelled to Hull to face fellow Super League side Hull KR. In a much tighter affair than the previous round, the prolific Tomkins scored another 4 tries to ensure that the Warriors progressed. Other scores from Richards, Charnley, Thornley and Farrell gave the scoreline a more emphatic feel, with a 46-14 final result. Wigan managed to avoid the other top sides in the competition in the quarter finals, facing a visit from Widnes Vikings. Once again, another routine victory for the home side, with tries from Charnley (3), Tomkins, Smith, Farrell, Hampshire and Green sending the Warriors into the final 48-4. Another favourable draw saw Wigan face another of Super League's struggling sides: London Broncos. In a complete demolition job of the side from the capital at Leigh Sports Village, Wigan equalled the record margin of victory in a semi final, winning 70-0. Tries from Goulding, Mossop, Tomkins, Green, Richards (2), Charnley (2), Taylor, Smith, Farrell and Thornley allowed Wigan to cruise to Wembley, humiliating the Broncos in the process.
Hull's progress, on the other hand, had been far from simple. Though their campaign began with a comfortable victory over Crusaders in the fourth round, where tries from Horne (2), Westerman, Crooks, Yeaman (3), Lineham, Cunningham and Shaul (3) gave Hull a 62-6 victory, that ease would not last long. Their fifth round tie was a nip-and-tuck affair against Wakefield Trinity Wildcats. In a scrappy game, a few moments of brilliance ensured that it would be the Hull side that progressed. Tries from Horne, Ellis, Yeaman and Pitts (2) gave Hull a hard-fought 24-6 win, and set them up for a quarter final trip to the South of France. A difficult tie against Catalan Dragons was the reward for that win, and that match would prove to be every bit as difficult. In a rollercoaster game, in which both sides held the lead, and thought they had the momentum, with the half-time score 7-8. This time, it was the English side that progressed to the semi-final, with the promise of Wembley now just one game away. Tries from McDonnell (2), Lineham and Briscoe gave the Yorkshire side the narrowest of 13-24 wins. They saved the tightest game for last however. At Huddersfield's John Smith's Stadium, Hull were the underdogs for their clash with Challenge Cup holders Warrington Wolves. In order to win that game, they required a scrappy and tense affair. Fortunately, the Black and Whites got it, defending fantastically well against an out-of-sorts Warrington, and hitting them with 3 great tries. Lineham, Whiting and Heremaia gave them a lead to protect, and once they had held off a late Warrington charge, they claimed a fantastic 16-12 victory to take them to rugby league's showpiece.
In order for this game to be considered in the same breath as its 1985 predecessor, it had to start quickly. Unfortunately, the nerves, and the dismal weather obviously got to the players, as the opening 20 went by without incident. It seemed to be a case of not wanting to take too many risks, as the game became a scrappy affair, but it maintained the intensity that one would expect from a cup final. After the initial sparring between the two teams, it was Wigan who struck the first blow. After some quick hands, Warriors wing Ian Thornley went over in the corner. With Pat Richards adding the two points, the Warriors took a 6-0 lead. Immediately after the try, Hull struggled to cope with a rampant Wigan side, with McIlorum breaking the line and only last ditch defending preventing a second. After riding the initial shock, Hull began to work themselves back into the game. However, the niggly errors continued from both sides, meaning that the fluidity of the game was regularly interrupted. This was particularly evident in the statistics for Hull at half time. In terms of set completion, Hull managed only 50% to Wigan's 82%. The final real chance of the first half fell to the Black and Whites, with a Wigan knock-on handing Hull a good field position. After further possession, the underdogs were handed a penalty. However, instead of the common sense option to kick the points and go in just four points down, Hull chose to tap and go. Almost immediately, the ball was lost forwards and the chance was gone. The question was raised about how valuable those points may be come the end of the game as the hooter went.
In complete contrast to the rather lacklustre start to the match, the second half started at a much higher pace, with Wigan forward Taylor coming within inches of a try. Having been given an advantage, the centre was dropped short of the line. If Hull thought that that would be the end of the danger, they were mistaken, as the referee pulled the game back for the penalty. Richards stepped up and put the two points over, making it a 2 score game. After this, the game once again returned to the scrappy and error-strewn affair that it was before the break, meaning that chances were few and far-between. When one did arrive, it was Hull that profited. After another period of Wigan pressure, Jamie Shaw intercepted a ball and broke the Wigan line. His path to the try line looked straight-forward, putting the game back in the balance. However, the Hull man did not reckon on the pace of Josh Charnley. The Wigan winger, who is arguably the fastest player on the field, chased Shaw down and managed to tackle him, thus saving his side 6 points. However, with the Hull crowd lifted, would that break lead to a comeback? Unfortunately for Hull, the momentum that threatened to shift was checked almost immediately by the seemingly serious injury to the Wigan forward Goulding. In a tough tackle with a Hull player, Goulding failed to put his head in the right place, knocking him unconscious and leaving him prone on the Wembley turf. After a good few minutes of treatment, he left the field on a stretcher. The latest reports suggest that he will make a full recovery, which is very good news.
Once the game restarted, any momentum Hull may have gained had well and truly gone. Every time they progressed into the Wigan final third, the Hull players dropped the ball. Wigan also began to get into that pattern, with the second half slowed to a crawl, punctuated by the mistakes and errors. Eventually, one of those errors lead to a kickable opportunity for Wigan's Richards. The kicker remained composed, taking the score to 10-0. As the final 10 minutes moved into focus, Hull were in desperate need for a try, and they began to put pressure on the Wigan defence. It was met by excellent defence, at times last-ditch, with only one clear cut chance to show for it. Yeaman charged down a Wigan clearance, knocking it forwards for Briscoe to chase. Had the winger dived onto the ball, the arrears may have been reduced. As it was, a last ditch tackle ensured that Wigan's scorecard remained unblemished. After all that pressure, it was Wigan that finished the scoring, with the excellent Sam Tomkins going over to cap a magnificent performance. The full back has had a fantastic campaign once again, and if this is to be his Wigan swansong, with rumours that he is on the move to the NRL, he has acquitted himself admirably during his time at the DW Stadium.
After the Tomkins try, there was barely time for Richards to add the 2 points before the final hooter sounded, ensuring that the score finished 16-0, handing Wigan another trophy. They will be hoping for the more elusive one in a couple of months, where they will have to wrestle their way past sides like Warrington, Huddersfield and Leeds to win the Super League title. Hull will be disappointed, but they have shown enough to suggest that this won't be the last time we see them at Wembley. The showcase was a touch more one-sided and error-strewn than we are used to seeing, but it still proved an entertaining game, needing that final Tomkins try to put it to bed.
In setting up the repeat of that historic contest, both sides have had to come through arduous examinations of their credentials. As Super League sides are given byes through to the fourth round, there is an obvious advantage of being in the top tier of British rugby league. For Wigan, a home tie against Championship side Leigh kicked off their Challenge Cup campaign. An emphatic win for the Super League team, with tries from Charnley (3), Richards (3), Tomkins (4) and Williams ensuring a 60-10 win. In the fifth round they travelled to Hull to face fellow Super League side Hull KR. In a much tighter affair than the previous round, the prolific Tomkins scored another 4 tries to ensure that the Warriors progressed. Other scores from Richards, Charnley, Thornley and Farrell gave the scoreline a more emphatic feel, with a 46-14 final result. Wigan managed to avoid the other top sides in the competition in the quarter finals, facing a visit from Widnes Vikings. Once again, another routine victory for the home side, with tries from Charnley (3), Tomkins, Smith, Farrell, Hampshire and Green sending the Warriors into the final 48-4. Another favourable draw saw Wigan face another of Super League's struggling sides: London Broncos. In a complete demolition job of the side from the capital at Leigh Sports Village, Wigan equalled the record margin of victory in a semi final, winning 70-0. Tries from Goulding, Mossop, Tomkins, Green, Richards (2), Charnley (2), Taylor, Smith, Farrell and Thornley allowed Wigan to cruise to Wembley, humiliating the Broncos in the process.
Hull's progress, on the other hand, had been far from simple. Though their campaign began with a comfortable victory over Crusaders in the fourth round, where tries from Horne (2), Westerman, Crooks, Yeaman (3), Lineham, Cunningham and Shaul (3) gave Hull a 62-6 victory, that ease would not last long. Their fifth round tie was a nip-and-tuck affair against Wakefield Trinity Wildcats. In a scrappy game, a few moments of brilliance ensured that it would be the Hull side that progressed. Tries from Horne, Ellis, Yeaman and Pitts (2) gave Hull a hard-fought 24-6 win, and set them up for a quarter final trip to the South of France. A difficult tie against Catalan Dragons was the reward for that win, and that match would prove to be every bit as difficult. In a rollercoaster game, in which both sides held the lead, and thought they had the momentum, with the half-time score 7-8. This time, it was the English side that progressed to the semi-final, with the promise of Wembley now just one game away. Tries from McDonnell (2), Lineham and Briscoe gave the Yorkshire side the narrowest of 13-24 wins. They saved the tightest game for last however. At Huddersfield's John Smith's Stadium, Hull were the underdogs for their clash with Challenge Cup holders Warrington Wolves. In order to win that game, they required a scrappy and tense affair. Fortunately, the Black and Whites got it, defending fantastically well against an out-of-sorts Warrington, and hitting them with 3 great tries. Lineham, Whiting and Heremaia gave them a lead to protect, and once they had held off a late Warrington charge, they claimed a fantastic 16-12 victory to take them to rugby league's showpiece.
In order for this game to be considered in the same breath as its 1985 predecessor, it had to start quickly. Unfortunately, the nerves, and the dismal weather obviously got to the players, as the opening 20 went by without incident. It seemed to be a case of not wanting to take too many risks, as the game became a scrappy affair, but it maintained the intensity that one would expect from a cup final. After the initial sparring between the two teams, it was Wigan who struck the first blow. After some quick hands, Warriors wing Ian Thornley went over in the corner. With Pat Richards adding the two points, the Warriors took a 6-0 lead. Immediately after the try, Hull struggled to cope with a rampant Wigan side, with McIlorum breaking the line and only last ditch defending preventing a second. After riding the initial shock, Hull began to work themselves back into the game. However, the niggly errors continued from both sides, meaning that the fluidity of the game was regularly interrupted. This was particularly evident in the statistics for Hull at half time. In terms of set completion, Hull managed only 50% to Wigan's 82%. The final real chance of the first half fell to the Black and Whites, with a Wigan knock-on handing Hull a good field position. After further possession, the underdogs were handed a penalty. However, instead of the common sense option to kick the points and go in just four points down, Hull chose to tap and go. Almost immediately, the ball was lost forwards and the chance was gone. The question was raised about how valuable those points may be come the end of the game as the hooter went.
In complete contrast to the rather lacklustre start to the match, the second half started at a much higher pace, with Wigan forward Taylor coming within inches of a try. Having been given an advantage, the centre was dropped short of the line. If Hull thought that that would be the end of the danger, they were mistaken, as the referee pulled the game back for the penalty. Richards stepped up and put the two points over, making it a 2 score game. After this, the game once again returned to the scrappy and error-strewn affair that it was before the break, meaning that chances were few and far-between. When one did arrive, it was Hull that profited. After another period of Wigan pressure, Jamie Shaw intercepted a ball and broke the Wigan line. His path to the try line looked straight-forward, putting the game back in the balance. However, the Hull man did not reckon on the pace of Josh Charnley. The Wigan winger, who is arguably the fastest player on the field, chased Shaw down and managed to tackle him, thus saving his side 6 points. However, with the Hull crowd lifted, would that break lead to a comeback? Unfortunately for Hull, the momentum that threatened to shift was checked almost immediately by the seemingly serious injury to the Wigan forward Goulding. In a tough tackle with a Hull player, Goulding failed to put his head in the right place, knocking him unconscious and leaving him prone on the Wembley turf. After a good few minutes of treatment, he left the field on a stretcher. The latest reports suggest that he will make a full recovery, which is very good news.
Once the game restarted, any momentum Hull may have gained had well and truly gone. Every time they progressed into the Wigan final third, the Hull players dropped the ball. Wigan also began to get into that pattern, with the second half slowed to a crawl, punctuated by the mistakes and errors. Eventually, one of those errors lead to a kickable opportunity for Wigan's Richards. The kicker remained composed, taking the score to 10-0. As the final 10 minutes moved into focus, Hull were in desperate need for a try, and they began to put pressure on the Wigan defence. It was met by excellent defence, at times last-ditch, with only one clear cut chance to show for it. Yeaman charged down a Wigan clearance, knocking it forwards for Briscoe to chase. Had the winger dived onto the ball, the arrears may have been reduced. As it was, a last ditch tackle ensured that Wigan's scorecard remained unblemished. After all that pressure, it was Wigan that finished the scoring, with the excellent Sam Tomkins going over to cap a magnificent performance. The full back has had a fantastic campaign once again, and if this is to be his Wigan swansong, with rumours that he is on the move to the NRL, he has acquitted himself admirably during his time at the DW Stadium.
After the Tomkins try, there was barely time for Richards to add the 2 points before the final hooter sounded, ensuring that the score finished 16-0, handing Wigan another trophy. They will be hoping for the more elusive one in a couple of months, where they will have to wrestle their way past sides like Warrington, Huddersfield and Leeds to win the Super League title. Hull will be disappointed, but they have shown enough to suggest that this won't be the last time we see them at Wembley. The showcase was a touch more one-sided and error-strewn than we are used to seeing, but it still proved an entertaining game, needing that final Tomkins try to put it to bed.
Tuesday, 2 July 2013
Confederations Cup 2013 Review: The King Is Dead, Long Live The King!
Spain have fallen in battle. A day most in football never foresaw. But a day that marks the beginning of a new period of uncertainty, with several sides battling it out for the right to be World Number 1. And there are plenty of contenders, all of whom believe that they have a genuine claim to be heir to the footballing throne. This blog post will briefly review the events of the last two weeks, before outlining the heirs apparent in international football. I feel that this is a war that will drag on for many tournaments to come, with dominance akin to Spain's unlikely to be seen again for many years.
If I compare the standard of this Confederations Cup to that of the 2009 edition in South Africa, it is a whitewash. For starters, the stadia and infrastructure were better prepared (although the fans outside the grounds in Brazil seemed intent on changing that!). As far as I can see it, there is a bit of a problem with the logic of many of the Brazilian protesters. Many were outside football grounds, protesting over the excessive spending on the 2014 World Cup, and the even greater waste of public money on the 2016 Olympics. Fair enough, as there were times when I felt like taking a similar tack against last year's shredding of billions of pounds in London (especially when sections of the competition actually took place away from the capital). However, the sensible, and indeed logical, way to protest against this offence is not, as many Brazilians did, to riot and smash stuff up. Do they not understand that this will only cost the taxpayer a greater amount, and will only damage their cause? Personally, I have always felt that protesting over a decision that has already been made and is irreversible is pretty pointless, and this case is no exception. I simply found the irony of the actions of many of the protestors highly amusing.
After that slight rant, I will get back on track. Other reasons why this Confederations Cup has been better than the last include: the lack of annoying buzzing sounds (also known as vuvuzelas), the quality of the football (by this I mean the ball they kick around), and the quality of the football (the competitiveness of the matches and the eyecatching goals). There have been many moments that have caught the eye over the last two weeks. Here are a few of my favourites. The hype surrounding Brazilian superstar Neymar after his reported £50 million move to Barcelona, and the subsequent pressure heaped upon his young shoulders. A real sink or swim moment in his fledgling career, and one he passed with flying colours. Three goals in Brazil's opening three games, and four overall, has led the home nation's talisman to be a shoo-in for the player of the tournament award. Secondly, the moment Johnathan Tehau scored for Tahiti against Nigeria in their opening group game. The scream from the BBC commentator said enough. As the underdog, we Brits are programmed to cheer for them, despite the world's derision over their inclusion. Before the tournament, I too thought the inclusion of the tiny Oceanic nation undermined the competitiveness of the tournament. However, once I saw their plucky (albeit, naive) style of defending and their emphasis on attack, I willed them on. And despite losing 6-1, 10-0 and 8-0, Tahiti can hold their heads high after their first international tournament.
My final highlight has been the numerous thrilling matches that have characterised this year's competition. Although a significant proportion of the goals have come against the Tahitians, there have been many high-scoring contests. Shockingly, the Italians have been involved in two of them. Traditionally low scorers and a tight defence, the Italians were involved in a breath-taking 4-3 game against the Japanese, before a 4-2 reverse against the Brazilians in their very next fixture! Other less high-scoring, but equally intriguing matches include: the 0-0 semi-final draw after 120 minutes between Spain and Italy, where the two sides provided a penalty-taking masterclass, the 2-2 draw after 120 minutes between Italy and Uruguay in the 3rd place playoff, before the all-conquering Spaniards were dismantled on the pitch for the first time in 5 years by the home nation Brazil. A comprehensive 3-0 victory, with two goals from Fred and one from the talismanic Neymar, effectively ended Spain's reign as undisputed world kings of football.
So if we can agree that the Spanish domination has ended, who is most likely to replace them? Though I would argue that the domination has ended, we would be stupid to discount the abilities of the Spanish to win future tournaments. Though they may no longer be the nailed on choice, I still believe they have a decent shot at retaining their crown in Brazil next year. We mustn't forget that the Spaniards suffered a shock defeat to the USA in South Africa in 2009, only to sweep all before them aside the following year. The fact that the Spanish have also won the recent Under 21 World Cup also bodes well for the future. I have already said that we are unlikely to see such a domination as the one Spain has enjoyed in recent years in the near future. However, there are two further clear contenders for the crown.
Spain's vanquishers in Rio, Brazil, are the first. Though it could be argued that home advantage played a significant part in the demolition of the world champions, the fact remains that the hosts thoroughly outplayed their illustrious opponents for the full 90 minutes, and could concievably have won by more. Their side is formidable, with the likes of Neymar, Thiago Silva and Hulk harking back to previous glories, and with the majority of the side currently in their early twenties, there is a great deal of time for future growth. Being on home soil once more next year will give the Brazilians the boost they may need to reclaim the great trophy. Whether they can turn that trophy into a period of dominance would be the real test, with challenges from Uruguay and Argentina on a continental level, and Spain and Germany on the global scale. This weekend's result has sent a warning shot across the bows of many of the big nations worldwide, foretelling of a potential shift in power.
Though not involved in the last two weeks' competition, I still count Germany as one of the strong favourites to get their hands on the World Cup next summer. After the dominance of the German league in Europe this year, I must confess, I was ready to hand the trophy to them then. As the majority of the superstars in many of the big German clubs are home grown, they threaten to become the next Spain, building their national side around the squads of a few domestic clubs. After this weekend, I would very much like to see a Germany vs Brazil match, preferably on neutral ground, in an attempt to discover how far the Germans have come before embarking on what could be a glorious tour of South America next summer. Like Brazil, I doubt their ability to dominate global football, even if they do manage to beat the Spanish, however, a trophy would very much re-announce themselves on the world stage.
Other than the big three, there is a small chasing pack that will be eager to punish any slip-ups (sorry England fans, we are not even close!). I consider that group to include nations such as: Italy, Argentina, Holland, Portugal, Uruguay to name a few. Whilst none of these show the potential of the three superpowers, all have the potential on their day to win a tournament. The next few years will prove to be a tussle for power around the globe (let us hope we are simply talking in footballing terms). I for one am very much looking forward to seeing who claims the crown.
So the King is dead. Long live the King. But who is the King?
If I compare the standard of this Confederations Cup to that of the 2009 edition in South Africa, it is a whitewash. For starters, the stadia and infrastructure were better prepared (although the fans outside the grounds in Brazil seemed intent on changing that!). As far as I can see it, there is a bit of a problem with the logic of many of the Brazilian protesters. Many were outside football grounds, protesting over the excessive spending on the 2014 World Cup, and the even greater waste of public money on the 2016 Olympics. Fair enough, as there were times when I felt like taking a similar tack against last year's shredding of billions of pounds in London (especially when sections of the competition actually took place away from the capital). However, the sensible, and indeed logical, way to protest against this offence is not, as many Brazilians did, to riot and smash stuff up. Do they not understand that this will only cost the taxpayer a greater amount, and will only damage their cause? Personally, I have always felt that protesting over a decision that has already been made and is irreversible is pretty pointless, and this case is no exception. I simply found the irony of the actions of many of the protestors highly amusing.
After that slight rant, I will get back on track. Other reasons why this Confederations Cup has been better than the last include: the lack of annoying buzzing sounds (also known as vuvuzelas), the quality of the football (by this I mean the ball they kick around), and the quality of the football (the competitiveness of the matches and the eyecatching goals). There have been many moments that have caught the eye over the last two weeks. Here are a few of my favourites. The hype surrounding Brazilian superstar Neymar after his reported £50 million move to Barcelona, and the subsequent pressure heaped upon his young shoulders. A real sink or swim moment in his fledgling career, and one he passed with flying colours. Three goals in Brazil's opening three games, and four overall, has led the home nation's talisman to be a shoo-in for the player of the tournament award. Secondly, the moment Johnathan Tehau scored for Tahiti against Nigeria in their opening group game. The scream from the BBC commentator said enough. As the underdog, we Brits are programmed to cheer for them, despite the world's derision over their inclusion. Before the tournament, I too thought the inclusion of the tiny Oceanic nation undermined the competitiveness of the tournament. However, once I saw their plucky (albeit, naive) style of defending and their emphasis on attack, I willed them on. And despite losing 6-1, 10-0 and 8-0, Tahiti can hold their heads high after their first international tournament.
My final highlight has been the numerous thrilling matches that have characterised this year's competition. Although a significant proportion of the goals have come against the Tahitians, there have been many high-scoring contests. Shockingly, the Italians have been involved in two of them. Traditionally low scorers and a tight defence, the Italians were involved in a breath-taking 4-3 game against the Japanese, before a 4-2 reverse against the Brazilians in their very next fixture! Other less high-scoring, but equally intriguing matches include: the 0-0 semi-final draw after 120 minutes between Spain and Italy, where the two sides provided a penalty-taking masterclass, the 2-2 draw after 120 minutes between Italy and Uruguay in the 3rd place playoff, before the all-conquering Spaniards were dismantled on the pitch for the first time in 5 years by the home nation Brazil. A comprehensive 3-0 victory, with two goals from Fred and one from the talismanic Neymar, effectively ended Spain's reign as undisputed world kings of football.
So if we can agree that the Spanish domination has ended, who is most likely to replace them? Though I would argue that the domination has ended, we would be stupid to discount the abilities of the Spanish to win future tournaments. Though they may no longer be the nailed on choice, I still believe they have a decent shot at retaining their crown in Brazil next year. We mustn't forget that the Spaniards suffered a shock defeat to the USA in South Africa in 2009, only to sweep all before them aside the following year. The fact that the Spanish have also won the recent Under 21 World Cup also bodes well for the future. I have already said that we are unlikely to see such a domination as the one Spain has enjoyed in recent years in the near future. However, there are two further clear contenders for the crown.
Spain's vanquishers in Rio, Brazil, are the first. Though it could be argued that home advantage played a significant part in the demolition of the world champions, the fact remains that the hosts thoroughly outplayed their illustrious opponents for the full 90 minutes, and could concievably have won by more. Their side is formidable, with the likes of Neymar, Thiago Silva and Hulk harking back to previous glories, and with the majority of the side currently in their early twenties, there is a great deal of time for future growth. Being on home soil once more next year will give the Brazilians the boost they may need to reclaim the great trophy. Whether they can turn that trophy into a period of dominance would be the real test, with challenges from Uruguay and Argentina on a continental level, and Spain and Germany on the global scale. This weekend's result has sent a warning shot across the bows of many of the big nations worldwide, foretelling of a potential shift in power.
Though not involved in the last two weeks' competition, I still count Germany as one of the strong favourites to get their hands on the World Cup next summer. After the dominance of the German league in Europe this year, I must confess, I was ready to hand the trophy to them then. As the majority of the superstars in many of the big German clubs are home grown, they threaten to become the next Spain, building their national side around the squads of a few domestic clubs. After this weekend, I would very much like to see a Germany vs Brazil match, preferably on neutral ground, in an attempt to discover how far the Germans have come before embarking on what could be a glorious tour of South America next summer. Like Brazil, I doubt their ability to dominate global football, even if they do manage to beat the Spanish, however, a trophy would very much re-announce themselves on the world stage.
Other than the big three, there is a small chasing pack that will be eager to punish any slip-ups (sorry England fans, we are not even close!). I consider that group to include nations such as: Italy, Argentina, Holland, Portugal, Uruguay to name a few. Whilst none of these show the potential of the three superpowers, all have the potential on their day to win a tournament. The next few years will prove to be a tussle for power around the globe (let us hope we are simply talking in footballing terms). I for one am very much looking forward to seeing who claims the crown.
So the King is dead. Long live the King. But who is the King?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)