The FA's Response: Changing Attitudes?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Who Makes It? On The Plane To Brazil

Just under a week until we know who to pin our childhood excitement on, however inevitable failure at the quarter final stage appears. The next in a long line of decisions for Roy Hodgson is who exactly has earned the place on the plane? His recent comments that a last dash of form wouldn't change his mind may be true, but it is worth examining those that seem set to miss out unless they do something spectacular with two to go in the Premier League season.

Goalkeepers
Obviously Joe Hart, but which other two deserve a place on the bench? For me, it is down to three for the two spots. Celtic's Fraser Forster has once again been solid for the Scottish champions this season, as he has for the past few campaigns. The main criticism levied against the ex-Newcastle man is that his abilities are overplayed due to the favourable clean sheet statistics, thanks mostly to Celtic's huge superiority in the league. However, having seen his performances against Barcelona both this season and last, I take such criticism with a pinch of salt. Reliable when called upon, I think he would be my number two.

So who for the last place? For me, despite the talk of youngster Jack Butland making the side, it has to be between West Brom's Ben Foster and Norwich's John Ruddy. The statistics demonstrate how marginal it is. While Ruddy's 11 clean sheets betters that achieved by Foster, who has only managed 7, the Norwich stopper has conceded 6 goals more than his West Brom counterpart. Perhaps that says more about the defence in front of him than his ability, but nevertheless a difficult decision. However, these, and any other stats like saves (which Ruddy also leads) are somewhat skewed by the fact that Ben Foster only managed 5 appearances in the first half of the season, with Boaz Myhill being preferred to the Englishman. Going purely on my gut feeling, I would take Ruddy. He is an excellent shot stopper who has earned the opportunity. Not that Foster hasn't, but his previous experience and mistakes unfortunately count against him.

Defenders
Now it gets interesting. With neither of the usual stalwarts of Rio Ferdinand or John Terry available for selection, a little more reshuffling is needed in the World Cup backline. Beginning at left back, it is a case of two places, three candidates. The left back present in the last three world cups, Ashley Cole, is not assured of his place this time around, having been robbed of his club spot by Cesar Azpilicueta. With the Chelsea defender being talked about as over the hill, it offers flying Everton wing back Leighton Baines the chance to cement that first team spot. Though the Toffees player has not been as effective this year as previous campaigns, he remains our best left back, and I would certainly take him (assuming his home sickness means he can go!).

This is one of the positions where a late run will make all the difference. Despite being sensational in the early to mid season, Southampton's Luke Shaw has flown somewhat under the radar in the last few weeks. Unfortunately for the 18 year old, this has happened just as Cole has returned to the fore for Chelsea in the big games in the Champions League and Premier League. For me, I would take Shaw. Cole has been an excellent servant of England, but his time is over, and it is time to allow the next generation of England players to take the main stage. With Baines into his early 30's, he is unlikely to keep the left back shirt for long, meaning that Shaw is the most likely to hold down the place in the long term.

Going into the centre of the field, it is again tough. I think that Gary Cahill and Phil Jagielka have already booked their places on the plane. This is not necessarily as a result of any performances this year, though Cahill has been exceptional this season in particular, but the partnership that the pair have created at the heart of England's defence. Outside of this pair, who is there? Thankfully not Matt Upson, but the likes of Joleon Lescott, Phil Jones, Chris Smalling, Steven Caulker and Ryan Shawcross have all been mentioned in relation to the contest. Of these, I would take Phil Jones, and maybe surprisingly, Steven Caulker. Lescott has not played enough games this season, while Ryan Shawcross and Chris Smalling are about as consistent as simulation decisions.

Right back is a little more confirmed. Though Liverpool's Jon Flanagan has had a good season, he is not ready for the World Cup. As a result, his teammate Glen Johnson and Tottenham's Kyle Walker seem shoo-ins for the squad. Both have had anonymous seasons, but with relatively little competition, it is certainly the position that England are struggling for now.

Midfielders
Here I will split this into central midfielders and wingers. Beginning with central midfielders, with Steven Gerrard's incredible season this year, he is impossible to rule out. Equally, exceptional years for Southampton's Adam Lallana and Jordan Henderson mean that I would take them too. That leaves just two places. So who is left?

Chelsea's Frank Lampard has had a difficult season, with sporadic appearances for Jose Mourinho's Chelsea, and being less effective going forward than he has been in previous years. Nevetheless, his England pedigree means that he cannot be ignored for consideration. Equally, injury has hit Jack Wilshere's England charge this year, with his appearances for Arsenal limited to a handful. Manchester United, despite a horrific season, have a number of English candidates, and Michael Carrick is certainly one of them. The defensive midfielder has struggled this year, after a number of excellent years for the Red Devils. Manchester City's James Milner, often maligned for being dull and boring, is perhaps the most consistent and hardworking player of the lot. What he lacks in flair, he more than makes up for in tenacity. However, his first team appearances have also been limited with the arrival of Jesus Navas. Ross Barkley, the Everton playmaker has shown desire, drive and innovation, but does his youth and inexperience count against him in such a hotly contested position? Tom Cleverley? No. Just no. Too far.

So which two get the nod? Though I would love to see Barkley lighting up the Maracana in July, I just wouldn't take the risk. There are too many experienced and seasoned campaigners to take the young Evertonian, but his time will come. At the other end of the scale, I would discount Frank Lampard. Though he can take a good penalty (always an important consideration with England), his best days are behind him, and he is no longer the 20 goals a season player we are used to seeing. It is so difficult to separate the three remaining, but I would take Carrick and Milner. Both have experienced World Cup football before, and both have the drive and work ethic to succeed in tough conditions. I feel Wilshere, with his well publicised petulance, would be far too easily wound up by the likes of Pepe and the South Americans with their diving to risk taking. Who knows, he may end up swearing at more crowds? Carrick offers reliability, while Milner offers stability in the midfield, which will be essential when playing sides with pace.

Now, to wingers. It's a shame Theo Walcott will not be on the plane, as he more than many deserves the opportunity after a lightning fast start to the season. However, the winger to most benefit from this has to be Raheem Sterling. The 19 year-old Liverpudlian has performed beyond everyone's expectations in the second half of the season, putting defences to the sword and acting as the catalyst for Liverpool's incredible title challenge. He is definitely there. Other than him, it is difficult. No-one else has stood out massively, with Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain and Andros Townsend denied games by both injury and more illustrious teammates. Aaron Lennon has been a regular starter, but has failed to fully take advantage. Similarly, Adam Johnson at Sunderland has attempted to show fight, with a few good mid-season performances. However, he has not been consistent throughout the season. For me, I would take the North London duo of Oxlade-Chamberlain and Lennon. Despite his excellent performances for his country, Townsend has not done enough to win a place throughout the season.

Forwards
Two of these are already sewn up. Wayne Rooney remains United's shining light despite the trials and tribulations, and Daniel Sturridge, behind just Luis Suarez and Yaya Toure, would be my pick for player of the season. So who gets the last two places? It would have been Jay Rodriguez after a phenomenal couple of years, but his horrific injury has cut that dream short. Despite a late run by Andy Carroll, I would take Rickie Lambert and Danny Welbeck. I dislike Welbeck's play in general, as his touch is often abysmal but he works hard. He is just an English Carlos Tevez, but he does have an excellent scoring record for the Three Lions. On the other hand, Lambert more than deserves his place. His power and aerial ability is important, but he is also more than capable of using either foot, and his dead ball delivery is exceptional.

Full Squad

Joe Hart (Manchester City), Fraser Forster (Celtic), John Ruddy (Norwich City)

Leighton Baines (Everton), Luke Shaw (Southampton), Gary Cahill (Chelsea), Phil Jagielka (Everton), Phil Jones (Manchester United), Steven Caulker (Cardiff City), Glen Johnson (Liverpool), Kyle Walker (Tottenham Hotspur)

Steven Gerrard (Liverpool), Adam Lallana (Southampton), Jordan Henderson (Liverpool), Michael Carrick (Manchester United), James Milner (Manchester City), Raheem Sterling (Liverpool), Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain (Arsenal), Aaron Lennon (Tottenham Hotspur)

Wayne Rooney (Manchester United), Daniel Sturridge (Liverpool), Rickie Lambert (Southampton)

England Series: Harry Redknapp: The Jilted Lover

                            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?

                             This post will be the last in my 'headline-makers' aspect to this England series, and has perhaps been the most damaging to English footballing stability. It concerns Roy Hodgson's appointment as England manager in the spring of 2012 was a surprise, as the front runner for the position from the start had been then Tottenham boss Harry Redknapp. The loveable Cockney Arry', best known for his transfer deadline day antics, most famously hanging out of his car window, and his odd resemblance to a bulldog, had proven himself to be one of the Premier League's top managers in the previous few seasons. Having taken Spurs from the relegation zone after 7 games of the 2008/2009 season, he transformed the North London club's fortunes, taking them to a league cup final in the same season, where they lost narrowly on penalties. The following year, he led Spurs to 4th place, and a Champions League spot for the first time in the club's history. A remarkable run in the competition took them to the quarter finals, where they had accept defeat against Real Madrid. Nevertheless, from the relegation zone to the quarter-finals of the Champions League in two years is a quite incredible run, and put the Spurs manager on the lips of many for the recently available post of England manager.

                              However, things took an unexpected turn for the Londoner. With all the distractions over his potential move, his Spurs side began to slide away from the title race in 2011/2012, even finishing behind local rivals Arsenal. This meant that they missed out on the automatic Champions League places, which would prove incredibly costly. With Chelsea winning the tournament, 4th was not enough to get them into the Champions League the following year. To make matters worse for media darling Arry', despite him being installed as overwhelming favourite to succeed Fabio Capello as England boss, the FA opted to go with Roy Hodgson, a decision met with derision by many in the footballing world. They say that bad things come in threes, and this was to be the case for Harry, as no sooner had the season concluded, with Spurs equalling their best ever finish to a Premier League season, he and Spurs parted ways, due to 'unresolved contract issues'. Since the dismissal, Redknapp's managerial career seems to have been in terminal decline. He quickly found employment in the form of struggling QPR last season, only to lead the club down, rock bottom of the Premier League. Since the speculation over the England job, he had not been the same successful Harry that football had known and come to love, and, underneath, there was developing a rather bitter edge to the Cockney manager that few had fully experienced.

                               This bitterness was suddenly thrust into the public eye with the release of his autobiography in October 2013. Here, he registers his disgust at the FA for the decision-making in the run-up to the announcement of Roy Hodgson as England manager. Whilst the former Spurs manager states that he never held anything against the former Fulham manager, the tone in which he wrote his words suggests exactly the opposite. Just read some of the words he (and by that I mean Martin Samuel) wrote: 'I wouldn't trust the FA to show me a good manager if their lives depended on it', 'Everyone says I was the people's choice, the only choice' and 'I got quite a few text messages at the time from players saying they would love me to manage England: Steven Gerrard, Wayne Rooney, Rio Ferdinand, John Terry. But the FA went for Roy Hodgson-a man who is more their cup of tea.' All of these quotes have an undertone of bitterness to them, and will do little to further his career.

                                 These comments are also exactly what Roy Hodgson and England did not need in the build up to their two most critical World Cup Qualifiers for Brazil 2014. With England not guaranteed qualification, two performances (at home to firstly Montenegro, and then Poland) would be required to ensure their place in South America. Considering that Harry specifically says in his book that he wants England to do well, you have to question the release date of an autobiography that is so critical of the England manager and the FA. Surely it wouldn't have made any difference to Redknapp if he had waited to release his book for another week? Or perhaps that was his intention-especially if England did fail to qualify over the following two games. That way, he could point to the England performances as evidence of the FA's incompetence in appointing Hodgson over him, as predicted in his book. Had he released it a week later, he could be accused of acting in hindsight, when his claims would not have as much of an effect. Perhaps that is me being cynical, but they are certainly questions that can be levied at the former Spurs boss.

                                  Timing aside, the way in which Redknapp has criticised the FA will do nothing to aid the England side as they prepare for the game against Poland. Any negative comments about the squad, manager and FA will inevitably destabilise the side, potentially even causing the seed of doubt into the minds of the England players. If the Montenegro game is anything to go by, we shouldn't worry too much about the mental effect, but nevertheless, it is hardly the ideal preparation. Redknapp has inherently criticised all three of those groups, claiming that recent performances at World Cups have not been acceptable, that the manager is not the right man, and as we have heard, aimed several shots across the bows of the FA. How much of this is influenced by the ludicrous expectations placed upon our national side by the media and the FA, I am unsure. However, we have been shown that our national team needs little excuse to implode, and these comments could certainly have been the catalyst.

                                   In my opinion, Harry Redknapp has acted very much like a jilted lover. His bitter comments to the press are broadly similar to telling your friends embarrassing secrets about your ex after they have broken up with you. How malicious the intent of both the comments, and the timing of them, are cannot be proven, but my cynical mind tends to suspect that there is a very good reason for releasing his comments when he has. Such has his recent conduct been, I would almost expect him to have a rebound one-night stand managing another national side to try and make England jealous! His managerial failure with QPR has left him wildly blaming others for his decline, with the FA the prime recipients of his bile. If nothing else, this episode has illustrated precisely why the FA made the right decision to go with Hodgson. If a manager deals with disappointment by bitching about others to the press, he is hardly the professional you need. His media darling image has well and truly gone now, and I expect him to become the managerial equivalent of a spinster, with his only supporters his loyal bulldogs.

Diving: A Red Card Offence?

                             Last weekend's events, most notably David Moyes's comments after Manchester United's home victory against Crystal Palace, has brought the topic of diving back into the public eye. So many players are accused of it, and there there are discussions in pubs up and down the land assessing what the appropriate penalty for divers is. The current system of a yellow card for 'simulation' is widely considered to be too lenient. However, is the answer really, as Crystal Palace chairman Steve Parish has suggested, a straight red card for diving offences? This post will look at the offence as it is currently defined, before examining the possible new punishments for the crime.

                               In order to fully understand the topic in question, it is worth consulting the FA definition of diving (or 'simulation'). Diving constitutes: 'an attempt by a player to gain an unfair advantage by diving to the ground and possibly feigning an injury, to appear as if a foul has been committed'. This seems relatively clear, and you would expect to see fairly regular punishments based on this definition. However, it proceeds to state that: 'a referee should be 100% certain that a player has simulated (feigned) an unfair challenge before cautioning the offender for unsporting behaviour. The referee must be convinced that there has been no physical contact whatsoever by the player challenging for the ball.' This is the cause of the controversy, as this clause means that referees tend to be overly lenient on simulation, not wanting to call a player a cheat, and this sometimes leads to miscarriages of justice when the referee gets it wrong. We will examine this in more detail later.

                                 Looking purely at the definition as it stands, we should perhaps compare it with other offences. By examining both those considered to be worthy of yellow and red cards, we will be able to see which category this offence more resembles. If we look at the options in both categories, I would say that 'unsporting conduct' would most easily be comparable from the yellow card section. The red card section does not appear to have an easily comparable alternative, with neither serious foul play, nor violent conduct accurately describing the act. If we run with the unsporting conduct offence, there are clear parallels between the pair. This indicates that perhaps the initial classification of diving as a yellow card carries weight.

                                 However, two alternatives have been suggested by prominent men in English football. We will begin by the suggestion made by Crystal Palace chairman Steve Parish, that diving should constitute a straight-red card offence. Despite my above paragraph, there is evidence to suggest that this may be a possible alternative. Diving is a scourge in world football, and needs to be stamped out. If we look at another offence that has been 'stamped down upon', we find that racism has been much more heavily punished in recent years, in an attempt to eradicate it from the game. Now, I am not for one moment saying that diving is as bad as racism, however, I am merely making the point that if you want rid of an aspect from a game, you must penalise every instance heavily. Therefore, a case could certainly be made for the introduction of a heavy-handed penalty for diving, at least until the act is not so prominent. However, there are a couple of problems with this. Firstly, there will be the inevitable comparison between diving and the other red card offences, which illustrates the gap in severity. Simulation does not seem on the same page as intentionally breaking someone's leg, but, under this rule change, they would be considered equally severe. Secondly, there is a more pressing issue with the rules. As the current idea of diving is so open to interpretation, there are already many instances of referees making the wrong call. Under these new rules, a referee making the wrong call could irreparably change the outcome of the game, potentially ruining a team's season. Until we solidify what is considered a dive, I feel that a red card could not be awarded for the offence.

                                     The second alternative is one that appears far more reasonable. David Moyes, having stated that he wanted to stamp out diving from his own club, with Ashley Young coming in for further criticism, then suggested that video technology should be used to retrospectively ban players who have been proven to have dived. As much as that will be a dagger to the heart of Michel Platini, I think that this is an excellent idea. It lowers the fear of referee's getting a decision woefully wrong and costing a team a game in an instant, whilst ensuring that those guilty of diving are rightfully punished. I would introduce an initial ban of 4 games for a diving offence, meaning that there is that aspect of over the top punishment with a more accurate justice system, which I believe forms a nice middle ground. Once simulation has begun to die out of the game, a reduction in the ban could then be enacted. However, I suspect that none of these will be considered, players will be allowed to con referees and dive all over the place. This will continue to cause a horrible Catch 22 situation for referees, who will be blamed as much if they fail to penalise a dive, than if they wrongfully penalise one. And it will continue to be the topic of pub gossip for years to come.

The Romance of the Cup: Wigan Athletic Win the FA Cup

            As a Manchester City fan, I had been hoping to do a comfortable, slightly gloating post about yesterday’s events. However, this was not to be. Congratulations must go to Wigan Athletic, and especially Roberto Martinez, as I believe that he and his tactics were a key reason for the Latics claiming their first piece of silverware in their 81 year history. I am also especially pleased for Wigan chairman Dave Whelan, as his story is particularly moving. A Blackburn Rovers player in 1960, Whelan went to Wembley to play in a cup final, only to suffer a horrendous leg fracture in the 43^rd minute. After this, he never got another chance to play at Wembley. An exemplary chairman of a football club, especially in today’s environment of hire and fire at will, Whelan has retained faith in Martinez for the last four years, enabling Wigan to beat the drop repeatedly. I am glad the FA allowed Whelan to lead his side out yesterday, as it is highly unlikely he will ever get another chance to do so.

 

                Pre-match, the team selection from Manchester City prompted much derision from those on Twitter, with City’s ‘cup goalkeeper’ Costel Pantilimon being dropped in favour of Joe Hart. After conceding only one goal in the entire cup run to this point, some believed it to be highly unfair that he would be replaced for the final. Personally, whilst I would have liked to have seen Pantilimon start, as his performances this season have deserved it, I can certainly understand the argument against. Hart is undoubtedly City’s number 1 goalkeeper, and in games such as these, you would want to play your best side. Equally, the big Romanian will not have done himself any favours in the past week, as he made it very clear that he will be leaving City in the summer to pursue regular first team football. This could quite easily be interpreted as the excuse that Roberto Mancini required to drop Pantilimon, as an apparent lack of loyalty to the club can certainly justify replacing the player.

 

                During the previous week, I had been telling friends ‘if City score early, it could be 3 or 4 nil.’ I also added that ‘if no-one has scored before half time, I suspect another replay of City vs Stoke final in 2011, with a 1-0 win.’ In the first half, City started relatively quickly, getting an early free kick and testing Wigan goalkeeper Joel Robles in the first 4 minutes. The big chance for City, and for my first prediction, in the first half fell to Carlos Tevez in the 25^th minute. A shot across the goalkeeper after some neat work in the box drew a fantastic last-ditch save with his legs by Joel. Other than that, Wigan had the vast majority of the play, with Callum McManaman looking a constant threat, creating several good chances for his team. Winning every second ball, and looking generally like the side who wanted the result more, Wigan defended stoutly and broke quickly, with Roberto Martinez’s tactics set up perfectly to stifle the usually creative City. By half-time, my City-supporting mum and I were suitable exasperated by their performance, and I hoped that Roberto Mancini really got stuck into them in the second half, prompting a higher tempo.

 

                Unfortunately for me, the second half remained vastly the same as the first. Whilst City retained possession slightly better for the first twenty minutes of the second half, there was little to indicate that they would score. Despite being 9/1 long shots at kick-off, Wigan continued to look dangerous on the break, with McManaman and James McCarthy driving the Latics forward. By 60 minutes, my pessimistic side was beginning to see the inevitable defeat that I have become so accustomed to when watching Manchester City. This was confirmed to me when Pablo Zabaleta, having already been booked, scythed down McManaman and received his marching orders in the 81^st minute. After this, Ben Watson’s winner in the first minute of injury time was completely foreseeable and deserved.

 

                Roberto Martinez may be moving on at the end of the season, with Everton a supposed destination, but if that was one of his final games for Wigan, then what a way to go out. His tactics for this game were unquestionable, and he has done his career no harm whatsoever with that victory. There are also several Wigan players that have played themselves into either a much more lucrative contract, or a move to a more high profile club. McManaman, McCarthy and Joel in particular stood out, but each and every one of the Wigan players had their part to play in the most momentous day in their history. I have to say, I would much prefer to lose to a side like Wigan than one like Chelsea, Arsenal and the like. This is simply because for the top sides, these finals happen relatively regularly, and therefore each win is less significant. The pride emblazoned upon every Wigan face as the final whistle was blown, and the celebrations on the touchlines and the stands clearly illustrate exactly how massive an achievement this was for this team, and how important is was to all.

 

Whilst the defeat felt like a dagger to my heart, I cannot deny that Wigan were by far the better side on the day, and encapsulated everything the FA Cup stands for. A true David vs Goliath encounter, with the underdog triumphing against all odds. A fantastic advertisement for the modern FA Cup, showing that it hasn’t lost any of its charm. Wigan were, on the day, thoroughly deserving victors. I now hope that they carry this momentum forward to avoid relegation. Otherwise, I fear that they will lose many of their cup-winning stars, and their inaugural season in European competition will fizzle out quickly next year.

 

Picture from Google Images