Given all that went the week before it almost defied belief that QPR's Anton Ferdinand and captain Ji Sung Park refused to shake the hand of Chelsea captain John Terry before Saturday's game.
What happened to the football brotherhood following the findings of the Enquiry into the Hillsborough disaster of 1989? It lasted less than a few days.
Ferdinand and Park refused to move on and betrayed the continuing grudge against the - pronounced innocent, let's not forget - Terry.
While one migh have some understanding and empathy with Ferdinand, Park's connection is tenuous at best (I guess it must be that he played with Ferdinand's brother Rio at Manchester United before moving to QPR).
QPR boss Mark Hughes mooted the idea of doing away with the pre-match handshake between the teams. But does he suggest the same for the captains - as it was his captain Park who refused to shake Terry's hand before kick-off. What next: do away with any references to sportsmanship altogether? (I guess that might actually be more honest in the game these days.)
Is there no room for forgiveness in these hard hearts? And forgiving an innocent man, remember.
Can we move on?
Tuesday, 18 September 2012
Friday, 31 August 2012
Early season shapes the football rankings
From the Football Ranking System we see that Manchester City have just about retained top spot from the very in-form early season pace-setters Chelsea. Indeed, a Chelsea win in the UEFA Super Cup tonight might see them take over on top.
The other early season form team Everton have risen from 6th to 4th.
It will be fascinating to see how far Rangers fall now that they are in Scottish League Division Three. Among such lowly opposition they will not score so many points unless they thrash everyone of them, and they're not doing that yet. In August Rangers have fallen from 8th to 19th.
Conversely, Swansea City have gone the other way, rising from 18th to 9th, and Wigan Athletic have gone from 14th to 7th.
Ten-place plus movers elsewhere include:
The other early season form team Everton have risen from 6th to 4th.
It will be fascinating to see how far Rangers fall now that they are in Scottish League Division Three. Among such lowly opposition they will not score so many points unless they thrash everyone of them, and they're not doing that yet. In August Rangers have fallen from 8th to 19th.
Conversely, Swansea City have gone the other way, rising from 18th to 9th, and Wigan Athletic have gone from 14th to 7th.
Ten-place plus movers elsewhere include:
- Sheffield Wednesday, up from 55 to 21.
- Leeds United, up from 49 to 36.
- Motherwell, down from 28 to 38.
- Yeovil Town, up from 80 to 69.
- Swindon Town, up from 87 to 71.
- Dundee, down from 62 to 73.
- Preston North End, up from 85 to 74.
- Crawley Town, up from 98 to 84.
- Chesterfield, down from 76 to 86.
- Bradford City, up from 107 to 97.
- Ayr United, down from 88 to 100.
- Southend United, down from 95 to 105.
- Dumbarton, down from 106 to 117.
- Brackley, new in at 157.
- Bradford Park Avenue, new in at 161.
- Woking, up from 177 to 166.
- Dartford, up from 178 to 168.
- Chester, new in at 173.
- Altrincham, down from 165 to 176.
- Oxford City, new in at 179.
- Billericay Town, new in at 184.
- Corby Town, down from 174 to 186.
- AFC Hornhcurch, new in at 190.
- Bromley, down from 189 to 199.
Tuesday, 21 August 2012
Football talks a good Olympian game; let's see it in deed
The Footballers versus Olympians debate has raged and has quietened down and will rear its head from time to time over the next season.
The problem with football is that it refuses to learn from other sports; it knows it is the Beautiful Game, but thinks that it is the pinnacle of beauty. But it isn't.
I am not going to go into all the things that football should learn from other sports in this post; they will be the subject of many other posts to come.
However, in the Footballers versus Olympians debate, one thing has struck me. The Olympians have never said a word. People in the media and many of us bloggers, tweeters, facebook posters have commented on their behalf: "Weren't they wonderful?", "Fantastic attitude", "Actually apologising to supporters", etc. But I can't recall seeing any quotes from any of the participiants themselves.
Yet those "in the [football] game" have felt the need to speak out: Richard Scudamore, Joey Barton, Gary Neville are a few that spring to mind. And, of course, they're mostly defending their sport. Well, what would we expect? Of course they would.
The problem lies in the very fact that they need to defend their sport, and the behaviour of players, managers and supporters. And they do need to. It's because football's reputation is so woeful by its deeds that it needs to defend itself in words. Prime example: Alan Pardew (a most unexpected culprit) demonstrates his attitude by his deeds (pushing an assistant referee), but then apologises in words afterwards.
There's always been the joke about the not-so-good manager or player, who "talks a good game".
How about those "in the game", cutting the talk, and improving the reputation of football in their actions? Come May next year, let's see if football no longer needs to defends its actions in words.
The problem with football is that it refuses to learn from other sports; it knows it is the Beautiful Game, but thinks that it is the pinnacle of beauty. But it isn't.
I am not going to go into all the things that football should learn from other sports in this post; they will be the subject of many other posts to come.
However, in the Footballers versus Olympians debate, one thing has struck me. The Olympians have never said a word. People in the media and many of us bloggers, tweeters, facebook posters have commented on their behalf: "Weren't they wonderful?", "Fantastic attitude", "Actually apologising to supporters", etc. But I can't recall seeing any quotes from any of the participiants themselves.
Yet those "in the [football] game" have felt the need to speak out: Richard Scudamore, Joey Barton, Gary Neville are a few that spring to mind. And, of course, they're mostly defending their sport. Well, what would we expect? Of course they would.
The problem lies in the very fact that they need to defend their sport, and the behaviour of players, managers and supporters. And they do need to. It's because football's reputation is so woeful by its deeds that it needs to defend itself in words. Prime example: Alan Pardew (a most unexpected culprit) demonstrates his attitude by his deeds (pushing an assistant referee), but then apologises in words afterwards.
There's always been the joke about the not-so-good manager or player, who "talks a good game".
How about those "in the game", cutting the talk, and improving the reputation of football in their actions? Come May next year, let's see if football no longer needs to defends its actions in words.
Monday, 25 June 2012
Weep for England
So we weep for England.
Once again we were beaten on penalties in a quarter-final. It is our lot.
But let us not disguise the fact that it would have been an absolute travesty of Chelsea-like proportions for England to have sneaked past Italy to the semi-finals. Italy totally dominated the whole of the second-half and extra-time, but just couldn't turn their dominance into a goal. England, however, barely got into Italy's half in that time.
Yet there is some pride in England's performance in the tournament. It does seem to show a new realism about England's limitations. We are simply not good enough to compete with the top nations in World football, of which most are in these European Championships. Top eight (i.e. quarter-finals) is the best we should realistically expect.
My worry is that the fact that Roy Hodgson has done pretty well with a weak and threadbare squad may blind people to the dearth of English talent and the trends that continue to sweep English players aside in our own Premier League.
With few English owners and English managers in the English Premier League, where is the concern for English players and the English national team? It isn't there.
We've got years of this international misery to come, and it will get worse.
As a final point: let's finally lay to rest this myth that there are any World-class English players. There are none.
Once again we were beaten on penalties in a quarter-final. It is our lot.
But let us not disguise the fact that it would have been an absolute travesty of Chelsea-like proportions for England to have sneaked past Italy to the semi-finals. Italy totally dominated the whole of the second-half and extra-time, but just couldn't turn their dominance into a goal. England, however, barely got into Italy's half in that time.
Yet there is some pride in England's performance in the tournament. It does seem to show a new realism about England's limitations. We are simply not good enough to compete with the top nations in World football, of which most are in these European Championships. Top eight (i.e. quarter-finals) is the best we should realistically expect.
My worry is that the fact that Roy Hodgson has done pretty well with a weak and threadbare squad may blind people to the dearth of English talent and the trends that continue to sweep English players aside in our own Premier League.
With few English owners and English managers in the English Premier League, where is the concern for English players and the English national team? It isn't there.
We've got years of this international misery to come, and it will get worse.
As a final point: let's finally lay to rest this myth that there are any World-class English players. There are none.
Wednesday, 20 June 2012
All these officials - and they still get it wrong!
Well, good for England. They beat Ukraine and won the Group!
It wasn't entirely convincing, but not many teams are convincing all the way through a tournament. Quarter-final opponents Italy, for example, have been particularly adept over the years at sneaking through the group phase without, in some cases, even winning a game!
But England will have to get better to stand a chance of progressing in this tournament.
England have played Italy only twice before in tournament matches and, strangely enough, they have both been IN Italy. The first was in 1980 in the European Championship when they lost 1-0 in Turin. The second time was in the third and fourth place play-off match of Italia '90 when Italy won 2-1 in Bari.
Going back to the Ukraine v England match and it is astonishing that we still have to suffer from goals not being given when the ball is over the line. This time luck favoured England as John Terry's clearance was of a ball that had crossed the line. The fourth (fifth or sixth or seventh?) official was standing less than ten yards away, but failed to see the ball had crossed the line (or, at least, failed to signal it).
WHAT DO THESE OFFICIALS DO? No one at the BBC or ITV seem to know and surely they would have found out by now. And why do they patrol the goal line on the same side of the pitch as the assistant referee (linesman in old money)? Maybe the goal line official was told NOT to signal for goal line decisions (which would be madness), as that is the assistant referee's decision, but the latter's view would be obscured by the former! (At least it would have been if the assistant referee had been able to keep up with play - he was five yards short!)
In addition, this same assistant referee missed a blatant offisde in the build-up to the phantom "goal", which would have avoided all this goal line fiasco. (I note that a furious Oleg Blokhin didn't complain about that decision not being given.)
Come on, even without goal-line technology, surely the now huge number of officials can get key decisions right.
It wasn't entirely convincing, but not many teams are convincing all the way through a tournament. Quarter-final opponents Italy, for example, have been particularly adept over the years at sneaking through the group phase without, in some cases, even winning a game!
But England will have to get better to stand a chance of progressing in this tournament.
England have played Italy only twice before in tournament matches and, strangely enough, they have both been IN Italy. The first was in 1980 in the European Championship when they lost 1-0 in Turin. The second time was in the third and fourth place play-off match of Italia '90 when Italy won 2-1 in Bari.
Going back to the Ukraine v England match and it is astonishing that we still have to suffer from goals not being given when the ball is over the line. This time luck favoured England as John Terry's clearance was of a ball that had crossed the line. The fourth (fifth or sixth or seventh?) official was standing less than ten yards away, but failed to see the ball had crossed the line (or, at least, failed to signal it).
WHAT DO THESE OFFICIALS DO? No one at the BBC or ITV seem to know and surely they would have found out by now. And why do they patrol the goal line on the same side of the pitch as the assistant referee (linesman in old money)? Maybe the goal line official was told NOT to signal for goal line decisions (which would be madness), as that is the assistant referee's decision, but the latter's view would be obscured by the former! (At least it would have been if the assistant referee had been able to keep up with play - he was five yards short!)
In addition, this same assistant referee missed a blatant offisde in the build-up to the phantom "goal", which would have avoided all this goal line fiasco. (I note that a furious Oleg Blokhin didn't complain about that decision not being given.)
Come on, even without goal-line technology, surely the now huge number of officials can get key decisions right.
Tuesday, 19 June 2012
Nervous about England's chances
Am I alone in being a little nervous about England's chances this evening?
They 'only' need a draw against Ukraine to progress to the quarter-finals and everyone seems to think it'll be a bit of a breeze.
I don't.
But of course it only takes one win for England to become world-beaters in so many eyes. And "we've got Wayne Rooney back". He might just upset such a delicate balance, but let's hope not; let's hope he shines.
England are no world- (or even Euro-) beaters for me. They're not the weakest team in the tournament, but are they really one of the top eight (i.e. worth of a quarter-final spot)? No, Ukraine might be one of the best eight either, but they'll quietly fancy their chances.
Beware the cauldron-like atmosphere that is bound to greet England's players this evening. Have they got the right stuff to progress?
We shall see.
They 'only' need a draw against Ukraine to progress to the quarter-finals and everyone seems to think it'll be a bit of a breeze.
I don't.
- We are AWAY to Ukraine in what appears to be the hottest venue (at least it has been before).
- Ukraine MUST WIN to progress themselves.
- England drew unconvincingly with France.
- England did beat Sweden - but that wasn't convincing either.
But of course it only takes one win for England to become world-beaters in so many eyes. And "we've got Wayne Rooney back". He might just upset such a delicate balance, but let's hope not; let's hope he shines.
England are no world- (or even Euro-) beaters for me. They're not the weakest team in the tournament, but are they really one of the top eight (i.e. worth of a quarter-final spot)? No, Ukraine might be one of the best eight either, but they'll quietly fancy their chances.
Beware the cauldron-like atmosphere that is bound to greet England's players this evening. Have they got the right stuff to progress?
We shall see.
Monday, 18 June 2012
Table ordering system at Euro2012 is over-complicated
I'm delighted to say that Euro 2012 has so far risen above expectations. There have been some interesting and some exciting games, and very few have been boring. No nil-nil draw yet either! Excellent.
However, there are always one or two things to gripe about (of course!).
As we half-way through the final round of group matches, it has come to light the extraordinarily stupid way of determining the order of teams in the groups. The number of points is the key way to order the teams and, thankfully, that is still the main way (but, as we see the way order is determined after that, we cannot be sure that UEFA will always retain points as the key method!).
If teams are level on points we go through this ridiculous ordering system:
In other words, ignore numbers 1, 2 and 3.
In this more sensible method, Group One's qualifiers would have been Czech Republic and Russia (rather than Greece).
But there's no hope. Why keep something simple if you can over-complicate it?
However, there are always one or two things to gripe about (of course!).
As we half-way through the final round of group matches, it has come to light the extraordinarily stupid way of determining the order of teams in the groups. The number of points is the key way to order the teams and, thankfully, that is still the main way (but, as we see the way order is determined after that, we cannot be sure that UEFA will always retain points as the key method!).
If teams are level on points we go through this ridiculous ordering system:
- head-to-head results
- if three countries are level, goal difference from games between them
- if three countries are level, goals scored in games between them
- goal difference from all group games
- goals scored in all group games
- UEFA coefficient rankings
- fair play ratings from the finals
- drawing of lots.
In other words, ignore numbers 1, 2 and 3.
In this more sensible method, Group One's qualifiers would have been Czech Republic and Russia (rather than Greece).
But there's no hope. Why keep something simple if you can over-complicate it?
Friday, 8 June 2012
Grass Roots Football Part 2
From a contributor:
I read and listen too many of the debates about the Grass Roots football transformation in England lead by the FA. As a youth team coach (volunteer) like so many other willing parents it all sounds wonderful and I’m all for it.
I read and listen too many of the debates about the Grass Roots football transformation in England lead by the FA. As a youth team coach (volunteer) like so many other willing parents it all sounds wonderful and I’m all for it.
However,
I find it so frustrating that The FA, the local County FA’s and the local
Leagues don’t seem to be completing the circle themselves.
My own
under 12 team have had a fantastic season, playing some really good passing
football and developing their skills along the way. I know and agree that it
isn’t all about winning but they reached their first ever cup final and were
delighted... BUT their day was ruined because the local league insists on
playing it on a full size senior pitch with full size goals. Even worse the
pitch was awful, like a plough field, only worse! It was the ground on a Ryman
League team and goodness knows what kind of horrid kick and rush football they
have to play on it. Subsequently the match that followed was by far the worst
of the season (for both teams), which ended up in a poor 1-1 draw, decided on
penalties (which we won, just so you don’t think this is about sour grapes).
Neither team played to their usual level and this was solely down to the size
and extremely poor quality of the pitch provided.
We and
the team we played in the final both benefit from having smaller junior size
pitch with junior size goals (21’x7’ feet rather than 24’x8’) and both of us
would have been happy to flip a coin and play it at either of our own grounds –
but “oh no, we can’t do that” says the league, it has to be at a neutral
ground. Obviously our massive home crowd of a dozen or so parents would be too
much of an advantage over the opposition!!
It is
just so unimaginably stupid that a local league affiliated to the local County
FA which is subsequently responsible to The FA itself who are driving these
changes can be so stubbornly ridiculous.
I
applaud The FA’s drive and commitment to changes in junior and youth football,
particularly bridging the gap between 7 aside and 11 aside with the 9v9 format,
which my own team has unfortunately missed out on. But, please get your own act
together first and INSIST that local County FA’s INSIST that local Leagues play
cup semi-finals and finals that they organise on neutral grounds on
appropriately size pitches with appropriately sized goals – surely this isn’t
too much to ask!?
Thursday, 7 June 2012
Negativity beckons in Euro 2012
So we come to Euro 2012 in Ukraine and Poland. I never was convinced of the validity of these two countries as a joint venue, and the stories we hear as we approach the tournament are not encouraging. Blimey - if it's enough to put England fans off travelling, then things must be bad! Let us hope that the tournament passes off without any major hitches.
On the field I have a feeling it's going to be a negative tournament. The trouble is that success can be achieved by negativity - you don't actually have to win or seek to win football matches to win football tournaments. Chelsea have proved that recently in the Champions League and Greece have proved it before in Euro 2004.
I know there's more than one way to win a football match, but we must do away with the odious penalty shoot-out and think of a better way to encourage teams to actually score goals - that is meant to be the object of the game after all. I have always advocated taking a player off each team every five minutes during extra time, and just play on till someone scores.
The old Golden Goal didn't really work - and it didn't work because there was still the back-up of a penalty shoot-out. Get rid of it! If you take a player off from each team during extra time and they know they MUST SCORE to win, then a goal will come. It will have to!
I can see teams trying to stifle the teams that want to attack and, having seen Barcelona fail this season, lesser teams will be encouraged to snuff the light out of the more enterprising teams.
Sadly, England fall into the "lesser team" category (they have done for years, but it seems that everyone has finally realised it htis tiem round!), so don't expect many goals in England's games. I could yet end up hoping against hope that they can win a penalty shoot-out!
On the field I have a feeling it's going to be a negative tournament. The trouble is that success can be achieved by negativity - you don't actually have to win or seek to win football matches to win football tournaments. Chelsea have proved that recently in the Champions League and Greece have proved it before in Euro 2004.
I know there's more than one way to win a football match, but we must do away with the odious penalty shoot-out and think of a better way to encourage teams to actually score goals - that is meant to be the object of the game after all. I have always advocated taking a player off each team every five minutes during extra time, and just play on till someone scores.
The old Golden Goal didn't really work - and it didn't work because there was still the back-up of a penalty shoot-out. Get rid of it! If you take a player off from each team during extra time and they know they MUST SCORE to win, then a goal will come. It will have to!
I can see teams trying to stifle the teams that want to attack and, having seen Barcelona fail this season, lesser teams will be encouraged to snuff the light out of the more enterprising teams.
Sadly, England fall into the "lesser team" category (they have done for years, but it seems that everyone has finally realised it htis tiem round!), so don't expect many goals in England's games. I could yet end up hoping against hope that they can win a penalty shoot-out!
Monday, 21 May 2012
Congratulations to Chelsea
Congratulations to Chelsea on winning the Champions League!
I'm not sure they won it in the greatest style (either by getting past Barcelona or by beating a dominant Bayern Munich on penalties in the final), but there are many ways to win football matches and Chelsea know how to do that. And the Germans can hardly complain about losing a match on penalties, can they!
The Blues stuck doggedly to their task, only attacking when they were behind and equalising from their only corner (to Bayern's 20) over the course of the 120 minutes.
That their talisman Didier Drogba, who one way or another contrived to defeat Barcelona in the semi-final, should score the winning penalty will be extra sweet for the Chelsea fans.
It was inevitable that Chelsea would eventually win the Champions League with Abramovich's millions (or is it billions now?). Maybe he'll decide his job his done and quit, or maybe he'd like to win the same tournament with a bit more style. It certainly won't be with this same core of players as Drogba, Lampard, Terry and Cole (Chelsea supremely solid rocks) are all the wrong side of 30.
The mistake that Andre Villas-Boas made was to try and move them on too quickly. They will move on soon.
Abramovich should certainly give Roberto Di Matteo the manager's job. Surely he must recognise that he's a lucky manager - and a lucky manager is always better than a good one.
Chelsea have ridden their luck in the past few weeks to lift two trophies. Surely Di Matteo cannot be denied the job now.
I'm not sure they won it in the greatest style (either by getting past Barcelona or by beating a dominant Bayern Munich on penalties in the final), but there are many ways to win football matches and Chelsea know how to do that. And the Germans can hardly complain about losing a match on penalties, can they!
The Blues stuck doggedly to their task, only attacking when they were behind and equalising from their only corner (to Bayern's 20) over the course of the 120 minutes.
That their talisman Didier Drogba, who one way or another contrived to defeat Barcelona in the semi-final, should score the winning penalty will be extra sweet for the Chelsea fans.
It was inevitable that Chelsea would eventually win the Champions League with Abramovich's millions (or is it billions now?). Maybe he'll decide his job his done and quit, or maybe he'd like to win the same tournament with a bit more style. It certainly won't be with this same core of players as Drogba, Lampard, Terry and Cole (Chelsea supremely solid rocks) are all the wrong side of 30.
The mistake that Andre Villas-Boas made was to try and move them on too quickly. They will move on soon.
Abramovich should certainly give Roberto Di Matteo the manager's job. Surely he must recognise that he's a lucky manager - and a lucky manager is always better than a good one.
Chelsea have ridden their luck in the past few weeks to lift two trophies. Surely Di Matteo cannot be denied the job now.
Wednesday, 11 April 2012
Why bigger clubs get more decisions in their favour
The offisde goal scored by Branislav Ivanovic against Wigan on Saturday was ridiculous. How the assistant referee could fail to spot the fact that Ivanovic was way offside was a mystery.
It brings up the old question of whether the bigger clubs have more decisions go in their favour.
The answer is yes, and here's why.
Chelsea score an offside goal at home. The crowd cheers, the Wigan players complain. Less trouble to let the goal stand. Chelsea 1-0 Wigan.
Wigan score an offside goal away. The crowd bays for the officials' blood, the Wigan players cheer, the Chelsea players complain. Less trouble to disallow the goal. Chelsea 1-0Wigan.
Chelsea score an offside goal away at Wigan. The crowd is small and makes less complaint. Just as easy to allow the goal as disallow it: Chelsea 1-0 Wigan.
Wigan score an offside goal at home. The crowd is small and makes less noise for the goal. Chelsea's big-name players mob the referee. Just as easy to allow the goal as disallow it: Chelsea 1-0 Wigan.
You can replace Chelsea with any large, well-supported club.
The officials don't mean it; it's not deliberate or malicious; it's not black or white, and it doesn't happen all the time. but it does happen and the end result is that the decisions will favour the bigger club.
It brings up the old question of whether the bigger clubs have more decisions go in their favour.
The answer is yes, and here's why.
Chelsea score an offside goal at home. The crowd cheers, the Wigan players complain. Less trouble to let the goal stand. Chelsea 1-0 Wigan.
Wigan score an offside goal away. The crowd bays for the officials' blood, the Wigan players cheer, the Chelsea players complain. Less trouble to disallow the goal. Chelsea 1-0Wigan.
Chelsea score an offside goal away at Wigan. The crowd is small and makes less complaint. Just as easy to allow the goal as disallow it: Chelsea 1-0 Wigan.
Wigan score an offside goal at home. The crowd is small and makes less noise for the goal. Chelsea's big-name players mob the referee. Just as easy to allow the goal as disallow it: Chelsea 1-0 Wigan.
You can replace Chelsea with any large, well-supported club.
The officials don't mean it; it's not deliberate or malicious; it's not black or white, and it doesn't happen all the time. but it does happen and the end result is that the decisions will favour the bigger club.
Thursday, 9 February 2012
Misplaced loyalty costs Fabio dear
So Fabio has gone!
The mistake the FA made when they appointed Fabio was thinking that putting a good manager in charge of the players would help create a great team.
But you can’t expect a chef to create a great meal with rotten ingredients.
And Fabio Capello couldn’t create a great team with overrated, overpaid and in the end, rotten players.
It is not surprising that the root cause of his downfall was a player who has caused and continues to cause ruffles and ructions wherever he goes. In his annoyance against the FA stripping John Terry of the England captaincy, Fabio Capello showed misplaced loyalty to a player whose very actions show little respect for the thoughts or feelings of anyone else. Capello would have been better off without him.
Whether England will be better off without Capello is open to question – and millions of words will be written in trying to answer it.
For now, it’s farewell to Fabio, but we’re still stuck with Terry.
Monday, 23 January 2012
Manchester clubs trump the north London cards
So Manchester gained the whip-hand over north London on Sunday as City beat Spurs 3-2 and United beat Arsenal 2-1.
Manchester City only just squeezed over the line against Tottenham with a last-gasp penalty taken by a player who might not have been on the pitch on another day, as Mario Balotelli supposed "stamp" went unpunished, but might have resulted in a sending-off on another occasion. My opinion is the same as Lee Dixon's on Match of the Day: there was enough doubt about the action to merit no action. Indeed, it may be that Howard Webb didn't even see it as his head was partly turned away when Balotelli's foot came down.
Perhaps, however, Tottenham boss Harry Redknapp should use his words to Gareth Bale and Jermain Defoe for failing to convert a glorious chance seconds before Balotelli's telling spot kick. It's all about points of view, isn't it?
And so it was in the Arsenal v. Manchester United game as Arsenal boss Arsene Wenger was roundly criticised and booed for substituting the threatening Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain with Andrey Arshavin as minutes ran out at the Emirates. The fact that Arshavin was ineffectual in preventing United's winner would not help Wenger's case. But he must have had his reasons. He said: "Arshavin is captain of the Russian national team. You have an 18-year-old kid making his first Premier League start and a player who is captain of his country and they are querying the substitution?"
Although no manager - including Wenger - can be right 100% of the time, I am staggered that Arsenal fans can doubt the man (trophyless for six years or not). Look around, you Gooners. If you sacked Wenger, who would be your ideal managerial candidate?
Manchester City only just squeezed over the line against Tottenham with a last-gasp penalty taken by a player who might not have been on the pitch on another day, as Mario Balotelli supposed "stamp" went unpunished, but might have resulted in a sending-off on another occasion. My opinion is the same as Lee Dixon's on Match of the Day: there was enough doubt about the action to merit no action. Indeed, it may be that Howard Webb didn't even see it as his head was partly turned away when Balotelli's foot came down.
Perhaps, however, Tottenham boss Harry Redknapp should use his words to Gareth Bale and Jermain Defoe for failing to convert a glorious chance seconds before Balotelli's telling spot kick. It's all about points of view, isn't it?
And so it was in the Arsenal v. Manchester United game as Arsenal boss Arsene Wenger was roundly criticised and booed for substituting the threatening Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain with Andrey Arshavin as minutes ran out at the Emirates. The fact that Arshavin was ineffectual in preventing United's winner would not help Wenger's case. But he must have had his reasons. He said: "Arshavin is captain of the Russian national team. You have an 18-year-old kid making his first Premier League start and a player who is captain of his country and they are querying the substitution?"
Although no manager - including Wenger - can be right 100% of the time, I am staggered that Arsenal fans can doubt the man (trophyless for six years or not). Look around, you Gooners. If you sacked Wenger, who would be your ideal managerial candidate?
Monday, 16 January 2012
Why do we have corners in football?
Many years ago my grandfather, who was not a great football follower, asked me (as a teenager) why, when a defending team put the ball over the goal line, was a corner kick given.
"Well," I replied, "that's the rule: if the defending team puts the ball over the goal line, a corner is awarded."
I had missed his point.
"Yes," he said, "but why is a corner given? Why is play restarted by kicking the ball in from the corner of the pitch?"
I couldn't answer him. I had no idea and still don't. I suppose someone came up with the idea as being a good way of giving the attachking team a chance to score when the defending team had knocked the ball out of play past their own goal line.
Perhaps a more pertinent quesion for football would have been: why do players throw the ball in with their hands when the ball has gone out over the touch line? That is a bit odd.
About 15 years ago there was an experiment at a low level (approximately Isthmian League level) where they played a season kicking the ball rather than throwing it. Presumably it didn't prove a success, or we'd all be doing it now.
Odd rules when you examine them, but maybe they show that not all is wrong in football, and some things are just right.
"Well," I replied, "that's the rule: if the defending team puts the ball over the goal line, a corner is awarded."
I had missed his point.
"Yes," he said, "but why is a corner given? Why is play restarted by kicking the ball in from the corner of the pitch?"
I couldn't answer him. I had no idea and still don't. I suppose someone came up with the idea as being a good way of giving the attachking team a chance to score when the defending team had knocked the ball out of play past their own goal line.
Perhaps a more pertinent quesion for football would have been: why do players throw the ball in with their hands when the ball has gone out over the touch line? That is a bit odd.
About 15 years ago there was an experiment at a low level (approximately Isthmian League level) where they played a season kicking the ball rather than throwing it. Presumably it didn't prove a success, or we'd all be doing it now.
Odd rules when you examine them, but maybe they show that not all is wrong in football, and some things are just right.
Tuesday, 10 January 2012
Third round weekend delivers as expected
It proved to be an interesting FA Cup third round weekend (as it so often is), from Paolo Di Canio's Swindon Town knocking out Premier League Wigan Athletic to Thierry Henry making a dream comeback for Arsenal, scoring the winner against Leeds United.
The Manchester derby didn't disappoint as we had the return of Paul Scholes, a dubious sending-off of Vincent Kompany as United roared into a 3-0 lead, and a stirring effort to peg United back from City - yet the half-time pundits on both ITV and Sky would have had City "accept and settle for the 3-0 defeat so that it wouldn't get any worse"! A pathetic assessment, and one that would no doubt have had any City fans growling with anger.
Crawley Town pulled off a giant-killing, by dumping Bristol City out of the cup, and Macclesfield Town (2-2 with Bolton Wanderers) and MK Dons (1-1 with QPR) came close and get a second chance.
As for Henry - fair play to him, and will be interesting to see if he can deliver in the Premier League, but from a Leeds United's fan's perspective, the overwhelmingly biased coverage by ESPN on Monday night was little short of disgraceful.
The Manchester derby didn't disappoint as we had the return of Paul Scholes, a dubious sending-off of Vincent Kompany as United roared into a 3-0 lead, and a stirring effort to peg United back from City - yet the half-time pundits on both ITV and Sky would have had City "accept and settle for the 3-0 defeat so that it wouldn't get any worse"! A pathetic assessment, and one that would no doubt have had any City fans growling with anger.
Crawley Town pulled off a giant-killing, by dumping Bristol City out of the cup, and Macclesfield Town (2-2 with Bolton Wanderers) and MK Dons (1-1 with QPR) came close and get a second chance.
As for Henry - fair play to him, and will be interesting to see if he can deliver in the Premier League, but from a Leeds United's fan's perspective, the overwhelmingly biased coverage by ESPN on Monday night was little short of disgraceful.
Friday, 6 January 2012
Where to look for Round Three shocks
As ever, when FA Cup third round day comes around, we all look for shocks. Of course, it's no longer "a day" as the third round is spread over four days this year, starting with Liverpool v Oldham tonight - no shock there, I'm sure.
The majority of the ties (26) take place on Saturday, so where might the shocks come?
Barnsley might knock out Swansea City at Oakwell given Brendan Rodgers's propensity to turn his nose up at anything that's not devoted to survival in the Premier League. Crawley Town could prove a tough trip for Bristol City. Fleetwood Town against Blackpool could be a tasty local encounter, but it's hard to see anything other than a Blackpool win.
For a real giant-killing, Macclesfield Town might fancy their chances against Bolton Wanderers, whose form has not been inspiring in the Premier League this season, but their recent 2-1 over Everton might have given them the boost they need.
Recent cup-fighters and form-team Cardiff City might also think they've got a good chance against West Brom at the Hawthorns, and it may depend on the strength of the side Roy Hodgson puts out.
On Sunday the might of Manchester meets head-on at City, with United probably having the bigger need to win, following back-to-back defeats. Without doubt, it's the tie of the round.
On Monday Leeds United travel to the Emirates, but it's hard to see anything other than an Arsenal win, despite the same tie last season going to a replay after a 1-1 draw at the same ground.
The majority of the ties (26) take place on Saturday, so where might the shocks come?
Barnsley might knock out Swansea City at Oakwell given Brendan Rodgers's propensity to turn his nose up at anything that's not devoted to survival in the Premier League. Crawley Town could prove a tough trip for Bristol City. Fleetwood Town against Blackpool could be a tasty local encounter, but it's hard to see anything other than a Blackpool win.
For a real giant-killing, Macclesfield Town might fancy their chances against Bolton Wanderers, whose form has not been inspiring in the Premier League this season, but their recent 2-1 over Everton might have given them the boost they need.
Recent cup-fighters and form-team Cardiff City might also think they've got a good chance against West Brom at the Hawthorns, and it may depend on the strength of the side Roy Hodgson puts out.
On Sunday the might of Manchester meets head-on at City, with United probably having the bigger need to win, following back-to-back defeats. Without doubt, it's the tie of the round.
On Monday Leeds United travel to the Emirates, but it's hard to see anything other than an Arsenal win, despite the same tie last season going to a replay after a 1-1 draw at the same ground.
Wednesday, 28 December 2011
Can Spurs really challenge City and United for the title?
Tottenham Hotspur brushed aside Norwich City last night to go seven points behind the two Manchester clubs with a game in hand.
Are Spurs a real threat for the Premier League title?
After losing their first two games (to United and City) they have only lost once since - to Stoke City - and they were desperately unlucky to lose that one. So it's been 12 wins in 15 games since those two opening defeats.
Spurs have been knocked out of the Europa Cup while both City and United have fallen into it since being knocked out of the Champions League. That could be a blessing for Spurs, but there is no question of United or City treating it as anything like a priority.
In the League Cup Manchester City play Liverpool in the two-legged semi-final. United and Spurs have already been knocked out.
In the FA Cup one of Manchester United or Manchester City will definitely get knocked out and one will definitely progress - as they are drawn against each other. Tottenham have the 'luxury' of a home draw against League Two Cheltenham Town, so they should progress.
It boils down to Manchester City having a lot of games; United with the League and FA Cup (at least as far as beating City is concerned) as priorities, and Tottenham with the League and the FA Cup as far as it takes them.
Tottenham undoubtedly have a multi-talented midfield, with Scott Parker, Luka Modric, Rafael Van der Vaart, being supported superbly by Gareth Bale on one side and Aaron Lennon on the other. The defence looks fairly strong and is backed by 40+ Brad Friedel showing no signs of a dip in form.
Maybe it is only up front where Spurs lack the fire-power to match the best. They average 2 goals a game; United average 2.61 and City average 2.94.
But with City possibly distracted by other tournaments, it may depend on United and Tottenham's progress in the FA Cup as to which will challenge City the most.
I don't think Tottenham are quite ready yet, but they're close.
Are Spurs a real threat for the Premier League title?
After losing their first two games (to United and City) they have only lost once since - to Stoke City - and they were desperately unlucky to lose that one. So it's been 12 wins in 15 games since those two opening defeats.
Spurs have been knocked out of the Europa Cup while both City and United have fallen into it since being knocked out of the Champions League. That could be a blessing for Spurs, but there is no question of United or City treating it as anything like a priority.
In the League Cup Manchester City play Liverpool in the two-legged semi-final. United and Spurs have already been knocked out.
In the FA Cup one of Manchester United or Manchester City will definitely get knocked out and one will definitely progress - as they are drawn against each other. Tottenham have the 'luxury' of a home draw against League Two Cheltenham Town, so they should progress.
It boils down to Manchester City having a lot of games; United with the League and FA Cup (at least as far as beating City is concerned) as priorities, and Tottenham with the League and the FA Cup as far as it takes them.
Tottenham undoubtedly have a multi-talented midfield, with Scott Parker, Luka Modric, Rafael Van der Vaart, being supported superbly by Gareth Bale on one side and Aaron Lennon on the other. The defence looks fairly strong and is backed by 40+ Brad Friedel showing no signs of a dip in form.
Maybe it is only up front where Spurs lack the fire-power to match the best. They average 2 goals a game; United average 2.61 and City average 2.94.
But with City possibly distracted by other tournaments, it may depend on United and Tottenham's progress in the FA Cup as to which will challenge City the most.
I don't think Tottenham are quite ready yet, but they're close.
Tuesday, 20 December 2011
Rodgers should stop moaning and get on with it
I see Swansea City manager Brendan Rodgers is moaning about the Premier League schedule over the festive period. They play - as do all the Premier League clubs - four games in 12 days or so.
I find this all this rather incomprehensible. No club in England or Scotland has played fewer games than Swansea City have so far this season - 17. In contrast, Fulham have played 31, including their assault on the Europa League, but I haven't heard Martin Jol complaining. (If he has, he might have some justification.)
Swansea City got themselves dumped out of the League Cup at the first attempt - beaten 3-1 at Shrewsbury Town - and one wonders what effort they'll make to get past Barnsley in the FA Cup third round in January.
I'm sure the Swansea City board will welcome the games over the festive period as they are always well attended and bring in commensurate revenue
Swansea City could end up playing a mere 40 games in the whole season. One wonders what the objective is: to play football or not to play football?
I find this all this rather incomprehensible. No club in England or Scotland has played fewer games than Swansea City have so far this season - 17. In contrast, Fulham have played 31, including their assault on the Europa League, but I haven't heard Martin Jol complaining. (If he has, he might have some justification.)
Swansea City got themselves dumped out of the League Cup at the first attempt - beaten 3-1 at Shrewsbury Town - and one wonders what effort they'll make to get past Barnsley in the FA Cup third round in January.
I'm sure the Swansea City board will welcome the games over the festive period as they are always well attended and bring in commensurate revenue
Swansea City could end up playing a mere 40 games in the whole season. One wonders what the objective is: to play football or not to play football?
Thursday, 15 December 2011
Fulham undone by last-gasp header
Fulham were undone by a sucker punch last night as they were knocked out of the Europa League by an injury-time header by Odense BK of Denmark.
Fulham were seemignly curising into the last 32 at half-time with a 2-0 lead, and needed to win to remain above Wisla Karkow in the group. But two second-half goals put paid to Fulham's Europa League ambitions. So ends a 14-game run in the competition which started way back on 30 June - nearly six months ago!
Despite a 3-1 defeat in Turkey, Stoke City qualified for the knock-out stages last night, but they could be the only British team to make it through the Europa League groups.
All of Celtic, Tottenham Hotspur and Birmingham City are starting this evening's round of matches in third place and all look unlikely to qualify.
But will they be sad or happy?
Celtic will be left to push for the SPL title. Tottenham will be left to push for (ahem) a European place, although they will hope to qualify for the Champions League; and Birmingham will be left to catch up their league games and settle down to plotting a way out of the Championship.
It makes you wonder why they bother to qualify in the first place.
Manchester City and Manchester United, take note.
Fulham were seemignly curising into the last 32 at half-time with a 2-0 lead, and needed to win to remain above Wisla Karkow in the group. But two second-half goals put paid to Fulham's Europa League ambitions. So ends a 14-game run in the competition which started way back on 30 June - nearly six months ago!
Despite a 3-1 defeat in Turkey, Stoke City qualified for the knock-out stages last night, but they could be the only British team to make it through the Europa League groups.
All of Celtic, Tottenham Hotspur and Birmingham City are starting this evening's round of matches in third place and all look unlikely to qualify.
But will they be sad or happy?
Celtic will be left to push for the SPL title. Tottenham will be left to push for (ahem) a European place, although they will hope to qualify for the Champions League; and Birmingham will be left to catch up their league games and settle down to plotting a way out of the Championship.
It makes you wonder why they bother to qualify in the first place.
Manchester City and Manchester United, take note.
Thursday, 8 December 2011
Manchester has the Europa League to look forward to
I'm sure a few weeks ago, Manchester was preparing to laugh at London as, at various times both Arsenal and Chelsea appeared unlikely to progress out of the Champions League groups.
Well, the luagh was transferred to London last night as both Manchester clubs failed to progress, while both Chelsea and Arsenal had already won their groups the previous evening.
Oh, woe is Manchester!
City's damage had alrady been done in previous matches - not only losing to both Napoli and Bayern Munich away, but also only drawing with Napoli at home.
United had faltered in earlier matches two - having beaten only Otelul Galati in this group - but even so, a draw in Basel last night would have seen them through. They lost 2-1. The loss of so many strikers to injury is taking its toll, even on a squad as big as Manchester United's.
So, they're both left to concentrate on domestic competition - oh, and the Europa Leagu, of course.
Well, the luagh was transferred to London last night as both Manchester clubs failed to progress, while both Chelsea and Arsenal had already won their groups the previous evening.
Oh, woe is Manchester!
City's damage had alrady been done in previous matches - not only losing to both Napoli and Bayern Munich away, but also only drawing with Napoli at home.
United had faltered in earlier matches two - having beaten only Otelul Galati in this group - but even so, a draw in Basel last night would have seen them through. They lost 2-1. The loss of so many strikers to injury is taking its toll, even on a squad as big as Manchester United's.
So, they're both left to concentrate on domestic competition - oh, and the Europa Leagu, of course.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
