It had to happen and it duly did following an entirely insipid display at the Hawthorns against a West Bromwich team that Chelsea had not previously lost to since 1979.
The players at Chelsea must shoulder a large burden of blame for the sacking of this young, talented but entirely out of his depth manager as the display on Saturday showed they had simply stopped playing for him. In doing so, the players have acted disgracefully.
No matter what they have achieved before, they have short changed the fans and the owner as they attempted to shake off a manager that they did not want. The fans pay to watch Chelsea and the players are paid to represent the club, not to act out their own egotistical tantrums to the cost of everyone else.
For AVB, whilst his pride will surely be hurt it is not the worst result. He will be handsomely rewarded for this short tenure, another high profile job - possibly in Italy - will surely be waiting and the mess that Chelsea find themselves in in terms of the age profile and fitness of their squad could take years to sort out, indeed should there be no continuity in terms of manager hiring, it may not get sorted out at all.
Benitez was apparently approached with regard to a short term post and his would have been an intriguing hire. The attractions for Abramovich were his success in Europe and the potential to revive Fernando Torres. Benitez however seemed to learn little about the domestic side of English football in his time at Liverpool and he was certainly not loved by the Chelsea fans either.
The papers are full of talk of Guardiola and Mourinho. This blog would ask why on earth Pep Guardiola would want to leave the Nou Camp for Stamford Bridge? Guardiola currently has the best players in the world with the best youth infrastructure. Chelsea have an old and overpaid squad with almost no infrastructure in place.
Nearly anywhere would be a step down after Barcelona but this would be several. If Guardiola does leave the Nou Camp this summer, it will probably be for a well earned rest.
Mourinho of course would love the drama and the fans would clamour for his return also. Mourinho is not however what is required. Mourinho simply comes in, spends big, wins (hopefully) and then leaves. Chelsea need planning and that was what AVB was meant to do, but he had to keep them in the Champions League during the process.
The Champions League is precisely Chelsea's biggest problem and Arsenal are now firm favourites to land the last coveted fourth spot. A few years ago, the cost of hiring and firing managers (Chelsea's compensation figures to sacked managers beggars belief) and buying new players was an irrelevance, Roman simply dipped into his ample pockets.
Now however, the Champions League revenue is critical because of the UEFA Financial Fair Play regulations. That, coupled with the aforementioned compensation that Chelsea is paying to various managers and they will not even be close to meeting that criteria.
Liverpool have found that it is hard to attract certain players when you do not have Champions League football, Chelsea do not share their rich history and may find it even harder to do so even if they still enjoy the lure of life in the capital.
This blog warned over a year ago that Chelsea were at a tipping point and potentially headed for disaster and was shot down accordingly for it by many short sighted Chelsea fans. The writing has been on the wall for a while and a fifth place finish could potentially put Chelsea in a very tight spot. The Chelsea job is not necessarily any longer one that will the attract the very best candidates - No Nonsense.
Monday, March 5, 2012
Friday, February 17, 2012
Abramovich's Final Exams
This Summer will mark nine years since Roman Abramovich bought Chelsea football club. That is quite enough time for anyone to be at school studying one subject which in this instance is how to run a football club.
In all that time, Abramovich has never spoken in public with regard to Chelsea but what we can glean is that he has a genuine interest in football. Many will also think he has a sharp business acumen given his vast wealth, the combination should be a heady cocktail of success and in many regards it has been given Chelsea's three league titles and various near misses in the Champions League.
What is less clear however is how savvy an operator Abramovich truly is. There are a myriad of allegations and suggestions regarding his acquisition of Sibneft and the subsequent billions that came his way. Whilst clearly 'street smart', business genius he may not be.
Whilst nearly every Chelsea fan would thank him for the success he has brought to the club, what is less appealing is his stop/start nature of investment and his constant changing of managers. With the exception of Jose Mourinho who has proven to all at Internazionale and as Real Madrid are about to find out - engineers his own departures, the problem for Abramovich has been the appointments that he has made in the first place rather than the subsequent axing.
After nine years, Abramovich now stands at a crossroads, does he listen to the young, struggling manager who he courted so expensively last Summer and who refers continually to his 'project'? Or does he listen to his ageing and fading stars who whilst having served the club magnificently will now do everything to hang on to their place in the dressing room no matter what the drop in their powers may be.
It is clear that the Chelsea dressing room is split once again. Since Mourinho left, every manager without exception (Ancelotti was just good at ignoring it) has been subjected to pushback in the form of player power against any new ideas, players or systems.
The most powerful influences clearly are John Terry, Peter Cech, Frank Lampard and Didier Drogba. What is also clear is that every single one of those players is past his sell by date. That being the case, why listen to them?
You only need to look up the M6 to Old Trafford to see how these situations are dealt with there. Jaap Stam, David Beckham, Ruud Van Nistelrooy, Roy Keane, Dwight Yorke, even Paul McGrath in the dark old days. All of these players were jettisoned at the first sign of either trouble or that they were possibly getting over the hill.
In most cases, good transfer fees were obtained and the money reinvested in younger players, the No7 shirt being the most obvious success. Beckham brought through as a school boy, sold to Real Madrid for 24M. The money reinvested in the 12M teenager Cristiano Ronaldo who was then onsold again to the Bernabeau, this time for a world record transfer fee of 80M.
Chelsea, have passed up several opportunities to sell both Didier Drogba and John Terry in the past few seasons, both who have become fitful performers at best. Whilst the Championship under Ancelotti would probably have not been won without those two granted, the probable 60M in transfer fees (City were prepared to pay over 40M for Terry at one stage) and the 300K or so a week in wages saved over that period would have allowed significant reinvestment in a chronically ageing squad and gone a long way to helping Chelsea get closer to the financial fair play regulations. The prospect of Terry being a Man City player when the Wayne Bridge scandal broke would also have been highly entertaining.
It is clear that Chelsea's transfer policy has suffered from a lack of continuity at manager level with each hired gun simply trying to win the Championship that season and keep his job rather than planning for the future which in fairness to AVB seems to be what he is trying to do. The problem is he has to keep the team in the Champions League spots at the same time or the financial fair play implications would render the team rebuilding impossible.
It is obvious that some players will not support his 'project', it is simply because they know it will no longer include them, what the players are not understanding is that it is not AVB's fault, it is Father Time's. There is no question that he would not love ten years younger versions of John Terry, Frank Lampard and Didier Drogba, who wouldn't?
Abramovich has been at school quite long enough and it is time for him to show that he has been listening in class and that he is ready to graduate. Listening to the calls from faded stars still texting Jose Mourinho and pleas for Guus Hiddink will send the club even further backwards. It is time for Abramovich to look to younger heads and instill some continuity with managers - No Nonsense.
In all that time, Abramovich has never spoken in public with regard to Chelsea but what we can glean is that he has a genuine interest in football. Many will also think he has a sharp business acumen given his vast wealth, the combination should be a heady cocktail of success and in many regards it has been given Chelsea's three league titles and various near misses in the Champions League.
What is less clear however is how savvy an operator Abramovich truly is. There are a myriad of allegations and suggestions regarding his acquisition of Sibneft and the subsequent billions that came his way. Whilst clearly 'street smart', business genius he may not be.
Whilst nearly every Chelsea fan would thank him for the success he has brought to the club, what is less appealing is his stop/start nature of investment and his constant changing of managers. With the exception of Jose Mourinho who has proven to all at Internazionale and as Real Madrid are about to find out - engineers his own departures, the problem for Abramovich has been the appointments that he has made in the first place rather than the subsequent axing.
After nine years, Abramovich now stands at a crossroads, does he listen to the young, struggling manager who he courted so expensively last Summer and who refers continually to his 'project'? Or does he listen to his ageing and fading stars who whilst having served the club magnificently will now do everything to hang on to their place in the dressing room no matter what the drop in their powers may be.
It is clear that the Chelsea dressing room is split once again. Since Mourinho left, every manager without exception (Ancelotti was just good at ignoring it) has been subjected to pushback in the form of player power against any new ideas, players or systems.
The most powerful influences clearly are John Terry, Peter Cech, Frank Lampard and Didier Drogba. What is also clear is that every single one of those players is past his sell by date. That being the case, why listen to them?
You only need to look up the M6 to Old Trafford to see how these situations are dealt with there. Jaap Stam, David Beckham, Ruud Van Nistelrooy, Roy Keane, Dwight Yorke, even Paul McGrath in the dark old days. All of these players were jettisoned at the first sign of either trouble or that they were possibly getting over the hill.
In most cases, good transfer fees were obtained and the money reinvested in younger players, the No7 shirt being the most obvious success. Beckham brought through as a school boy, sold to Real Madrid for 24M. The money reinvested in the 12M teenager Cristiano Ronaldo who was then onsold again to the Bernabeau, this time for a world record transfer fee of 80M.
Chelsea, have passed up several opportunities to sell both Didier Drogba and John Terry in the past few seasons, both who have become fitful performers at best. Whilst the Championship under Ancelotti would probably have not been won without those two granted, the probable 60M in transfer fees (City were prepared to pay over 40M for Terry at one stage) and the 300K or so a week in wages saved over that period would have allowed significant reinvestment in a chronically ageing squad and gone a long way to helping Chelsea get closer to the financial fair play regulations. The prospect of Terry being a Man City player when the Wayne Bridge scandal broke would also have been highly entertaining.
It is clear that Chelsea's transfer policy has suffered from a lack of continuity at manager level with each hired gun simply trying to win the Championship that season and keep his job rather than planning for the future which in fairness to AVB seems to be what he is trying to do. The problem is he has to keep the team in the Champions League spots at the same time or the financial fair play implications would render the team rebuilding impossible.
It is obvious that some players will not support his 'project', it is simply because they know it will no longer include them, what the players are not understanding is that it is not AVB's fault, it is Father Time's. There is no question that he would not love ten years younger versions of John Terry, Frank Lampard and Didier Drogba, who wouldn't?
Abramovich has been at school quite long enough and it is time for him to show that he has been listening in class and that he is ready to graduate. Listening to the calls from faded stars still texting Jose Mourinho and pleas for Guus Hiddink will send the club even further backwards. It is time for Abramovich to look to younger heads and instill some continuity with managers - No Nonsense.
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
Rangers in the red
Glasgow Rangers yesterday lodged papers signalling their intent to enter administration. The statement made by Craig Whyte was as opaque as his previous business dealings still remain.
He stated that the move had been made to 'protect the club' and with the possibility of liabilities to Her Majesty's Customs of more than 50M it may well be that he is acting in Rangers' best interests. His past and lack of disclosure on his previous dealings however means it is hard to either believe or understand what his true motives are.
Whyte stands accused as an alleged fraud and charlatan in his business dealings yet whilst he rules the roost currently, it is the previously heralded maverick reign of David Murray that has put Rangers into such a disastrous position. His ludicrous spending now appearing to be paired with illegal means of paying the players. The only thing that has not yet played out in this saga is that Peter Risdale hasn't offered to come to the rescue.
No club should ever feel it is too big to fail. Supporters of both Leeds and Fiorentina (both more famous names in European terms) would surely vouch for that. Where Rangers differs from either of these clubs is in terms of its' domestic stature as part of an all conquering duopoly with Celtic.
Whilst nearly everyone in Scotland that does not support Rangers will find great mirth in the plight of the blue half of Glasgow, the reality is that should Rangers cease trading, the implosion that would face Scottish football would be catastrophic.
Nearly every professional club in Scotland lives beyond its' means with Hearts as an example under the stewdardship of the Rasputin like Romanov struggling to pay their players on a monthly basis. The budgets - we use the term loosely - that these clubs use is based on television income, advertising and gate receipts which revolves around a huge percentage of income from matches against the Old Firm.
Should Rangers go under, every single contract or financial arrangement that these clubs have will be left null and void in terms of these club's ability to fulfill those commitments. Television and advertising income will dry up and the liabilities in terms of players' wages will become unserviceable. In basic terms, they will all have to enter administration also.
For Celtic, currently enjoying the plight of their neighbours, the perils are in some way the greatest as they have the furthest to fall. Their chairmen yesterday said that Celtic do not need Rangers in order to operate and in many respects he is completely accurate. What he is missing however is that in any sport where you remove all semblance of competition, that sport crumbles and dies.
Celtic's attendances, always far and away been the best in Scotland (even taking Rangers into account) have already started to teeter and without their closest rivals, can they really expect packed houses for a league that they will have already won by January?
The lack of any seriously competitive games will seriously hamper their already challenged European ambitions also. Their squad would face serious downsizing to that required to win the league given the remaining level of competition and the financial reality of the appeal of that product.
No one is to blame for this sorry mess other than Rangers themselves and the revelation yesterday by Whyte that Rangers were still operating at a 10M annual loss (presumably interest payments) despite the slashing of their playing staff and gates of close to 50,000 was quite staggering.
Scottish football has been a mess since the late 80s due the entirely lop sided nature of the league and every fan in Scotland will be feeling delighted about Rangers' predicament given their endurance of watching Rangers win nine in a row on the back of racking up a credit card debt that Mr Murray and the Ibrox side had no means of paying.
David Murray's legacy to Rangers it would appear is not the fantastic training and youth complex that bears his name and is actually an abyss for them to fall in to. The problem for Scottish football is that black holes aren't selective about what gets sucked in, they take everything without exclusion - No Nonsense.
He stated that the move had been made to 'protect the club' and with the possibility of liabilities to Her Majesty's Customs of more than 50M it may well be that he is acting in Rangers' best interests. His past and lack of disclosure on his previous dealings however means it is hard to either believe or understand what his true motives are.
Whyte stands accused as an alleged fraud and charlatan in his business dealings yet whilst he rules the roost currently, it is the previously heralded maverick reign of David Murray that has put Rangers into such a disastrous position. His ludicrous spending now appearing to be paired with illegal means of paying the players. The only thing that has not yet played out in this saga is that Peter Risdale hasn't offered to come to the rescue.
No club should ever feel it is too big to fail. Supporters of both Leeds and Fiorentina (both more famous names in European terms) would surely vouch for that. Where Rangers differs from either of these clubs is in terms of its' domestic stature as part of an all conquering duopoly with Celtic.
Whilst nearly everyone in Scotland that does not support Rangers will find great mirth in the plight of the blue half of Glasgow, the reality is that should Rangers cease trading, the implosion that would face Scottish football would be catastrophic.
Nearly every professional club in Scotland lives beyond its' means with Hearts as an example under the stewdardship of the Rasputin like Romanov struggling to pay their players on a monthly basis. The budgets - we use the term loosely - that these clubs use is based on television income, advertising and gate receipts which revolves around a huge percentage of income from matches against the Old Firm.
Should Rangers go under, every single contract or financial arrangement that these clubs have will be left null and void in terms of these club's ability to fulfill those commitments. Television and advertising income will dry up and the liabilities in terms of players' wages will become unserviceable. In basic terms, they will all have to enter administration also.
For Celtic, currently enjoying the plight of their neighbours, the perils are in some way the greatest as they have the furthest to fall. Their chairmen yesterday said that Celtic do not need Rangers in order to operate and in many respects he is completely accurate. What he is missing however is that in any sport where you remove all semblance of competition, that sport crumbles and dies.
Celtic's attendances, always far and away been the best in Scotland (even taking Rangers into account) have already started to teeter and without their closest rivals, can they really expect packed houses for a league that they will have already won by January?
The lack of any seriously competitive games will seriously hamper their already challenged European ambitions also. Their squad would face serious downsizing to that required to win the league given the remaining level of competition and the financial reality of the appeal of that product.
No one is to blame for this sorry mess other than Rangers themselves and the revelation yesterday by Whyte that Rangers were still operating at a 10M annual loss (presumably interest payments) despite the slashing of their playing staff and gates of close to 50,000 was quite staggering.
Scottish football has been a mess since the late 80s due the entirely lop sided nature of the league and every fan in Scotland will be feeling delighted about Rangers' predicament given their endurance of watching Rangers win nine in a row on the back of racking up a credit card debt that Mr Murray and the Ibrox side had no means of paying.
David Murray's legacy to Rangers it would appear is not the fantastic training and youth complex that bears his name and is actually an abyss for them to fall in to. The problem for Scottish football is that black holes aren't selective about what gets sucked in, they take everything without exclusion - No Nonsense.
Monday, February 13, 2012
Dalglish and AVB get it wholly wrong
King Kenny?
Firstly, let us draw a line under the Evra/Suarez nonsense. Dalglish made himself look ignorant, arrogant and entirely out of touch with reality with his barbed and aggressive post match interview defending his player.
Luis Suarez has behaved disgracefully and the direct intervention of the US owners was warmly welcomed. It's just a pity that Dalglish couldn't have shown some dignity without being instructed to do so, being given lessons in how to behave less crassly from Americans?
So on to the football and as we have stated several times before, Liverpool are going nowhere under Dalglish. Realistically they are no closer to the top sides than they were twelve months ago. A midfield containing Spearing and Henderson hardly inspires confidence and Dalglish's tactics left much to be desired.
One constant theme that has run through this season is that ManYoo's new keeper De Gea is 'dodgy' and cannot handle crosses. In front of him was an increasingly fragile Rio Ferdinand and the mediocre Jonny Evans. Armed with these facts, Dalglish chose to go with one only up front and leave the one man keeper wrecking machine that is Andy Carroll on the bench. It is also worth noting that Carroll had been putting in improved performances recently, if anyone could have unsettled De Gea it was he.
Liverpool were duly dispatched without too much difficulty with a late Suarez consolation flattering the scoreline for the Anfield side. Dalglish's negativity ensured that Liverpool never had a realistic shot at winning the match and his tactics are wholly to blame.
Andre Villas Boas
Chelsea fans are not everyone's favourites granted. In the same way that other fans can behave in similarly vile manners, they have been guilty of many distasteful instances over the years. One thing however that the crowd at Stamford Bridge typically does do is back their manager no matter what.
Since Abramovich's arrival, Mourinho, Hiddink and Ancelotti all enjoyed great support. Even the much maligned Grant and Scolari as well as the entirely wacky Claudio Ranieri were on the whole treated fondly by the blues' supporters and received their backing for the most.
AVB endured taunts from the travelling Chelsea fans on Saturday and the writer of this column for the first time in twenty years found himself thinking 'he has to go'. It is tough and probably premature to be calling for his head given the three year plan, the age of the man and the transitional phase that the team is in. With the financial fair play regulations however, finishing lower than fourth is not an option.
Ironically it may be that Abramovich's itchy trigger finger gives AVB a reprieve as the publicity (and cost) associated with his perennial sacking of managers means the oligarch would look highly foolish firing yet another manager so quickly.
In the same way that young players are 'bought for the future', AVB in his early thirties was hired with an eye to the next few years. The problem is that whilst no one expected Chelsea to win the league this year, the bare minimum is really third place as even fourth carries the danger of a qualifying tie for the Champions League.
Chelsea were entirely awful on Saturday. Without meaning any disrespect to Everton, the Toffees are a hard working and honest Premiership side at best and Chelsea could have played for a week without scoring against them. The worrying part is how a Chelsea side so poor can find a way to garner enough points to finish in the top four.
Tactically Chelsea were not at the races. Going forward they seemed to have no options in attack yet they always managed to look stretched when being attacked despite apparently having no players in advanced positions. With Terry on the sidelines, it seems odd that Gary Cahill was not selected given that he would have offered stability at the back and allowed Ivanovic to be deployed at right back.
Much of Chelsea's misery lies with Torres. Add 15 goals (as should be expected reasonably) to his tally this season and Chelsea could have possibly another 10 points. This however would be papering over the cracks of a team, especially in midfield that is woefully short of pace, ideas and quality.
It looks like Torres' career at Chelsea could be over come the Summer, the irony being that wherever his cut price destination is - possibly back to Atletico - his confidence may well return and the goals will hopefully come for him again. He cut an incredibly forlorn figure on Saturday as he again could find no way into the game.
There could be more than one Stamford Bridge employee heading back to the Iberian peninsula with their tails between their legs - albeit it with trouser pockets stuffed with cash - come this Summer. Did someone mention Jose Mourinho? - No Nonsense.
Firstly, let us draw a line under the Evra/Suarez nonsense. Dalglish made himself look ignorant, arrogant and entirely out of touch with reality with his barbed and aggressive post match interview defending his player.
Luis Suarez has behaved disgracefully and the direct intervention of the US owners was warmly welcomed. It's just a pity that Dalglish couldn't have shown some dignity without being instructed to do so, being given lessons in how to behave less crassly from Americans?
So on to the football and as we have stated several times before, Liverpool are going nowhere under Dalglish. Realistically they are no closer to the top sides than they were twelve months ago. A midfield containing Spearing and Henderson hardly inspires confidence and Dalglish's tactics left much to be desired.
One constant theme that has run through this season is that ManYoo's new keeper De Gea is 'dodgy' and cannot handle crosses. In front of him was an increasingly fragile Rio Ferdinand and the mediocre Jonny Evans. Armed with these facts, Dalglish chose to go with one only up front and leave the one man keeper wrecking machine that is Andy Carroll on the bench. It is also worth noting that Carroll had been putting in improved performances recently, if anyone could have unsettled De Gea it was he.
Liverpool were duly dispatched without too much difficulty with a late Suarez consolation flattering the scoreline for the Anfield side. Dalglish's negativity ensured that Liverpool never had a realistic shot at winning the match and his tactics are wholly to blame.
Andre Villas Boas
Chelsea fans are not everyone's favourites granted. In the same way that other fans can behave in similarly vile manners, they have been guilty of many distasteful instances over the years. One thing however that the crowd at Stamford Bridge typically does do is back their manager no matter what.
Since Abramovich's arrival, Mourinho, Hiddink and Ancelotti all enjoyed great support. Even the much maligned Grant and Scolari as well as the entirely wacky Claudio Ranieri were on the whole treated fondly by the blues' supporters and received their backing for the most.
AVB endured taunts from the travelling Chelsea fans on Saturday and the writer of this column for the first time in twenty years found himself thinking 'he has to go'. It is tough and probably premature to be calling for his head given the three year plan, the age of the man and the transitional phase that the team is in. With the financial fair play regulations however, finishing lower than fourth is not an option.
Ironically it may be that Abramovich's itchy trigger finger gives AVB a reprieve as the publicity (and cost) associated with his perennial sacking of managers means the oligarch would look highly foolish firing yet another manager so quickly.
In the same way that young players are 'bought for the future', AVB in his early thirties was hired with an eye to the next few years. The problem is that whilst no one expected Chelsea to win the league this year, the bare minimum is really third place as even fourth carries the danger of a qualifying tie for the Champions League.
Chelsea were entirely awful on Saturday. Without meaning any disrespect to Everton, the Toffees are a hard working and honest Premiership side at best and Chelsea could have played for a week without scoring against them. The worrying part is how a Chelsea side so poor can find a way to garner enough points to finish in the top four.
Tactically Chelsea were not at the races. Going forward they seemed to have no options in attack yet they always managed to look stretched when being attacked despite apparently having no players in advanced positions. With Terry on the sidelines, it seems odd that Gary Cahill was not selected given that he would have offered stability at the back and allowed Ivanovic to be deployed at right back.
Much of Chelsea's misery lies with Torres. Add 15 goals (as should be expected reasonably) to his tally this season and Chelsea could have possibly another 10 points. This however would be papering over the cracks of a team, especially in midfield that is woefully short of pace, ideas and quality.
It looks like Torres' career at Chelsea could be over come the Summer, the irony being that wherever his cut price destination is - possibly back to Atletico - his confidence may well return and the goals will hopefully come for him again. He cut an incredibly forlorn figure on Saturday as he again could find no way into the game.
There could be more than one Stamford Bridge employee heading back to the Iberian peninsula with their tails between their legs - albeit it with trouser pockets stuffed with cash - come this Summer. Did someone mention Jose Mourinho? - No Nonsense.
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
India's dereliction of duty to test cricket.
Test cricket is not in a good place and has not been for some time if truth be told. Crowds and general interest in the longer format of the game have been dwindling and countries such as the West Indies in particular and even Australia have been suffering in an exodus from the wider sport as the world media bombasts the global public with other sports with far quicker results.
Whilst test cricket remains hugely popular in Australia, it is only really in England - at smaller grounds - where sell outs for entire tests can be expected every time. Australia has a relatively small population and there is only so much that they can do. One suspects however that not holding tests that run their entire duration during the working week such as the recently in Sydney might be a good place to start.
Whilst this is all well and good, the reality of modern cricket finances means is that it is what India says and does that matters. The farcical ICC ruling allowing India to effectively veto the DRS system when they play is an indication of where the true power lies. The enormous (and welcome it must be said) success of the IPL has left many players reconsidering their attitude towards test cricket and it will only continue.
Only in the past week, M.S. Dhoni has indicated his time frame for retiring from test cricket. This will obviously allow him to extend his cricketing career in the shorter and more importantly most lucrative forms of the game. For a player to give up the shorter forms in order to extend his career is the supposedly elite form of the test match arena is several steps too far.
Sponsorships and endorsements are not formed by spending months at a time in places like New Zealand or Jamaica, they are made during two months of the IPL back home. It is hard to be too critical of someone like Dhoni in this day and age either such are the vast riches you would be asking him to waive.
India were until last Summer the number one ranked test team with a team of glittering if ageing stars especially in their batting order. Since then they have been utterly humbled by both England and Australia in two touring test series, or have they?
In the same twelve month period, India won the World Cup at home as well as handing out a thrashing to England in a limited over series, again at home. Now whilst India winning the vast majority of their matches at home whilst being far less successful on tour is nothing new, it is the manner of these defeats which makes one ask the question, do they really care?
Having watched both test series a couple of things stand out. Firstly losing to England last summer was no disgrace, they are a fine test side who had also hammered Australia down under prior to that.
This however is no great Australia team, and whilst they appear to have found some talent within the seam bowling ranks they are a thousand miles from being a great side. What you always get however from an Australian team is heart and effort and that is exactly what India are missing and there is the rub.
In both series, one against a good side with their tails up and one against a lesser team working very hard, India and especially their oft heralded batsmen have given the impression of simply not wanting to be there and that is biggest concern.
It could be wrong on the part of the writer to suggest this, it may well be that it is simply a class of batsmen who are either all horribly out of form or have simply grown too old at exactly the same time. Their performances at home in the short formats however suggest otherwise.
The openers Sehwag and the more youthful Gambhir have been awful in this latest series and have played poorly to get out. No one should ever question the application of Dravid who probably is simply out of form and Sachin has made a decent fist of things as everything falls apart around him. VVS has been dreadful and too often Kohli and Dhoni have refused to dig in and grind out a position and it was exactly the same in England.
India will point to injuries, Sehwag missed most of the England tour, Harbajhan went home injured also from England and Zaheer has been fighting his way back from injury, but again the thirst for limited overs action has removed the opportunities for rest.
Many England players and the likes of Ponting and Clarke have not particpated in the IPL one presumes for this very reason with England's central contracts in some instances prohibiting long periods of exposure to these types of tournaments. The likes of Andrew Flintoff - already hugely injury prone - could not resist and the injuries that resulted were inevitable.
It is hard to see the dedication to the art of test cricket that the likes of Dravid and Tendulkar have demonstrated in the past being replicated in the future and the sad truth is that without India's unstinting commitment to test cricket, its' long term future beyond being a side show is in serious doubt.
Great competitions like the Ashes one hopes would always endure but there are many sporting occasions around the world which whilst life and death to those involved offer nothing more than parochial idiosyncrasies to the rest such as the State of Origin rugby league matches in Australia, the Oxford versus Cambridge boat race and the Old Firm derby between Rangers and Celtic in Scottish Football.
Test cricket is in dire trouble in the medium to long term and it requires India's help to bring it back from the brink - No Nonsense.
Whilst test cricket remains hugely popular in Australia, it is only really in England - at smaller grounds - where sell outs for entire tests can be expected every time. Australia has a relatively small population and there is only so much that they can do. One suspects however that not holding tests that run their entire duration during the working week such as the recently in Sydney might be a good place to start.
Whilst this is all well and good, the reality of modern cricket finances means is that it is what India says and does that matters. The farcical ICC ruling allowing India to effectively veto the DRS system when they play is an indication of where the true power lies. The enormous (and welcome it must be said) success of the IPL has left many players reconsidering their attitude towards test cricket and it will only continue.
Only in the past week, M.S. Dhoni has indicated his time frame for retiring from test cricket. This will obviously allow him to extend his cricketing career in the shorter and more importantly most lucrative forms of the game. For a player to give up the shorter forms in order to extend his career is the supposedly elite form of the test match arena is several steps too far.
Sponsorships and endorsements are not formed by spending months at a time in places like New Zealand or Jamaica, they are made during two months of the IPL back home. It is hard to be too critical of someone like Dhoni in this day and age either such are the vast riches you would be asking him to waive.
India were until last Summer the number one ranked test team with a team of glittering if ageing stars especially in their batting order. Since then they have been utterly humbled by both England and Australia in two touring test series, or have they?
In the same twelve month period, India won the World Cup at home as well as handing out a thrashing to England in a limited over series, again at home. Now whilst India winning the vast majority of their matches at home whilst being far less successful on tour is nothing new, it is the manner of these defeats which makes one ask the question, do they really care?
Having watched both test series a couple of things stand out. Firstly losing to England last summer was no disgrace, they are a fine test side who had also hammered Australia down under prior to that.
This however is no great Australia team, and whilst they appear to have found some talent within the seam bowling ranks they are a thousand miles from being a great side. What you always get however from an Australian team is heart and effort and that is exactly what India are missing and there is the rub.
In both series, one against a good side with their tails up and one against a lesser team working very hard, India and especially their oft heralded batsmen have given the impression of simply not wanting to be there and that is biggest concern.
It could be wrong on the part of the writer to suggest this, it may well be that it is simply a class of batsmen who are either all horribly out of form or have simply grown too old at exactly the same time. Their performances at home in the short formats however suggest otherwise.
The openers Sehwag and the more youthful Gambhir have been awful in this latest series and have played poorly to get out. No one should ever question the application of Dravid who probably is simply out of form and Sachin has made a decent fist of things as everything falls apart around him. VVS has been dreadful and too often Kohli and Dhoni have refused to dig in and grind out a position and it was exactly the same in England.
India will point to injuries, Sehwag missed most of the England tour, Harbajhan went home injured also from England and Zaheer has been fighting his way back from injury, but again the thirst for limited overs action has removed the opportunities for rest.
Many England players and the likes of Ponting and Clarke have not particpated in the IPL one presumes for this very reason with England's central contracts in some instances prohibiting long periods of exposure to these types of tournaments. The likes of Andrew Flintoff - already hugely injury prone - could not resist and the injuries that resulted were inevitable.
It is hard to see the dedication to the art of test cricket that the likes of Dravid and Tendulkar have demonstrated in the past being replicated in the future and the sad truth is that without India's unstinting commitment to test cricket, its' long term future beyond being a side show is in serious doubt.
Great competitions like the Ashes one hopes would always endure but there are many sporting occasions around the world which whilst life and death to those involved offer nothing more than parochial idiosyncrasies to the rest such as the State of Origin rugby league matches in Australia, the Oxford versus Cambridge boat race and the Old Firm derby between Rangers and Celtic in Scottish Football.
Test cricket is in dire trouble in the medium to long term and it requires India's help to bring it back from the brink - No Nonsense.
Friday, January 13, 2012
Manchester City
There are a plethora of cliches with regard to teams holding their nerve in the second half of the season and it looks like 'Citeh' are about to start running into a myriad of articles with regard to theirs.
City had been unbeaten at home in an age until last Sunday and suddenly they have experienced two defeats in a week at the Etihad - admittedly both in Cups.
Some will point to the lack of Champions League and FA Cup fixtures as a boon for the run in, others will point to the loss of momentum and Thursday night Europa League fixtures followed by Sunday league matches.
Arsenal imploded last season after losing the Carling Cup Final and with Championship opposition awaiting, the return leg at Anfield is effectively the final for the eventual winner.
For City however, the bigger issue at hand is the characater of the team (and the manager) and how they cope with the loss of certain key individuals.
Last season it was all about Tevez, when he didn't play City didn't score. This season City have enjoyed far more dimension to their play yet they have become clearly reliant on certain individuals - as are all teams truth be told.
City's key performers and most influential players this season have been Vincent Kompany, Yaya Toure, David Silva and Sergio Aguero. Players such as Dzeko and Balotelli have had their moments but their form has been patchy and the likes of Nasri have disappointed.
As previously mentioned this does apply for all teams but the reality is that City are going to be missing both Kompany and Toure for several games including the upcoming clash with Tottenham. David Silva is currently back in Spain undergoing treatment for an injury leaving only Aguero from their band of four who is available and fully fit.
The going is about to get much tougher and for Mancini the pressure is already starting to tell with many references to how short of players he is which bearing in mind the money he has spent and his awareness of the African Nations Cup schedule sounds somewhat ridiculous.
It is time for City to dig deep now and for the supporting cast of players such as Savic, Barry, Milner and Johnson to prove their worth. City badly need to put together a sequence of wins to show the league that they have the nerve to collect their first title in a generation.
ManYoo will have players coming back from injury and they have the trump card of Ferguson's old head during the run in. Spurs have the hgue advantage of being rank outsiders with a squad supposedly inferior to the rest meaning they have the least pressure on them.
Chelsea, Arsenal and Liverpool are simply too far behind and the suspicion remains that Spurs will fold leaving it a straight fight between the Manchester clubs. City have the squad to win the league but the deciding factor could yet still be Ferguson - time for the City players to stand up and be counted - No Nonsense.
City had been unbeaten at home in an age until last Sunday and suddenly they have experienced two defeats in a week at the Etihad - admittedly both in Cups.
Some will point to the lack of Champions League and FA Cup fixtures as a boon for the run in, others will point to the loss of momentum and Thursday night Europa League fixtures followed by Sunday league matches.
Arsenal imploded last season after losing the Carling Cup Final and with Championship opposition awaiting, the return leg at Anfield is effectively the final for the eventual winner.
For City however, the bigger issue at hand is the characater of the team (and the manager) and how they cope with the loss of certain key individuals.
Last season it was all about Tevez, when he didn't play City didn't score. This season City have enjoyed far more dimension to their play yet they have become clearly reliant on certain individuals - as are all teams truth be told.
City's key performers and most influential players this season have been Vincent Kompany, Yaya Toure, David Silva and Sergio Aguero. Players such as Dzeko and Balotelli have had their moments but their form has been patchy and the likes of Nasri have disappointed.
As previously mentioned this does apply for all teams but the reality is that City are going to be missing both Kompany and Toure for several games including the upcoming clash with Tottenham. David Silva is currently back in Spain undergoing treatment for an injury leaving only Aguero from their band of four who is available and fully fit.
The going is about to get much tougher and for Mancini the pressure is already starting to tell with many references to how short of players he is which bearing in mind the money he has spent and his awareness of the African Nations Cup schedule sounds somewhat ridiculous.
It is time for City to dig deep now and for the supporting cast of players such as Savic, Barry, Milner and Johnson to prove their worth. City badly need to put together a sequence of wins to show the league that they have the nerve to collect their first title in a generation.
ManYoo will have players coming back from injury and they have the trump card of Ferguson's old head during the run in. Spurs have the hgue advantage of being rank outsiders with a squad supposedly inferior to the rest meaning they have the least pressure on them.
Chelsea, Arsenal and Liverpool are simply too far behind and the suspicion remains that Spurs will fold leaving it a straight fight between the Manchester clubs. City have the squad to win the league but the deciding factor could yet still be Ferguson - time for the City players to stand up and be counted - No Nonsense.
Friday, January 6, 2012
Rahul Dravid and the decline of the Test Batsman
When columns are written about Indian test batsmen who have accumulated thousands of runs over decades, the mind invariably springs to Sachin Tendulkar or possibly the dashing Virender Sehwag. Outside of India much less attention is paid to Rahul Dravid, 'The Wall' of Indian Cricket.
Dravid has had an amazing career in terms of both his incredible success but also the fact that his talent and achievements have gone possibly a little unnoticed by many due to his career running in parallel with Sachin's.
Dravid's career has come at a time when cricket was awash with several true test batting greats namely his teammate Sachin Tendulkar, Brian Lara, Jaques Kallis, Steve Waugh, Matthew Hayden and Ricky Ponting. Lara possibly matched or even bettered Sachin for sheer brilliance but his career was more fleeting. Kallis endures and endures and Ponting has dug back in at number four. Only Sachin (over 15,000) however is ahead of Dravid (over 13,000) in terms of test runs.
There are always questions when it comes to records amassed by sub continent teams, when it is runs by Indian batsmen it is because of flat pitches and when it is wickets by Murali it is because of poor opposition. Dravid for instance has played in an incredible number of drawn tests (usually flatter pitches) as compared to Ricky Ponting who has played in far more tests that have achieved results (meaning tougher batting).
Anil Kumble however snagged 619 test wickets as an example yet the talk will be of poor opposition rather than his incredible subtle variations eking wickets out on those flat tracks. You could also point out that Ponting achieved so many results because of a certain G.D. McGrath and S.K. Warne who usually assured the opposition was taken care of. Credit should be given where credit is due and Rahul Dravid is due plenty.
Dravid is no homer nor a flat track bully, he has proven his ability all around the World, some of his performances in 2002 in England were astonishing in particular on bowler friendly conditions.
The other huge contribution that Dravid has made is tougher to measure as it is an entire intangible and that is his facilitating the innings of others. The likes of Virender, Sachin, Suarav and VVS have found it far easier to indulge in their swashbuckling stroke play knowing that the other end had been secured by 'The Wall'. No one can ever gauge the true value of that influence.
Dravid's test match ability is sadly a fast disappearing art. Over a decade of mainly flat pitches in the test arena and the steroid injection of T20 have rendered many of today's top batsmen incapable of the study in concentration and shot selection that is test batting. Crease occupancy has become almost something to sneer at, replaced by switch hits and scoops over the batsmen's head.
Dravid has also always carried himself with huge dignity, his interviews during the highly charged series in England last Summer showed intelligence and consideration. He has always carried the respect of all.
One also shouldn't be fooled into thinking that he is not incredibly popular and valued in India. His face adorns many many billboards (probably outdone only by Sachin and M.S.) and he is continually on TV. For a nation of cricket daft fanatics it would never be any other way such is his obvious talent and their huge appreciation of it.
For such a low key guy, it is quite possible that he is happy for the likes of Tendulkar and Dhoni to take the lion's share of the plaudits. Sachin's life is much as Michael Jordan's was with it being very hard for him to live it in any normal way, it can be a two edged sword.
In the test arena today there are few class exponents of the art left. England probably have the most with a top order of Strauss, Cook and Trott and Bell who are all true test batsmen and an outrageously talented KP who can be one when he wants to be.
South Africa have Smith (in poor form granted) as well as AB DeVilliers and the peerless Jaques Kallis. West Indies have their own 'mini Dravid' in Shivnarine Chanderpaul and Chris Gayle who scores runs regardless of format whilst Sri Lanka have the excellent Sangakkara. Australia only really have Ponting and Clarke who you would class as test batsmen in their truest sense.
Whilst possibly doing a disservice to some who have been missed, what is clear is that whilst many many players nowadays are able to punch out a quick fifty from fifty balls, putting together a long game changing test innings is beyond most.
What is also concerning is that many of the fine test players mentioned are either at their peak or past it with most of the replacements coming through far more focused and schooled on the more profitable shorter formats.
Adam Gilchrist was called a 'game changer', someone who altered the perception of what wicket keepers should do and how middle and lower order batsmen should play. Gilchrist has one of the greatest eyes for batting ever - no question - but what he was able to do was come in and club demoralised bowlers all around the park after the likes of Langer, Hayden, Ponting and Martyn had already batted for four or five sessions.
This is not meant to do any disservice (after seeing him destroy England in person at the WACA with 100 off 57 deliveries the writer knows exactly how good he is) to one of the greatest players ever, it is just an observation that he had a specific role and that is why he never batted above seven in the test arena despite opening in one dayers and T20, his was almost a pinch hitting role in the Test Arena.
Test cricket is either at a crossroads or in terminal decline (we truly hope the former) but should the powers that be see sense in making more even test contests with pitches such as the one for this year's Boxing Day Test then test batsmen are going to be short of runs for some time until they alter their shot selection.
The current Sydney test provides a perfect example. India invariably got themselves out in the first innings and an inexperienced Australian top order then got themselves out. Many were talking of demons in the pitch and then three highly experienced test batsmen in Ponting, Clarke and Hussey all scored centuries - Clarke's a triple. It can be done if you bat properly.
For a lesson in how to bat the day out in a test match, aspiring players should reach no further than for a DVD of one Rahul Dravid, one of all the time greats - No Nonsense.
Dravid has had an amazing career in terms of both his incredible success but also the fact that his talent and achievements have gone possibly a little unnoticed by many due to his career running in parallel with Sachin's.
Dravid's career has come at a time when cricket was awash with several true test batting greats namely his teammate Sachin Tendulkar, Brian Lara, Jaques Kallis, Steve Waugh, Matthew Hayden and Ricky Ponting. Lara possibly matched or even bettered Sachin for sheer brilliance but his career was more fleeting. Kallis endures and endures and Ponting has dug back in at number four. Only Sachin (over 15,000) however is ahead of Dravid (over 13,000) in terms of test runs.
There are always questions when it comes to records amassed by sub continent teams, when it is runs by Indian batsmen it is because of flat pitches and when it is wickets by Murali it is because of poor opposition. Dravid for instance has played in an incredible number of drawn tests (usually flatter pitches) as compared to Ricky Ponting who has played in far more tests that have achieved results (meaning tougher batting).
Anil Kumble however snagged 619 test wickets as an example yet the talk will be of poor opposition rather than his incredible subtle variations eking wickets out on those flat tracks. You could also point out that Ponting achieved so many results because of a certain G.D. McGrath and S.K. Warne who usually assured the opposition was taken care of. Credit should be given where credit is due and Rahul Dravid is due plenty.
Dravid is no homer nor a flat track bully, he has proven his ability all around the World, some of his performances in 2002 in England were astonishing in particular on bowler friendly conditions.
The other huge contribution that Dravid has made is tougher to measure as it is an entire intangible and that is his facilitating the innings of others. The likes of Virender, Sachin, Suarav and VVS have found it far easier to indulge in their swashbuckling stroke play knowing that the other end had been secured by 'The Wall'. No one can ever gauge the true value of that influence.
Dravid's test match ability is sadly a fast disappearing art. Over a decade of mainly flat pitches in the test arena and the steroid injection of T20 have rendered many of today's top batsmen incapable of the study in concentration and shot selection that is test batting. Crease occupancy has become almost something to sneer at, replaced by switch hits and scoops over the batsmen's head.
Dravid has also always carried himself with huge dignity, his interviews during the highly charged series in England last Summer showed intelligence and consideration. He has always carried the respect of all.
One also shouldn't be fooled into thinking that he is not incredibly popular and valued in India. His face adorns many many billboards (probably outdone only by Sachin and M.S.) and he is continually on TV. For a nation of cricket daft fanatics it would never be any other way such is his obvious talent and their huge appreciation of it.
For such a low key guy, it is quite possible that he is happy for the likes of Tendulkar and Dhoni to take the lion's share of the plaudits. Sachin's life is much as Michael Jordan's was with it being very hard for him to live it in any normal way, it can be a two edged sword.
In the test arena today there are few class exponents of the art left. England probably have the most with a top order of Strauss, Cook and Trott and Bell who are all true test batsmen and an outrageously talented KP who can be one when he wants to be.
South Africa have Smith (in poor form granted) as well as AB DeVilliers and the peerless Jaques Kallis. West Indies have their own 'mini Dravid' in Shivnarine Chanderpaul and Chris Gayle who scores runs regardless of format whilst Sri Lanka have the excellent Sangakkara. Australia only really have Ponting and Clarke who you would class as test batsmen in their truest sense.
Whilst possibly doing a disservice to some who have been missed, what is clear is that whilst many many players nowadays are able to punch out a quick fifty from fifty balls, putting together a long game changing test innings is beyond most.
What is also concerning is that many of the fine test players mentioned are either at their peak or past it with most of the replacements coming through far more focused and schooled on the more profitable shorter formats.
Adam Gilchrist was called a 'game changer', someone who altered the perception of what wicket keepers should do and how middle and lower order batsmen should play. Gilchrist has one of the greatest eyes for batting ever - no question - but what he was able to do was come in and club demoralised bowlers all around the park after the likes of Langer, Hayden, Ponting and Martyn had already batted for four or five sessions.
This is not meant to do any disservice (after seeing him destroy England in person at the WACA with 100 off 57 deliveries the writer knows exactly how good he is) to one of the greatest players ever, it is just an observation that he had a specific role and that is why he never batted above seven in the test arena despite opening in one dayers and T20, his was almost a pinch hitting role in the Test Arena.
Test cricket is either at a crossroads or in terminal decline (we truly hope the former) but should the powers that be see sense in making more even test contests with pitches such as the one for this year's Boxing Day Test then test batsmen are going to be short of runs for some time until they alter their shot selection.
The current Sydney test provides a perfect example. India invariably got themselves out in the first innings and an inexperienced Australian top order then got themselves out. Many were talking of demons in the pitch and then three highly experienced test batsmen in Ponting, Clarke and Hussey all scored centuries - Clarke's a triple. It can be done if you bat properly.
For a lesson in how to bat the day out in a test match, aspiring players should reach no further than for a DVD of one Rahul Dravid, one of all the time greats - No Nonsense.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)