You could to a point argue that much of Chelsea's managerial merry go round was in some way defensible. Ranieri was a madcap manager from the old regime and no one could argue that Jose Mourinho was anything other than a fantastic appointment.
Mourinho although clearly irked by interference from above, proved to be a short term guy in any event who engineers his own removal when it suits him, he has done it at both Chelsea and Internazionale after all.
Avram Grant was nothing other than a short term fix designed to keep the Chelsea juggernaut on course until the arrival of a new broom in the Summer.
Again, few argued with the appointment of Luiz Felipe Scolari, a manager of huge international pedigree but here is where the case for any defence starts to breakdown. Scolari was clearly struggling to some extent to adapt but the issue of player power within the dressing room forced him out quickly.
Hiddink again was a short term fix who had no aspirations to manage Chelsea long term and he merely paved the way for Carlo Ancelotti.
Ancelotti lasted longer than most as he doesn't rock the boat - something which has clearly appealed to PSG's new owners - and he was a popular figure amongst the players. He was given little funds to develop an already ageing team and was merely asked to patch up the old warriors, the double in his first season wasn't enough to save him.
Andre Villas Boas would herald a brave new world we were told yet other than the inherited and erratic pair of David Luiz and Ferando Torres (not so much erratic as flat lining), AVB was only really given Juan Mata to add to the mix.
What AVB wasn't given at all was any time and with Chelsea lurching towards financial disaster in the shape of no Champions League football this season he was also hooked and Roberto Di Matteo stepped into the bridge with the rest of last season becoming the stuff of legend.
Everyone who follows football knew that RDM was not Abramovich's first choice over the Summer, in fact he may not have even been his second or third. We would also point out that this blog, as much as we love RDM did not think he was the right man either.
It was a populist choice based on the fact that he had somehow inexplicably steered Chelsea to Champions League glory and quite simply that Pep Guardiola had absolutely no interest in managing Chelsea.
Given that RDM was not Chelsea's first choice, it would seem churlish for anyone to suggest that the purchases of Hazard and Oscar were anything other than Abramovich's. Signings such as Victor Moses strike more of a manager who knows the game a little.
Whislt there is no question that there would be three less Premiership titles and one less Champions League title without Abramovich and that all Chelsea fans are extremely grateful for that, the situation has become a farce.
Chelsea now appear to purely be a billionaire's play thing, a reality version of Championship Manager if you like except that most CM players employ much more meticulous planning.
Given the level of investment and the push to move to a new style of football, why would you entrust the task to a manager that you clearly did not rate?
Rafa Benitez will prove a hugely unpopular choice - initially at least - amongst Chelsea fans who have a spikey view of him at best from his frequent clashes with Chelsea demi-god Jose Mourinho. It is also yet another 'interm appointment' meaning again that long term planning is a fantasy. It may also be nothing other than a last throw of the dice to get Fernando Torres playing well, Benitez after all being the only manager to bring him to the peak of his powers.
Pep Guardiola's name keeps being brought up but he must be looking at all of this and asking himself why on earth would he really need it? It is a long way from Barcelona.
There are certain clubs such as Real Madrid and Inter that have employed similarly ludicrous short termism but they remain a huge draw for managers given the stature of the those clubs. Chelsea are now of course a 'big club' given their recent success but they remain a level off these huge institutions and they would do well to remember that.
Winning the league this year was always going to be a stretch and whilst admittedly going out of the Champions League at the group stage will clearly hurt the club, it is again bad planning that is to blame for yet another manager being fired.
If RDM was to be given such little time and margin for error then he should not have been appointed in the first place. It is also not his fault that the ageing axis of Lampard and Terry has not been adequately replaced yet and that Jon Obi Mikel is simply not good enough as their holding player.
Chelsea's dysfunction has become an embarrassment for the fans but unfortunately not for the club's management. They however care not what the fans nor anyone else think.
Abramovich would argue - if he ever spoke - that his policies have brought around three Premierships and a Champions League in the nine years he has been there and he would be right to a huge degree.
He clearly has a passion for football but unfortunately, unlike the Championship Manager players, his trigger finger exists in the real world and is to the wider detriment of the club irrespective of the trophies that come along the way - No Nonsense.
Thursday, November 22, 2012
Friday, November 9, 2012
What is wrong with Roberto Mancini?
It is often said that teams are a reflection of their managers. ManYoo down the years have had Keane, Hughes, Cantona, Ince, Neville G, Stam, Schmeichel, all have breathed fire down their opponents necks in the image of their master.
Arsenal in the same way adopt a very studious and methodical approach to any given match yet there's an inherent suspicion that they're really just a bit of a pansy.
Chelsea under Mourinho were efficient, full of purpose, prone to the odd tantrum and devastatingly successful, the list goes on. So how does that leave Manchester City under Roberto Mancini?
City are an utter paradox, a team of spoiled overpaid superstar individuals who refuse to take the pitch in crucial Champions League ties, a team that threw away the title lead in such weak fashion towards the end of last season and have again flunked in the CL this time around.
Yet they are also the team that clawed back that lead that they gave up to win the title, they are the team that were 1-2 down to QPR with only minutes left in the season yet scored twice to win the most dramatic title in the English game since a certain Michael Thomas scored at Anfield twenty three years ago.
They are a team that were 1-0 down at West Brom recently with ten minutes to go and sent on the brooding Edin Dzeko to score twice and are still unbeaten this season. So which is the real Manchester City?
Much of the reason for this conundrum must lie with Roberto Mancini. Mancini was a brilliant (check you tube) yet highly temperamental player (a toned down version of Di Canio or Cantona), prone to mood swings and brilliance.
As a manager he utterly confounds with a combination of charm, wit and humour and a very quick temper and thirst for confrontation. His predilection for act first/think later reactions is there for all to see and it is this Jekyll and Hyde that appears to be muddling his team.
Mancini is clearly getting many things right. Many clubs have spent a lot of money yet have not necessarily bought success. It can be done but it still requires sound management, especially when faced with Sir Alex Ferguson.
Winning the league last season was no mean feat and yet Mancini has flunked his lines so badly in the Champions League yet again. There also appears to be little joy in the man, win or lose and that feeling seems to be transmitting itself to the fans who were leaving the stadium in droves in midweek despite City trying desperately for a win. The CL is the pinnacle of the game yet their fans seem ambivalent towards it, why?
Mancini is a naturally confrontational person, indeed he seems to revel in it (why else re-sign Mario Balotelli?) and there is nothing to suggest that prevents you from being a successful manager, after all Mourinho, Ferguson and Cruyff before them have managed to blend their caustic tendencies with winning trophies.
There are of course managers who's abrasive manners have hindered their managerial careers no matter what their intelligence or footballing knowledge, step forward Graeme Souness and Roy Keane. There is no doubt that Mancini has been successful but he appears to be treading a fine line between the two.
Manchester City need more than anything else right now, stability and continuity and both of those must come from the manager. Despite knowing this - and he must be aware of it - Manicini continues to agitate against his employers constantly complaining at his treatment.
It may come from an inherent insecurity, he was after all sacked from Internazionale after winning Serie A due to his failures in Europe. With City in exactly the same position and with ex Barcelona staff being hired and Pep Guardiola looking for a new challenge, these feelings of uncertainty may well have grounds.
Recent public revelations that he had extensive talks to join Monaco in the Summer as well as talking to several other clubs would seem to serve any positive purpose to anyone connected to Manchester City yet someone either connected to Mancini or City leaked the story. Either he wants out or someone wants him out.
There is much talk of the egos in the City dressing room. Yaya Toure talked openly about it recently. This is nothing new, successful clubs are full of big egos, it goes with the territory yet the truly great sides have these egos in check, either through the Mourinho and Ferguson method of sheer ruthlessness or through the Barcelona method where the joy of what they are achieving seems to render egos within the team meaningless.
Mancini is adopting the former method yet his attempts to clamp down on his players smack of rage rather than authority, the Carlos Tevez saga being a prime example. Whilst there is no doubt that Tevez has generally behaved terribly, there also seems little doubt that there was a huge element of misunderstanding in what happened that night on the bench in Munich.
Unlike Ferguson who managed a diplomatic climbdown over the Rio Ferdinand 'kick it out' furore, Mancini was unable to do the same, sticking to his guns to the extreme with the upshot being they lost a key player for most of the season and was probably the reason they nearly lost the title.
Both Ferguson and Mourinho rarely talking badly about their players in public, only doing it one suspects for strategic reasons when they feel it will have a positive effect on the player in question. Mancini has been quick to criticise several of his players in public including Dzeko, Tevez and Balotelli as well as more recently Micah Richards and Joe Hart. Alex and Jose would have dealt with things 'in house'.
Manicini it seems is at war with both those above and below him at Manchester City and whilst it is possible that he is actually trying to get sacked - as Mourinho did at Chelsea - he would appear to be on increasingly borrowed time. As it was so succinctly put in Braveheart, if you make enemies on all sides, you'll wind up dead, who'd have thought Manicini should be heeding advice from Mel Gibson? - No Nonsense.
Arsenal in the same way adopt a very studious and methodical approach to any given match yet there's an inherent suspicion that they're really just a bit of a pansy.
Chelsea under Mourinho were efficient, full of purpose, prone to the odd tantrum and devastatingly successful, the list goes on. So how does that leave Manchester City under Roberto Mancini?
City are an utter paradox, a team of spoiled overpaid superstar individuals who refuse to take the pitch in crucial Champions League ties, a team that threw away the title lead in such weak fashion towards the end of last season and have again flunked in the CL this time around.
Yet they are also the team that clawed back that lead that they gave up to win the title, they are the team that were 1-2 down to QPR with only minutes left in the season yet scored twice to win the most dramatic title in the English game since a certain Michael Thomas scored at Anfield twenty three years ago.
They are a team that were 1-0 down at West Brom recently with ten minutes to go and sent on the brooding Edin Dzeko to score twice and are still unbeaten this season. So which is the real Manchester City?
Much of the reason for this conundrum must lie with Roberto Mancini. Mancini was a brilliant (check you tube) yet highly temperamental player (a toned down version of Di Canio or Cantona), prone to mood swings and brilliance.
As a manager he utterly confounds with a combination of charm, wit and humour and a very quick temper and thirst for confrontation. His predilection for act first/think later reactions is there for all to see and it is this Jekyll and Hyde that appears to be muddling his team.
Mancini is clearly getting many things right. Many clubs have spent a lot of money yet have not necessarily bought success. It can be done but it still requires sound management, especially when faced with Sir Alex Ferguson.
Winning the league last season was no mean feat and yet Mancini has flunked his lines so badly in the Champions League yet again. There also appears to be little joy in the man, win or lose and that feeling seems to be transmitting itself to the fans who were leaving the stadium in droves in midweek despite City trying desperately for a win. The CL is the pinnacle of the game yet their fans seem ambivalent towards it, why?
Mancini is a naturally confrontational person, indeed he seems to revel in it (why else re-sign Mario Balotelli?) and there is nothing to suggest that prevents you from being a successful manager, after all Mourinho, Ferguson and Cruyff before them have managed to blend their caustic tendencies with winning trophies.
There are of course managers who's abrasive manners have hindered their managerial careers no matter what their intelligence or footballing knowledge, step forward Graeme Souness and Roy Keane. There is no doubt that Mancini has been successful but he appears to be treading a fine line between the two.
Manchester City need more than anything else right now, stability and continuity and both of those must come from the manager. Despite knowing this - and he must be aware of it - Manicini continues to agitate against his employers constantly complaining at his treatment.
It may come from an inherent insecurity, he was after all sacked from Internazionale after winning Serie A due to his failures in Europe. With City in exactly the same position and with ex Barcelona staff being hired and Pep Guardiola looking for a new challenge, these feelings of uncertainty may well have grounds.
Recent public revelations that he had extensive talks to join Monaco in the Summer as well as talking to several other clubs would seem to serve any positive purpose to anyone connected to Manchester City yet someone either connected to Mancini or City leaked the story. Either he wants out or someone wants him out.
There is much talk of the egos in the City dressing room. Yaya Toure talked openly about it recently. This is nothing new, successful clubs are full of big egos, it goes with the territory yet the truly great sides have these egos in check, either through the Mourinho and Ferguson method of sheer ruthlessness or through the Barcelona method where the joy of what they are achieving seems to render egos within the team meaningless.
Mancini is adopting the former method yet his attempts to clamp down on his players smack of rage rather than authority, the Carlos Tevez saga being a prime example. Whilst there is no doubt that Tevez has generally behaved terribly, there also seems little doubt that there was a huge element of misunderstanding in what happened that night on the bench in Munich.
Unlike Ferguson who managed a diplomatic climbdown over the Rio Ferdinand 'kick it out' furore, Mancini was unable to do the same, sticking to his guns to the extreme with the upshot being they lost a key player for most of the season and was probably the reason they nearly lost the title.
Both Ferguson and Mourinho rarely talking badly about their players in public, only doing it one suspects for strategic reasons when they feel it will have a positive effect on the player in question. Mancini has been quick to criticise several of his players in public including Dzeko, Tevez and Balotelli as well as more recently Micah Richards and Joe Hart. Alex and Jose would have dealt with things 'in house'.
Manicini it seems is at war with both those above and below him at Manchester City and whilst it is possible that he is actually trying to get sacked - as Mourinho did at Chelsea - he would appear to be on increasingly borrowed time. As it was so succinctly put in Braveheart, if you make enemies on all sides, you'll wind up dead, who'd have thought Manicini should be heeding advice from Mel Gibson? - No Nonsense.
Monday, November 5, 2012
Problems Mount For Chelsea
Roberto Di Matteo's honeymoon has been an extended one with last season's heroics in the Champions League being followed by an - until recently - impressive start to the season with Chelsea's new starlets Oscar and Hazard settling into the side quickly.
The John Terry affair has been an unfortunate cloud hanging over for the club and in hindsight it appears it would have been far better to have had the matter dealt with last season with on pitch sanctions taken at that point. It would have given the club more time to rebuild their damaged reputation also.
Whilst Chelsea's problems surrounding the John Terry affair have been well documented, problems on the pitch appear to be mounting too. Impressive wins against Spurs and Arsenal away have been offset by being well beaten by Atletico Madrid, Shaktar Donesk and ManYoo. Tactically against the best sides Chelsea appear to be wanting, much the same as Man City have been in Europe.
The writer of this blog was (un)fortunate enough to be present for the ManYoo game at Stamford Bridge and several things were apparent. The biggest issue other than tactics appears to be a chronic lack of leadership at the club.
It stems all the way from the owner. All Chelsea fans love him for his chequebook but none could profess to knowing his thoughts - and certainly not his values - on many issues other than his supposed love for total football.
Watching United in the flesh for the first time in many years since moving abroad, the writer again was struck by the drive that the men in red have stemming almost certainly from the touchline where one manager breathes fire and the other appears to be everyone's friend.
ManYoo man for man looked to be a poorer team than Chelsea - other than upfront and we'll come to that - yet the difference in desire and the level of aggression was apparent from the start, it is something that doesn't always come across on television.
Whilst Chelsea's play this season has often been commendable, this was a team shorn of the characters of Drogba, Terry, Lampard as well as others who have left such as Essien. Whilst this blog is not suggesting these players should still be playing regularly or even at the club given the need for younger legs, there is no doubt that the club is lacking character and apparently at all levels.
This brings us to Fernando Torres who has been defended many times on this blog. Torres appeared to have been enjoying a mini renaissance after his well documented struggles but of late again he has been at his surly and shoulders sagging worst.
Enjoying a beverage after the game, I asked one of my fellow fans what they thought the score would have been had we had RVP today and United had Torres, both of us agreed Chelsea would have won.
Chelsea are inherently going to struggle if they are going to persevere - Sturridge the only other current option - with their central striker seemingly unable to re-find either his physical form or his mental strength.
With the array of inventive talent behind him moving the ball around quickly it should be food and drink for Torres yet his goalscoring chances seem to be limited to headers from crosses and corners.
In addition to these issues, Chelsea have taken great umbrage with Mark Clattenburg over firstly his handling of the game and then the alleged comments to Jon Obi Mikel. The reality is Chelsea lost the game because they were set up poorly, far too open at the back.
Ashley Cole is supposedly the best left back in the world yet he was horribly isolated twice in the first twelve minutes with the result being two goals. Chelsea were again exposed in the second half leading to Ivanovic's fully deserved sending off.
Whilst the Hernandez goal was offside, it wasn't a blatant mistake and one made by the linesman after all and the kind that are got wrong at every stadium all over the country every week.
That leaves the Torres second yellow as the only howler and whilst it ruined the game as a spectacle - especially for someone who had flown five thousand miles to see the match - it wasn't the reason that Chelsea lost the game.
Chelsea have made a further rod for their own back by making snap accusations against Clattenburg that seem unlikely in the extreme, indeed the Juan Mata accusation was withdrawn promptly.
Whilst there is little doubting the appalling on field behaviour of many footballers, it seems staggering to believe that a professional referee would have said the things that are being suggested.
Referees do not behave like footballers on the pitch in the same way that they rarely get involved in roastings, assorted nightclub incidents, urinating in public and getting into fights outside McDonalds off it. It is doubtful after all that the referees could afford the super injunctions.
It is not all doom and gloom for Chelsea, they have after all had an incredible year given the Champions League triumph and the exciting new signings give much cause for hope. Seeing Oscar in the flesh in particular, he looks a huge talent with defensive duties to match the attacking talent. Alongside the likes of Mata, Hazard, Luiz (we still rate him highly), Ramires and Ivanovic, Chelsea have mainly talented players not yet even in their prime.
The siege mentality however fostered during the Mourinho years has been replaced by an air of near paranoia and of being just plain sore losers. It's time for Chelsea to show some leadership and that means at all levels in the club starting with the crunch home tie with Donetsk this week - No Nonsense.
The John Terry affair has been an unfortunate cloud hanging over for the club and in hindsight it appears it would have been far better to have had the matter dealt with last season with on pitch sanctions taken at that point. It would have given the club more time to rebuild their damaged reputation also.
Whilst Chelsea's problems surrounding the John Terry affair have been well documented, problems on the pitch appear to be mounting too. Impressive wins against Spurs and Arsenal away have been offset by being well beaten by Atletico Madrid, Shaktar Donesk and ManYoo. Tactically against the best sides Chelsea appear to be wanting, much the same as Man City have been in Europe.
The writer of this blog was (un)fortunate enough to be present for the ManYoo game at Stamford Bridge and several things were apparent. The biggest issue other than tactics appears to be a chronic lack of leadership at the club.
It stems all the way from the owner. All Chelsea fans love him for his chequebook but none could profess to knowing his thoughts - and certainly not his values - on many issues other than his supposed love for total football.
Watching United in the flesh for the first time in many years since moving abroad, the writer again was struck by the drive that the men in red have stemming almost certainly from the touchline where one manager breathes fire and the other appears to be everyone's friend.
ManYoo man for man looked to be a poorer team than Chelsea - other than upfront and we'll come to that - yet the difference in desire and the level of aggression was apparent from the start, it is something that doesn't always come across on television.
Whilst Chelsea's play this season has often been commendable, this was a team shorn of the characters of Drogba, Terry, Lampard as well as others who have left such as Essien. Whilst this blog is not suggesting these players should still be playing regularly or even at the club given the need for younger legs, there is no doubt that the club is lacking character and apparently at all levels.
This brings us to Fernando Torres who has been defended many times on this blog. Torres appeared to have been enjoying a mini renaissance after his well documented struggles but of late again he has been at his surly and shoulders sagging worst.
Enjoying a beverage after the game, I asked one of my fellow fans what they thought the score would have been had we had RVP today and United had Torres, both of us agreed Chelsea would have won.
Chelsea are inherently going to struggle if they are going to persevere - Sturridge the only other current option - with their central striker seemingly unable to re-find either his physical form or his mental strength.
With the array of inventive talent behind him moving the ball around quickly it should be food and drink for Torres yet his goalscoring chances seem to be limited to headers from crosses and corners.
In addition to these issues, Chelsea have taken great umbrage with Mark Clattenburg over firstly his handling of the game and then the alleged comments to Jon Obi Mikel. The reality is Chelsea lost the game because they were set up poorly, far too open at the back.
Ashley Cole is supposedly the best left back in the world yet he was horribly isolated twice in the first twelve minutes with the result being two goals. Chelsea were again exposed in the second half leading to Ivanovic's fully deserved sending off.
Whilst the Hernandez goal was offside, it wasn't a blatant mistake and one made by the linesman after all and the kind that are got wrong at every stadium all over the country every week.
That leaves the Torres second yellow as the only howler and whilst it ruined the game as a spectacle - especially for someone who had flown five thousand miles to see the match - it wasn't the reason that Chelsea lost the game.
Chelsea have made a further rod for their own back by making snap accusations against Clattenburg that seem unlikely in the extreme, indeed the Juan Mata accusation was withdrawn promptly.
Whilst there is little doubting the appalling on field behaviour of many footballers, it seems staggering to believe that a professional referee would have said the things that are being suggested.
Referees do not behave like footballers on the pitch in the same way that they rarely get involved in roastings, assorted nightclub incidents, urinating in public and getting into fights outside McDonalds off it. It is doubtful after all that the referees could afford the super injunctions.
It is not all doom and gloom for Chelsea, they have after all had an incredible year given the Champions League triumph and the exciting new signings give much cause for hope. Seeing Oscar in the flesh in particular, he looks a huge talent with defensive duties to match the attacking talent. Alongside the likes of Mata, Hazard, Luiz (we still rate him highly), Ramires and Ivanovic, Chelsea have mainly talented players not yet even in their prime.
The siege mentality however fostered during the Mourinho years has been replaced by an air of near paranoia and of being just plain sore losers. It's time for Chelsea to show some leadership and that means at all levels in the club starting with the crunch home tie with Donetsk this week - No Nonsense.
Wednesday, October 24, 2012
The Greatest Ever Premiership XI
This article will no doubt cause much conjecture, disagreement and even wailing and nashing of teeth and that is the entire object of the exercise.
For clarification, we are only looking at the period since the inception of 'The Premiership'. This allows for a smaller group of players to be compared as well as not running into the difficulties of comparing eras.
The criteria for selection are individual performances set over one season only in the Premiership, i.e. when they were at the peak of their powers, who was the best in a given position?
Given that ManYoo have been the dominant force since the inception of the Premiership we shall be using Sir Alex's tried and trusted 4-4-2 (just as he starts to tinker with employing a diamond formation...),
We will also be attempting to give a blend and balance to the side. So prejudices and rivalries aside, here we go.
Goalkeeper
There are basically three candidates for this slot which are Peter Schmeichel, David Seaman and Petr Cech. All three offer compelling arguements.
Schmeichel was one of the most dominating keepers in history as well as being a phenomonal shot stopper. His long flat throws from the penalty box were an incredible offensive weapon for ManYoo also. He was however prone to gaffs and his berrating and blaming of anyone else around him when something went wrong could be a destructive influence. Ferguson it must be said has never effectively replaced him.
David Seaman was an extremely good and reliable goalkeeper but never one suspects a great one. Neverthless he offered Arsenal a level of consistency over such a huge period that he remains one of their best ever signings. Like Schmeichel, he has never been adequately replaced.
Petr Cech has had two careers at Chelsea, one before his horrendous head injury and one after. The early Cech probably only lagged Gianluigi Buffon in terms of ability and performances. After the injury however he has never quite been the same, only starting to recover some of his former belief last season. Still remains a top class keeper.
It is tough between Schmeichel and the young Cech but Peter Schmeichel takes the No1 jersey for the team.
Right back
A relatively straightforward choice given the paucity of options. Step forward everyone's favourite Sky Sports pantomine villian, the ever 'busy' Gary Neville. Whilst not everyone's cup of tea, Neville was an exceptional and versatile defender who rarely let his team down. His haul of medals lay testament to that. The earlier vintage also had great attacking verve with fantastic link up play with David Beckham in particular.
Honourable mentions to Albert Ferrer, Lauren, Lee Dixon, William Gallas and Jamie Carragher.
Left back
Whilst there's not been a huge amount of quality at right back, there have been many good left backs with excellent players such as Patrice Evra, Graeme LeSaux and Gabriel Heinze all rating a strong mention. Ashley Cole however stands above all as possibly the best left back the world has seen since Paolo Maldini and Bixente Lizarazu (Roberto Carlos couldn't defend in case you were wondering).
Centre back pairing
Certainly one of the toughest conundrums in this entire process. There have been great rugged leaders such as Tony Adams, John Terry, Nemanda Vidic and Jaap Stam. Vincent Kompany has also developed into a true leader at City.
There have been exceptionally technically gifted and quick defenders such as Rio Ferdinand, Ledley King and Ricardo Carvalho and man mountains such as Sol Campbell and Marcel Desailly.
Tony Adams was a great leader and improved hugely under Arsene Wenger. John Terry for a couple of seasons under Mourinho was genuinely world class and seemed to find the extra yard of pace that he now so badly lacks. He remains an excellent passer of the ball as well as chipping in with some crucial goals.
Nemanda Vidic's recent injuries have only reinforced just how much he is missed whilst Jaap Stam recovered from a sticky start at Old Trafford to become one of the most dominant defenders in European football.
Rio Ferdinand is one of the most elegant central defenders in modern times although lapses in concentration can sometimes let him down, it's almost sometimes as if the game is to easy for him. There was always a suspicion that it was Carvalho that made John Terry look good and that says as much about him as anything although he had fantastic distribution and attacking verve also.
Arsenal have never really recoved defensively from Sol Campbell's departure, not a screamer or a shouter but simply an excellent defender. Marcel Desailly was coming to the latter stages of his career when he joined Chelsea but he remained one of the most dominant defenders in Europe with a wealth of experience. His distribution was also often underrated.
Given the array of attacking talent that will follow and the predilection for the full backs to get forwards, we are going with a solid and dominant pairing of Jaap Stam and Marcel Desailly. No centre forward would relish playing against those two (except possibly the one we have picked).
Right Wing
A straight forward shoot out between the two ManYoo No7s Beckham and Ronaldo. The Beckham of the turn of the century was a formidable force, running, tackling, crossing, shooting and with dead ball delivery with little compare. He was the geniune all action midfielder and one could sometimes understand his wish to play more centrally.
Ronaldo is almost a freak of nature given his stats, he is the only player who can remotely keep up with Lionel Messi's numbers. He arrived at ManYoo as a raw but incredibly talented winger and left the complete forward player who could score goals from anywhere including being a great header of the ball.
His sheer weight of goals in his final two seasons at Old Trafford mean that Cristiano Ronaldo gets to put back on the No7 shirt he had to give up to Raul.
Left Wing
Ryan Giggs we hear you cry and there is certainly a compelling arguement for ManYoo's most decorated player. Again we must stress the selection criteria is not consistency. Giggs has had a phenomonal career and on balance of sheer Premierships won it is hard to suggest not picking him. His final ball and lack of goals meant that amazingly enough he never truly realised his full potential however.
More recently, Gareth Bale has developed from an awkward full back into a full grown monster of a left winger with alarming pace and directness as well as great ball striking. If he continues to develop and realise his limitations (he is no Lionel Messi as he showed when given a roaming role last season) then he can become a devestatingly effective footballer of the highest class. Consistency and staying injury free will be the keys for Bale.
For a period at the end of the nineties however, Marc Overmars produced the kind of football that everyone knew he could prior to sustaining a potential career threatening injury. The highly skillful Dutch winger was a genuine match winner such as with his famous goal at Old Trafford as Arsenal won 0-1 to overhaul ManYoo for the title that year. Quick, direct and with a wonderful eye for goal, Barcelona were spurred to spending 25M on him (when 25M was still a lot of money).
An honourable mention to the man that replaced him, Robert Pires. Also David Ginola who played some incredible stuff for Newcastle in particular. Arjen Robben's short stay at Chelsea also produced some fantastic displays but the mercurial Dutchman was never able to put an entire season of excellence together.
Central Midfield Pairing
The key to this discussion is again balance. The league has seen combative box to box players with great defensive qualities such as Patrick Vieira, Roy Keane, Paul Ince and Emmanuel Petit. More creative goal scoring box to box players such as Steven Gerrard, Frank Lampard and Paul Scholes and most recently Yaya Toure.
There is the defensive midfield tour de force that was Claude Makelele and the attacking creative schemer and goalscorer that was Cesc Fabregas as well as a diminutive Brazilian going by the way of Juninho. Luca Modric was also a truly wonderful player for Spurs during his time there, full of craft and guile.
For the first more defensively minded place, it is a fight between, Keane, Vieira and Makelele. Makelele gives a compelling arguement given the calls for balance but Roy Keane edges the arguement.
Keane as a force of nature had few peers. The aggression in his game left many to forget what a supremely talented player he was. Keane of the late nineties was one of the finest players of his generation and whilst not a Premiership match, his perfomance in the second leg of their Champions League semi final in Turin in 1999 was the stuff of legend.
His ill displicine added to the fuel of his general decline but for several years he was the driving force behind ManYoo's relentless success.
For the second place, it is a toss up between Scholes and Fabregas, both superb masters of ball retention and passing. Scholes has won everything in his career but whilst his consistency is admirable, Cesc Fabregas added a fantastic goal scoring pedigree to his performances during his final two seasons at Arsenal putting his contirbution onto a different level.
For those of you crying out for Steven Gerrard, the simple reality is that Gerrard is a very good player but not a great one. His inability to control the pace of a game renders him poorer in comparison to the true greats with everything always at one hundred miles an hour. Sometimes you need a scalpel and not a sledgehammer.
The 'No 10'.
With the wonderful football that has eminated from Spain in the past decade, so has a brand of attacking midfielder that doesn't really fit into a 4-4-2 system. Players currently such as Juan Mata or David Silva fit this profile, as did Joe Cole and Juninho to a large degree before him. These players as such don't really slot into this system - wonderful players that they all are.
Ferguson's teams have always been at their best with a withdrawn striker, be it Cantona, Sheringham or Rooney when he's played in his best position. All three would certainly put their hands up for selection but they have strong competition from Matt Le Tissier, Gianfranco Zola and Dennis Bergkamp.
More recently Manchester City have added Sergio Aguero and Carlos Tevez who can either lead the line or play in the withdrawn role. Neither is a true 'No 10' however and nor is Wayne Rooney.
Le Tissier was probably the most gifted of all of these players yet he lacked the ambition to play at the very highest level shunning the brighter lights to remain a huge fish in a very small pond, his fitness was always an issue too.
Zola's impact on Chelsea was huge, voted their player of the century but Eric Cantona's influence was even bigger at Old Trafford with many memorable match winning performances.
Despite this, Dennis Bergkamp gets the nod for our first slot up front. His craft bordered on genius at times with goals both scored and created from all angles. Like Cantona he had a fiercely competitive streak and was part of Arsenal's most successful period in modern history.
Striker
There have again been many fantastic strikers to grace the Premiership. From the early days with Ian Wright, (Sir) Les Ferdinand and the emergence of the young Alan Shearer to the exciting arrival of Jurgen Klinsmann. Mark Hughes also gave many seasons of his masterclass of back to goal play and ball retention.
We then moved on to the likes of Robbie Fowler and the young Michael Owen before the arrival of Thierry Henry and Ruud Van Nistelrooy and finally Didier Drogba and Fernando Torres of the early Liverpool vintage. Along the way Andy Cole scored a barrel load of goals.
Again, both Sergio Aguero and Carlos Tevez have proven to be fabulous players either as a main or support striker. Robin Van Persie enjoyed an incredible season at Arsenal last year playing much more as a lead striker than as a withdrawn one, he plays with a huge level of skill.
It is incredibly hard to pick just one as Drogba had several fine seasons. Robbie Fowler was tremendous in his earlier Liverpool days, Thierry Henry was often unplayable and Van Persie was sensational last year.
We are however opting for Alan Shearer of circa '95/'96 vintage where he was in his absolute pomp. Pace, power, technique, he had absolutely everything with an unquenchable thirst for goals. It is possibly tough on Henry but there was always a suspicion that he went missing in the big games.
So there we have it, the best players in England's top division since the inception of the Premiership in 1992.
Schmeichel
Neville Desailly Stam Cole
Ronaldo Keane Fabregas Overmars
Bergkamp
Shearer
Subs Bench
Petr Cech, Rio Ferdinand, Graeme LeSaux, Claude Makelele, Paul Scholes, Ryan Giggs, Thierry Henry
Manager
Whilst there will be calls for Jose Mourinho or Arsene Wenger and possibly even for Davie Moyes and whilst there are questions about his tactical accumen in the Champions League, few would argue that Sir Alex Ferguson has proven to be the master of the Premiership seeing off all comers.
The debate can now commence and whilst everyone will have an opinion and ultimately that's all that it is about, it is interesting to note that including the substitutes, only one player who is not from Chelsea, ManYoo or Arsenal has made selection - Alan Shearer.
Liverpool have endured their most barren domestic period which is reflected by not having a single player selected. ManYoo contribute the most players - 8. Arsenal contribute 4 (five if you include Ashley Cole) and Chelsea 5 (4 if you include Cole for Arsenal). It is little surprise those three until City last year were the only teams to win the Premiership since its' inception other than Blackburn (step forward Alan Shearer).
What is also interesting is that in the first eleven, only one player is currently playing. This is a reflection that in recent seasons, ManYoo, Arsenal and Chelsea (as well as Liverpool) have all been fading forces as has the quality of the Premiership been falling. Of the teams at the top, only really Spurs and Manchester City could claim to have significantly improved. If we were to do this exercise again in a few years times one suspects a few more Manchester City players will be replacing Arsenal ones - No Nonsense.
For clarification, we are only looking at the period since the inception of 'The Premiership'. This allows for a smaller group of players to be compared as well as not running into the difficulties of comparing eras.
The criteria for selection are individual performances set over one season only in the Premiership, i.e. when they were at the peak of their powers, who was the best in a given position?
Given that ManYoo have been the dominant force since the inception of the Premiership we shall be using Sir Alex's tried and trusted 4-4-2 (just as he starts to tinker with employing a diamond formation...),
We will also be attempting to give a blend and balance to the side. So prejudices and rivalries aside, here we go.
Goalkeeper
There are basically three candidates for this slot which are Peter Schmeichel, David Seaman and Petr Cech. All three offer compelling arguements.
Schmeichel was one of the most dominating keepers in history as well as being a phenomonal shot stopper. His long flat throws from the penalty box were an incredible offensive weapon for ManYoo also. He was however prone to gaffs and his berrating and blaming of anyone else around him when something went wrong could be a destructive influence. Ferguson it must be said has never effectively replaced him.
David Seaman was an extremely good and reliable goalkeeper but never one suspects a great one. Neverthless he offered Arsenal a level of consistency over such a huge period that he remains one of their best ever signings. Like Schmeichel, he has never been adequately replaced.
Petr Cech has had two careers at Chelsea, one before his horrendous head injury and one after. The early Cech probably only lagged Gianluigi Buffon in terms of ability and performances. After the injury however he has never quite been the same, only starting to recover some of his former belief last season. Still remains a top class keeper.
It is tough between Schmeichel and the young Cech but Peter Schmeichel takes the No1 jersey for the team.
Right back
A relatively straightforward choice given the paucity of options. Step forward everyone's favourite Sky Sports pantomine villian, the ever 'busy' Gary Neville. Whilst not everyone's cup of tea, Neville was an exceptional and versatile defender who rarely let his team down. His haul of medals lay testament to that. The earlier vintage also had great attacking verve with fantastic link up play with David Beckham in particular.
Honourable mentions to Albert Ferrer, Lauren, Lee Dixon, William Gallas and Jamie Carragher.
Left back
Whilst there's not been a huge amount of quality at right back, there have been many good left backs with excellent players such as Patrice Evra, Graeme LeSaux and Gabriel Heinze all rating a strong mention. Ashley Cole however stands above all as possibly the best left back the world has seen since Paolo Maldini and Bixente Lizarazu (Roberto Carlos couldn't defend in case you were wondering).
Centre back pairing
Certainly one of the toughest conundrums in this entire process. There have been great rugged leaders such as Tony Adams, John Terry, Nemanda Vidic and Jaap Stam. Vincent Kompany has also developed into a true leader at City.
There have been exceptionally technically gifted and quick defenders such as Rio Ferdinand, Ledley King and Ricardo Carvalho and man mountains such as Sol Campbell and Marcel Desailly.
Tony Adams was a great leader and improved hugely under Arsene Wenger. John Terry for a couple of seasons under Mourinho was genuinely world class and seemed to find the extra yard of pace that he now so badly lacks. He remains an excellent passer of the ball as well as chipping in with some crucial goals.
Nemanda Vidic's recent injuries have only reinforced just how much he is missed whilst Jaap Stam recovered from a sticky start at Old Trafford to become one of the most dominant defenders in European football.
Rio Ferdinand is one of the most elegant central defenders in modern times although lapses in concentration can sometimes let him down, it's almost sometimes as if the game is to easy for him. There was always a suspicion that it was Carvalho that made John Terry look good and that says as much about him as anything although he had fantastic distribution and attacking verve also.
Arsenal have never really recoved defensively from Sol Campbell's departure, not a screamer or a shouter but simply an excellent defender. Marcel Desailly was coming to the latter stages of his career when he joined Chelsea but he remained one of the most dominant defenders in Europe with a wealth of experience. His distribution was also often underrated.
Given the array of attacking talent that will follow and the predilection for the full backs to get forwards, we are going with a solid and dominant pairing of Jaap Stam and Marcel Desailly. No centre forward would relish playing against those two (except possibly the one we have picked).
Right Wing
A straight forward shoot out between the two ManYoo No7s Beckham and Ronaldo. The Beckham of the turn of the century was a formidable force, running, tackling, crossing, shooting and with dead ball delivery with little compare. He was the geniune all action midfielder and one could sometimes understand his wish to play more centrally.
Ronaldo is almost a freak of nature given his stats, he is the only player who can remotely keep up with Lionel Messi's numbers. He arrived at ManYoo as a raw but incredibly talented winger and left the complete forward player who could score goals from anywhere including being a great header of the ball.
His sheer weight of goals in his final two seasons at Old Trafford mean that Cristiano Ronaldo gets to put back on the No7 shirt he had to give up to Raul.
Left Wing
Ryan Giggs we hear you cry and there is certainly a compelling arguement for ManYoo's most decorated player. Again we must stress the selection criteria is not consistency. Giggs has had a phenomonal career and on balance of sheer Premierships won it is hard to suggest not picking him. His final ball and lack of goals meant that amazingly enough he never truly realised his full potential however.
More recently, Gareth Bale has developed from an awkward full back into a full grown monster of a left winger with alarming pace and directness as well as great ball striking. If he continues to develop and realise his limitations (he is no Lionel Messi as he showed when given a roaming role last season) then he can become a devestatingly effective footballer of the highest class. Consistency and staying injury free will be the keys for Bale.
For a period at the end of the nineties however, Marc Overmars produced the kind of football that everyone knew he could prior to sustaining a potential career threatening injury. The highly skillful Dutch winger was a genuine match winner such as with his famous goal at Old Trafford as Arsenal won 0-1 to overhaul ManYoo for the title that year. Quick, direct and with a wonderful eye for goal, Barcelona were spurred to spending 25M on him (when 25M was still a lot of money).
An honourable mention to the man that replaced him, Robert Pires. Also David Ginola who played some incredible stuff for Newcastle in particular. Arjen Robben's short stay at Chelsea also produced some fantastic displays but the mercurial Dutchman was never able to put an entire season of excellence together.
Central Midfield Pairing
The key to this discussion is again balance. The league has seen combative box to box players with great defensive qualities such as Patrick Vieira, Roy Keane, Paul Ince and Emmanuel Petit. More creative goal scoring box to box players such as Steven Gerrard, Frank Lampard and Paul Scholes and most recently Yaya Toure.
There is the defensive midfield tour de force that was Claude Makelele and the attacking creative schemer and goalscorer that was Cesc Fabregas as well as a diminutive Brazilian going by the way of Juninho. Luca Modric was also a truly wonderful player for Spurs during his time there, full of craft and guile.
For the first more defensively minded place, it is a fight between, Keane, Vieira and Makelele. Makelele gives a compelling arguement given the calls for balance but Roy Keane edges the arguement.
Keane as a force of nature had few peers. The aggression in his game left many to forget what a supremely talented player he was. Keane of the late nineties was one of the finest players of his generation and whilst not a Premiership match, his perfomance in the second leg of their Champions League semi final in Turin in 1999 was the stuff of legend.
His ill displicine added to the fuel of his general decline but for several years he was the driving force behind ManYoo's relentless success.
For the second place, it is a toss up between Scholes and Fabregas, both superb masters of ball retention and passing. Scholes has won everything in his career but whilst his consistency is admirable, Cesc Fabregas added a fantastic goal scoring pedigree to his performances during his final two seasons at Arsenal putting his contirbution onto a different level.
For those of you crying out for Steven Gerrard, the simple reality is that Gerrard is a very good player but not a great one. His inability to control the pace of a game renders him poorer in comparison to the true greats with everything always at one hundred miles an hour. Sometimes you need a scalpel and not a sledgehammer.
The 'No 10'.
With the wonderful football that has eminated from Spain in the past decade, so has a brand of attacking midfielder that doesn't really fit into a 4-4-2 system. Players currently such as Juan Mata or David Silva fit this profile, as did Joe Cole and Juninho to a large degree before him. These players as such don't really slot into this system - wonderful players that they all are.
Ferguson's teams have always been at their best with a withdrawn striker, be it Cantona, Sheringham or Rooney when he's played in his best position. All three would certainly put their hands up for selection but they have strong competition from Matt Le Tissier, Gianfranco Zola and Dennis Bergkamp.
More recently Manchester City have added Sergio Aguero and Carlos Tevez who can either lead the line or play in the withdrawn role. Neither is a true 'No 10' however and nor is Wayne Rooney.
Le Tissier was probably the most gifted of all of these players yet he lacked the ambition to play at the very highest level shunning the brighter lights to remain a huge fish in a very small pond, his fitness was always an issue too.
Zola's impact on Chelsea was huge, voted their player of the century but Eric Cantona's influence was even bigger at Old Trafford with many memorable match winning performances.
Despite this, Dennis Bergkamp gets the nod for our first slot up front. His craft bordered on genius at times with goals both scored and created from all angles. Like Cantona he had a fiercely competitive streak and was part of Arsenal's most successful period in modern history.
Striker
There have again been many fantastic strikers to grace the Premiership. From the early days with Ian Wright, (Sir) Les Ferdinand and the emergence of the young Alan Shearer to the exciting arrival of Jurgen Klinsmann. Mark Hughes also gave many seasons of his masterclass of back to goal play and ball retention.
We then moved on to the likes of Robbie Fowler and the young Michael Owen before the arrival of Thierry Henry and Ruud Van Nistelrooy and finally Didier Drogba and Fernando Torres of the early Liverpool vintage. Along the way Andy Cole scored a barrel load of goals.
Again, both Sergio Aguero and Carlos Tevez have proven to be fabulous players either as a main or support striker. Robin Van Persie enjoyed an incredible season at Arsenal last year playing much more as a lead striker than as a withdrawn one, he plays with a huge level of skill.
It is incredibly hard to pick just one as Drogba had several fine seasons. Robbie Fowler was tremendous in his earlier Liverpool days, Thierry Henry was often unplayable and Van Persie was sensational last year.
We are however opting for Alan Shearer of circa '95/'96 vintage where he was in his absolute pomp. Pace, power, technique, he had absolutely everything with an unquenchable thirst for goals. It is possibly tough on Henry but there was always a suspicion that he went missing in the big games.
So there we have it, the best players in England's top division since the inception of the Premiership in 1992.
Schmeichel
Neville Desailly Stam Cole
Ronaldo Keane Fabregas Overmars
Bergkamp
Shearer
Subs Bench
Petr Cech, Rio Ferdinand, Graeme LeSaux, Claude Makelele, Paul Scholes, Ryan Giggs, Thierry Henry
Manager
Whilst there will be calls for Jose Mourinho or Arsene Wenger and possibly even for Davie Moyes and whilst there are questions about his tactical accumen in the Champions League, few would argue that Sir Alex Ferguson has proven to be the master of the Premiership seeing off all comers.
The debate can now commence and whilst everyone will have an opinion and ultimately that's all that it is about, it is interesting to note that including the substitutes, only one player who is not from Chelsea, ManYoo or Arsenal has made selection - Alan Shearer.
Liverpool have endured their most barren domestic period which is reflected by not having a single player selected. ManYoo contribute the most players - 8. Arsenal contribute 4 (five if you include Ashley Cole) and Chelsea 5 (4 if you include Cole for Arsenal). It is little surprise those three until City last year were the only teams to win the Premiership since its' inception other than Blackburn (step forward Alan Shearer).
What is also interesting is that in the first eleven, only one player is currently playing. This is a reflection that in recent seasons, ManYoo, Arsenal and Chelsea (as well as Liverpool) have all been fading forces as has the quality of the Premiership been falling. Of the teams at the top, only really Spurs and Manchester City could claim to have significantly improved. If we were to do this exercise again in a few years times one suspects a few more Manchester City players will be replacing Arsenal ones - No Nonsense.
Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Lance Armstrong
Stories about doping in cycling have been so widespread for so long that they usually barely register as 'news', such is the level of global apathy towards cycling that the 'Tour De Cheats' has created.
Cycling has an almost incomparable history of cheating. Eddy Merckx a five time Tour champion and hero to many once said 'you don't win the Tour on bread and water'. Merckx rode in the 60s and 70s.
This had led to many cycling fans turning off their television sets. The Tour is the greatest endurance sport on the planet yet no one any longer believes what they see, any great performances immediately throwing up suspicions in the same way that wides and batting collapses now confound in cricket.
In sports, there have always been athletes such as Tiger Woods or Michael Jordan that transcend the sporting world and become global superstars, known to all. Lance Armstrong was and is one of those people.
Armstrong's story was utterly compelling, fighting back from near death from cancer was a story enough without winning seven Tours De France afterwards, it was amazing stuff and now it seems it was all too amazing.
The evidence that Armstrong was involved in and even led a systematic doping programme designed with the simple aim of delivering victories for himself is compelling. It was done with not a single thought for ethics, rules or even law and even now he shows no remorse.
Armstrong's defence is built around the simple premise that he has never failed a drugs test. Quite how this could possibly stand up to such an avalanche of detail, times, places, people, facts seems entirely implausible.
Quite why nearly every single cyclist or protagonist has owned up and made their peace - whether for their own ends or another reason - would do such a thing seems entirely at odds with Armstrong's statements also. Success always comes with people bearing grudges, but everyone?
Armstrong has always defended himself vociferously to anyone who would care to listen, he has always been a fighter whether it was cancer, cycling or anything else he cared to get involved with. For him to go to ground so meekly seems highly telling also, the case for the prosecution is so overwhelming, what else can he do?
Armstrong has of course crossed many lines with charges being suggested as strong as witness intimidation, perjury and even trafficking in controlled substances, criminal charges could be a very strong possibility never mind the prospect of being sued for countless prize money and performance related bonuses.
The man has of course done a huge amount of good, his Livestrong Foundation has raised countless millions for the fight against cancer and he has inspired many through his actions and his books. The question is now is what the motivation was for doing all this work? Was it genuine concern or was it simply to provide a distraction and a smoke screen to protect him from his real life's work, winning Tours at any cost?
It is a tragedy that two of the most dominant sportsmen of the previous decade, Tiger Woods and Armstrong have been exposed as frauds.
Whilst Woods' troubles have nothing to do with golf, there is little question that Tiger pedalled a myth about his being a family man to earn endorsements and cash in on his magnificent skills as a golfer. His public image was one of perfection, a golfing machine with the perfect home life off the course, everyone wanted to be Tiger Woods.
How wrong we were and even with a highly contrived public apology, Tiger has and never will fully recover from those events. The other players no longer fear him as they have seen him in reality to be as fallible as anyone. It was Tiger's mental strength more than any of his physical golfing attributes that set him apart. He had already beaten the other players before he teed off - Ernie Els admitted as much in his autobiography.
None of that of course makes any real difference in a sporting sense but on a personal level it does, Tiger is not the saint he painted himself to be and in Armstrong's case, the image of perfection has become utterly tainted given his exposure as a ruthless cheat and bully. This leads us back to the question of his motivation for all his charity work.
The other issue that Lance Armstrong has created is that whilst he has created hope for so many through his foundation, he has destroyed so much hope for many through his blatant cheating.
The problem is that cheating and in such an organised way taints your view of all sports. Athletics hit a new low when Ben Johnson was stripped of his gold medal in Seoul in 1988. The problems of the actions of the likes of Johnson, Armstrong, Marion Jones is that it kills sport for everyone else.
One hopes for instance that Usain Bolt is just a freak of nature, such an incredible physical specimen of huge proportions that his records are legitimate. But one cannot help having the nagging doubt that in a few years time we are set to be hugely disappointed when we find out otherwise. How many days, weeks and even months of Tour De France viewing over the years have been rendered entirely meaningless? Was any of it legitimate?
The Armstrong story will eventually fade from public view, the likes of Nike are even now standing by him referring to the amount of good that he done in his life. What no one knows is what his motivation was for this work outside of cycling.
And no one has yet counted the cost of what his doping actions have meant for up and coming professional cyclists, induced into his drugs culture, for would be future cyclists or athletes and for simple sports fans across the globe, shame on you Lance Armstrong - No Nonsense.
Cycling has an almost incomparable history of cheating. Eddy Merckx a five time Tour champion and hero to many once said 'you don't win the Tour on bread and water'. Merckx rode in the 60s and 70s.
This had led to many cycling fans turning off their television sets. The Tour is the greatest endurance sport on the planet yet no one any longer believes what they see, any great performances immediately throwing up suspicions in the same way that wides and batting collapses now confound in cricket.
In sports, there have always been athletes such as Tiger Woods or Michael Jordan that transcend the sporting world and become global superstars, known to all. Lance Armstrong was and is one of those people.
Armstrong's story was utterly compelling, fighting back from near death from cancer was a story enough without winning seven Tours De France afterwards, it was amazing stuff and now it seems it was all too amazing.
The evidence that Armstrong was involved in and even led a systematic doping programme designed with the simple aim of delivering victories for himself is compelling. It was done with not a single thought for ethics, rules or even law and even now he shows no remorse.
Armstrong's defence is built around the simple premise that he has never failed a drugs test. Quite how this could possibly stand up to such an avalanche of detail, times, places, people, facts seems entirely implausible.
Quite why nearly every single cyclist or protagonist has owned up and made their peace - whether for their own ends or another reason - would do such a thing seems entirely at odds with Armstrong's statements also. Success always comes with people bearing grudges, but everyone?
Armstrong has always defended himself vociferously to anyone who would care to listen, he has always been a fighter whether it was cancer, cycling or anything else he cared to get involved with. For him to go to ground so meekly seems highly telling also, the case for the prosecution is so overwhelming, what else can he do?
Armstrong has of course crossed many lines with charges being suggested as strong as witness intimidation, perjury and even trafficking in controlled substances, criminal charges could be a very strong possibility never mind the prospect of being sued for countless prize money and performance related bonuses.
The man has of course done a huge amount of good, his Livestrong Foundation has raised countless millions for the fight against cancer and he has inspired many through his actions and his books. The question is now is what the motivation was for doing all this work? Was it genuine concern or was it simply to provide a distraction and a smoke screen to protect him from his real life's work, winning Tours at any cost?
It is a tragedy that two of the most dominant sportsmen of the previous decade, Tiger Woods and Armstrong have been exposed as frauds.
Whilst Woods' troubles have nothing to do with golf, there is little question that Tiger pedalled a myth about his being a family man to earn endorsements and cash in on his magnificent skills as a golfer. His public image was one of perfection, a golfing machine with the perfect home life off the course, everyone wanted to be Tiger Woods.
How wrong we were and even with a highly contrived public apology, Tiger has and never will fully recover from those events. The other players no longer fear him as they have seen him in reality to be as fallible as anyone. It was Tiger's mental strength more than any of his physical golfing attributes that set him apart. He had already beaten the other players before he teed off - Ernie Els admitted as much in his autobiography.
None of that of course makes any real difference in a sporting sense but on a personal level it does, Tiger is not the saint he painted himself to be and in Armstrong's case, the image of perfection has become utterly tainted given his exposure as a ruthless cheat and bully. This leads us back to the question of his motivation for all his charity work.
The other issue that Lance Armstrong has created is that whilst he has created hope for so many through his foundation, he has destroyed so much hope for many through his blatant cheating.
The problem is that cheating and in such an organised way taints your view of all sports. Athletics hit a new low when Ben Johnson was stripped of his gold medal in Seoul in 1988. The problems of the actions of the likes of Johnson, Armstrong, Marion Jones is that it kills sport for everyone else.
One hopes for instance that Usain Bolt is just a freak of nature, such an incredible physical specimen of huge proportions that his records are legitimate. But one cannot help having the nagging doubt that in a few years time we are set to be hugely disappointed when we find out otherwise. How many days, weeks and even months of Tour De France viewing over the years have been rendered entirely meaningless? Was any of it legitimate?
The Armstrong story will eventually fade from public view, the likes of Nike are even now standing by him referring to the amount of good that he done in his life. What no one knows is what his motivation was for this work outside of cycling.
And no one has yet counted the cost of what his doping actions have meant for up and coming professional cyclists, induced into his drugs culture, for would be future cyclists or athletes and for simple sports fans across the globe, shame on you Lance Armstrong - No Nonsense.
Tuesday, October 2, 2012
England Not Upto The Task
England surrendered their T20 crown last night, going out to the hosts with the merest of whimpers as they were well beaten by a talented and hard working Sri Lankan side.
For what seems the longest time now, England have had an obsession with changing their personnel hugely for different formats of the game seemingly forgetting that the basics of cricket, i.e. scoring runs and taking wickets remain paramount.
During England's horrible home performance at the 1999 World Cup, Sir Ian Botham lamented the introduction of so many 'bits and pieces' players who would not get into the side on the strength of either their batting or bowling yet were picked because they could do a bit of both, just not very well.
Since then, England have also developed an obsession with finding 'pinch hitters' and as of yet have still not figured out that when picking wicket keepers to open the batting in shorter formats, not one of those players is Adam Gilchrist.
Despite not being Adam Gilchrist however, it seems bizarre in the extreme that one of the most destructive test batsmen in the world right now, Matthew Prior is deemed not good enough to club a few overs for an England team hardly flush with established batsmen. Ian Bell is considered good enough to open the batting in ODIs for England yet isn't good enough to even get in the T20 squad, it beggars belief.
Looking at the England team last night, it had all the appearances of a development squad, hopelessly out of their depth against a first class International team. It is also time to stop the pretence that Ravi Bopara is an International cricketer, he has neither the technique nor the mental strength. Eoin Morgan also failed badly again last night when the team needed him.
England's sub continent travails against spin have been well documented and the irony is that in protecting the integrity of the England team by keeping their players from the IPL, England are going backwards (in all formats) against spin bowling and sub continent conditions where it appears more and more cricket is going to be played.
Whether anyone likes it or not, T20 cricket is here to stay and players are adapting and changing their skills accordingly through the IPL. Spin wasn't even the main culprit last night, more a devastating first over from Malinga that England simply couldn't cope with. Malinga's bowling in the T20 format is phenomenal and England had simply no idea how to deal with his clever use of cutters, length and changes of pace.
Stuart Broad is a fine player but it is questionable whether he is the right choice for captain given his propensity for hot headedness. T20 is a format that is often highly charged with fine margins, it is a cool head that is required and a batsman directing the bowlers at the end might serve England better. Unfortunately all the experienced batsmen were in TV studios or watching on TV at home.
This has been a year to forget for England across the board and with a daunting series in India to come followed by an energy sapping trip to New Zealand, all is not well in the England camp ahead of the Ashes. Maybe a certain Kevin Pietersen will be welcomed back more readily than anyone may have thought - No Nonsense.
For what seems the longest time now, England have had an obsession with changing their personnel hugely for different formats of the game seemingly forgetting that the basics of cricket, i.e. scoring runs and taking wickets remain paramount.
During England's horrible home performance at the 1999 World Cup, Sir Ian Botham lamented the introduction of so many 'bits and pieces' players who would not get into the side on the strength of either their batting or bowling yet were picked because they could do a bit of both, just not very well.
Since then, England have also developed an obsession with finding 'pinch hitters' and as of yet have still not figured out that when picking wicket keepers to open the batting in shorter formats, not one of those players is Adam Gilchrist.
Despite not being Adam Gilchrist however, it seems bizarre in the extreme that one of the most destructive test batsmen in the world right now, Matthew Prior is deemed not good enough to club a few overs for an England team hardly flush with established batsmen. Ian Bell is considered good enough to open the batting in ODIs for England yet isn't good enough to even get in the T20 squad, it beggars belief.
Looking at the England team last night, it had all the appearances of a development squad, hopelessly out of their depth against a first class International team. It is also time to stop the pretence that Ravi Bopara is an International cricketer, he has neither the technique nor the mental strength. Eoin Morgan also failed badly again last night when the team needed him.
England's sub continent travails against spin have been well documented and the irony is that in protecting the integrity of the England team by keeping their players from the IPL, England are going backwards (in all formats) against spin bowling and sub continent conditions where it appears more and more cricket is going to be played.
Whether anyone likes it or not, T20 cricket is here to stay and players are adapting and changing their skills accordingly through the IPL. Spin wasn't even the main culprit last night, more a devastating first over from Malinga that England simply couldn't cope with. Malinga's bowling in the T20 format is phenomenal and England had simply no idea how to deal with his clever use of cutters, length and changes of pace.
Stuart Broad is a fine player but it is questionable whether he is the right choice for captain given his propensity for hot headedness. T20 is a format that is often highly charged with fine margins, it is a cool head that is required and a batsman directing the bowlers at the end might serve England better. Unfortunately all the experienced batsmen were in TV studios or watching on TV at home.
This has been a year to forget for England across the board and with a daunting series in India to come followed by an energy sapping trip to New Zealand, all is not well in the England camp ahead of the Ashes. Maybe a certain Kevin Pietersen will be welcomed back more readily than anyone may have thought - No Nonsense.
Tuesday, September 4, 2012
Brendan Rodgered?
Problems at Anfield have become all too frequent for many years now. But even during all the long years under the shadow from Old Trafford there has always been light at the end of the famous tunnel in the shape of some fine cup wins and one famous night in Istanbul.
Along the way there have been a myriad of fine players that have represented the club such as Gerrard, Michael Owen, Torres and Xavi Alonso and always some kind of hope that a genuine title challenge could be mustered. Those hopes are distant ones now with the size of the problems at Liverpool becoming worryingly apparent.
That is not to say that things cannot be rectified, in Brendan Rodgers they have a manager - that this blog believes certainly - that can chart a long term overhaul of the club. It is however a long term project and it is in danger of being derailed early in the process.
The cusp of the current issue surrounds deadline day which in itself begs several questions about the running of a club. Deadline day is something that should be avoided, not something for clubs to swarm around. The sound business is done early in the transfer window with the deadline day required only for tweaks or adjustments such as Real Madrid taking the option of Michael Essien as a squad player.
Liverpool it seems were awfully disorganised last Friday and allowed Andy Carroll to go out on loan without securing a replacement. The word being that Clint Dempsey was Rodgers' preferred replacement only to be told that FSG would not stump up the cash.
FSG are on a steep learning curve. They allowed Dalglish and Comoli to go bananas last Summer on a vast array of mediocre fare such as Henderson, Adam and Downing which when all added up was a pretty penny.
Liverpool's finances prior to this were not in particularly great shape in any event due to the handicap of Anfield's relatively paltry gate receipts and the sizeable spending under Rafa Benitez again often on questionable signings (Reina, Alonso and Torres excluded).
It is therefore no surprise that FSG wish to use a more concerted strategy and approach, concentrating on younger players with potential and resale value. Clint Dempsey at 29 years old offered none of that, he did however offer an immediate boost to the team in terms of his proven goal threat.
So here is the rub. Brendan Rodgers insisted on being in charge of footballing matters prior to joining. The idea of a director of football was kicked in to touch. If that were to be completely true ala Sir Alex Ferguson, then FSG's job is to advise Rodgers how much money is there and it his decision on whom to spend it.
What appears to have happened here is that FSG would not sanction the move due to Dempsey's age in an entirely opposite approach to the Glazers who sanctioned the huge outlay for the 29 year old Robin Van Persie. So is Brendan Rodgers in charge of footballing matters after all? It seems not.
American owners hail from a land of franchises and salary caps where budgets are generally met. In instances such as the LA Dodgers, tales of financial mismanagement are met with widespread derision. Financial prudence should be expected and to a large degree welcomed, just ask Leeds United or Rangers fans.
Where the line appears to have been crossed is that when a budget is available and FSG feels that their valuation of a player is more accurate than their managers'.
The view of this blog is that in both Van Persie's and Dempsey's case, the clubs paid over the odds for both players who will have little resale value and are already at their peaks. ManYoo will argue that should Van Persie fire them to the title and the latter stages of the CL that he was cheap and they would have a point.
The problem also with such a simplified view is that it does not allow the manager - looking at the wider picture - to mould the squad as he sees fit. If Dempsey were to repeat his goalscoring heroics of last season and move Liverpool up the table then they too could argue he was worth the money given the riches on offer closer to the summit
This current spat is probably no more than that but it is possibly showing that football is beginning to change with owners starting to flex their 'no' muscles a little more. Several managers have felt irked over the Summer at the perceived 'lack of support' from their boards but the reality is that clubs are simply maxed out.
Liverpool are for example paying Joe Cole 100,000 pounds a week, with 40,000 crowds and little corporate money and no Champions League revenues (or hope of them in the short term), that is simply too much.
Brendan Rodgers did not create the problems at Anfield, nor did he spend the money of the previous regimes. It does appear however that for the time being, he is going to have to pick up the tab, life at Swansea was never this complicated - No Nonsense.
Along the way there have been a myriad of fine players that have represented the club such as Gerrard, Michael Owen, Torres and Xavi Alonso and always some kind of hope that a genuine title challenge could be mustered. Those hopes are distant ones now with the size of the problems at Liverpool becoming worryingly apparent.
That is not to say that things cannot be rectified, in Brendan Rodgers they have a manager - that this blog believes certainly - that can chart a long term overhaul of the club. It is however a long term project and it is in danger of being derailed early in the process.
The cusp of the current issue surrounds deadline day which in itself begs several questions about the running of a club. Deadline day is something that should be avoided, not something for clubs to swarm around. The sound business is done early in the transfer window with the deadline day required only for tweaks or adjustments such as Real Madrid taking the option of Michael Essien as a squad player.
Liverpool it seems were awfully disorganised last Friday and allowed Andy Carroll to go out on loan without securing a replacement. The word being that Clint Dempsey was Rodgers' preferred replacement only to be told that FSG would not stump up the cash.
FSG are on a steep learning curve. They allowed Dalglish and Comoli to go bananas last Summer on a vast array of mediocre fare such as Henderson, Adam and Downing which when all added up was a pretty penny.
Liverpool's finances prior to this were not in particularly great shape in any event due to the handicap of Anfield's relatively paltry gate receipts and the sizeable spending under Rafa Benitez again often on questionable signings (Reina, Alonso and Torres excluded).
It is therefore no surprise that FSG wish to use a more concerted strategy and approach, concentrating on younger players with potential and resale value. Clint Dempsey at 29 years old offered none of that, he did however offer an immediate boost to the team in terms of his proven goal threat.
So here is the rub. Brendan Rodgers insisted on being in charge of footballing matters prior to joining. The idea of a director of football was kicked in to touch. If that were to be completely true ala Sir Alex Ferguson, then FSG's job is to advise Rodgers how much money is there and it his decision on whom to spend it.
What appears to have happened here is that FSG would not sanction the move due to Dempsey's age in an entirely opposite approach to the Glazers who sanctioned the huge outlay for the 29 year old Robin Van Persie. So is Brendan Rodgers in charge of footballing matters after all? It seems not.
American owners hail from a land of franchises and salary caps where budgets are generally met. In instances such as the LA Dodgers, tales of financial mismanagement are met with widespread derision. Financial prudence should be expected and to a large degree welcomed, just ask Leeds United or Rangers fans.
Where the line appears to have been crossed is that when a budget is available and FSG feels that their valuation of a player is more accurate than their managers'.
The view of this blog is that in both Van Persie's and Dempsey's case, the clubs paid over the odds for both players who will have little resale value and are already at their peaks. ManYoo will argue that should Van Persie fire them to the title and the latter stages of the CL that he was cheap and they would have a point.
The problem also with such a simplified view is that it does not allow the manager - looking at the wider picture - to mould the squad as he sees fit. If Dempsey were to repeat his goalscoring heroics of last season and move Liverpool up the table then they too could argue he was worth the money given the riches on offer closer to the summit
This current spat is probably no more than that but it is possibly showing that football is beginning to change with owners starting to flex their 'no' muscles a little more. Several managers have felt irked over the Summer at the perceived 'lack of support' from their boards but the reality is that clubs are simply maxed out.
Liverpool are for example paying Joe Cole 100,000 pounds a week, with 40,000 crowds and little corporate money and no Champions League revenues (or hope of them in the short term), that is simply too much.
Brendan Rodgers did not create the problems at Anfield, nor did he spend the money of the previous regimes. It does appear however that for the time being, he is going to have to pick up the tab, life at Swansea was never this complicated - No Nonsense.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)