Brendan Rodgers has recently been announced as Liverpool's new manager, and after his performance in the 2011-12 season you can hardly say he isn't qualified. And the history of the club is only eclipsed by that of Manchester United, so you can see why they can demand the best managers. But I remain unconvinced that this is the right move for a manager so early in their career. Safe to say, Liverpool are not the side they were.
The fans, I'm sorry to any Liverpool fans, are slightly deluded. To even think they had the calibre to reach the top four this season was slightly laughable, Downing and Carroll is not a champions league combination. And unless Rodgers can sign some high quality players to boost his lacklustre squad, two cup finals and pushing for Europa league might just be the best they can hope for. He will be under a lot more pressure next season than he was at Swansea, because nothing was expected with the Swans, I was not alone in predicting the Wales side to go down. The fans will want to see the flowing football he gave Swansea, and hopefully a bit more savvy in the transfer market.
However, should he succeed, the world will be at his feet in terms of his managerial career. If he can build a couple of successful seasons at Anfield, he will be on high demand from every big football team in the world, and his decision to go to Liverpool will be justified. People may think from this article that I think he wasn't a good choice for Liverpool, and that isn't true in the slightest. I think he's a great manager, but a few more seasons at Swansea would have benefited him more.
I wish him luck at Liverpool, but he's going to be up against an over expectant fan base with a mediocre squad.
Friday, 1 June 2012
Tuesday, 22 May 2012
Friday, 27 April 2012
Barcelona: The Worlds Greatest One Trick Pony
For the past twelve months people have been singing the praises of Pep Gaurdiola's Barcelona team. And to be honest that has been truly deserved. They have played some of the greatest football the world has ever seen, with some of the best players I have ever seen play the game. Messi is, in my opinion, the best player to ever grace the game, and he has some brilliant midfield support in the form of Xavi and Iniesta who have helped make Barcelona a dominant force in Spain and Europe. They pass their opposition out of the game, then press relentlessly to win the ball back. But if a team works out a way to stop their passing game, or break past their pressing defence, what's their plan B?
From what I could gather from their games against Chelsea and Real Madrid, they don't really have one. First of all it's important to notice that Chelsea and Real Madrid had very different ways of combating the Catalan giants. Chelsea stood firm at the back and really stopped the Barcelona players running with the ball, whilst Real Madrid immediately moved the ball to the wings and looked to spread the pressing of the opposition, creating space behind .the defenders. But in both games Barcelona looked lost for ideas, completely bewildered that their total football approach wasn't working.
I would stress again that this is not me saying i don't like Barcelona's plan A. When it works, it's amazing. But because all of their players are good passers and like short sharp passing all around the box, they lack tactical dexterity. None of their attackers could stand up to the physical presence of Ivanovic, Terry or Cahill, and they suffered because of it. I were Gaurdiola I would want to be able to throw on a winger and a tall centre forward with twenty minutes to go to give the defence something to think about. It may also help at times for Barcelona to open the game up at times, but I just think they don't have enough confidence in their defence for that, and if they truly want to be the best team in Europe for seasons to come, they need to sort this out. Having Mascherano at centre back in the Champions League Semi-Final is not the answer.
So although I realise I'm hardly qualified to give transfer advice to one of the best sides in the world, I think the solution is pretty obvious. Sign a couple of robust centre backs, and a strong centre forward. Not a massive change in the culture of Barcelona, but the ability to adapt. It has become blatantly obvious in all sports, not just football, that what makes a good team or individual a great in the sport is the ability to change when their quality is under scrutiny.
From what I could gather from their games against Chelsea and Real Madrid, they don't really have one. First of all it's important to notice that Chelsea and Real Madrid had very different ways of combating the Catalan giants. Chelsea stood firm at the back and really stopped the Barcelona players running with the ball, whilst Real Madrid immediately moved the ball to the wings and looked to spread the pressing of the opposition, creating space behind .the defenders. But in both games Barcelona looked lost for ideas, completely bewildered that their total football approach wasn't working.
I would stress again that this is not me saying i don't like Barcelona's plan A. When it works, it's amazing. But because all of their players are good passers and like short sharp passing all around the box, they lack tactical dexterity. None of their attackers could stand up to the physical presence of Ivanovic, Terry or Cahill, and they suffered because of it. I were Gaurdiola I would want to be able to throw on a winger and a tall centre forward with twenty minutes to go to give the defence something to think about. It may also help at times for Barcelona to open the game up at times, but I just think they don't have enough confidence in their defence for that, and if they truly want to be the best team in Europe for seasons to come, they need to sort this out. Having Mascherano at centre back in the Champions League Semi-Final is not the answer.
So although I realise I'm hardly qualified to give transfer advice to one of the best sides in the world, I think the solution is pretty obvious. Sign a couple of robust centre backs, and a strong centre forward. Not a massive change in the culture of Barcelona, but the ability to adapt. It has become blatantly obvious in all sports, not just football, that what makes a good team or individual a great in the sport is the ability to change when their quality is under scrutiny.
Sunday, 15 April 2012
F1 and The Bahrain Conundrum
Its Sunday afternoon on a racing weekend and this blog's subject is F1. I'd love to use this space to be talking about the brilliant race I watched this morning where 3 of the nicest guys on the circuit finished on the podium, but instead, like the rest of the F1 world, all the attention is on next weeks race. Should it go ahead on moral/political grounds? What about safety grounds?
When it comes to politics, sport should not be used to fix problems, because it can't. Whether the F1 goes to Bahrain or not there will still be civil unrest there, and a large percentage of the population will still be living below the poverty line. F1 still races in China and other parts of the far east despite their poor human rights and labour records. North Korea was still allowed to play in the World Cup despite their awful excuse for a government. On these grounds, F1 should carry on racing wherever the fee has been paid. So far, Bernie Ecclestone's view that 'F1 won't solve anything by not going' is a fair point.
Then you take into consideration that Ecclestone is one of the slimiest people in world sport. As the track was built by the Bahrain royal family, and they're the ones paying the fees, this is basically a huge show just for them. Unless the tickets are offered at 1/4 of the normal price for a grand prix ticket 80% of the population just wont be able to afford to go. By racing at the track, F1 risks creating civil unrest as the protesters look to disrupt anything to do with the royal family. F1 won't heal anything by not racing, but I'm pretty sure they'll cause more unrest by going. F1 shouldn't risk being the scene of protesters being killed just because Ecclestone wants even more money.
The sad thing is a lot of drivers are against it. The last thing they want is someone running onto the track when they're racing at 180mph. A lot of them don't want to go purely because of what they think they'll be supporting. But due to contracts drivers can't really refuse to race if they're teams go ahead with it. And the teams trust the FIA. And the FIA trust Ecclestone. One money grabbing idiot forces a lot of people to do what they don't really want to do. I think most of the drivers would rather just not bother with the Bahrain GP. Plus it's usually really boring anyway.
All in all I just think F1 gains nothing from going, but risks a lot by doing so. I don't like to wish ill on anyone, but the sooner the sport is not in the control of Bernie Ecclestone the better. F1 should not be going to Bahrain.
When it comes to politics, sport should not be used to fix problems, because it can't. Whether the F1 goes to Bahrain or not there will still be civil unrest there, and a large percentage of the population will still be living below the poverty line. F1 still races in China and other parts of the far east despite their poor human rights and labour records. North Korea was still allowed to play in the World Cup despite their awful excuse for a government. On these grounds, F1 should carry on racing wherever the fee has been paid. So far, Bernie Ecclestone's view that 'F1 won't solve anything by not going' is a fair point.
Then you take into consideration that Ecclestone is one of the slimiest people in world sport. As the track was built by the Bahrain royal family, and they're the ones paying the fees, this is basically a huge show just for them. Unless the tickets are offered at 1/4 of the normal price for a grand prix ticket 80% of the population just wont be able to afford to go. By racing at the track, F1 risks creating civil unrest as the protesters look to disrupt anything to do with the royal family. F1 won't heal anything by not racing, but I'm pretty sure they'll cause more unrest by going. F1 shouldn't risk being the scene of protesters being killed just because Ecclestone wants even more money.
The sad thing is a lot of drivers are against it. The last thing they want is someone running onto the track when they're racing at 180mph. A lot of them don't want to go purely because of what they think they'll be supporting. But due to contracts drivers can't really refuse to race if they're teams go ahead with it. And the teams trust the FIA. And the FIA trust Ecclestone. One money grabbing idiot forces a lot of people to do what they don't really want to do. I think most of the drivers would rather just not bother with the Bahrain GP. Plus it's usually really boring anyway.
All in all I just think F1 gains nothing from going, but risks a lot by doing so. I don't like to wish ill on anyone, but the sooner the sport is not in the control of Bernie Ecclestone the better. F1 should not be going to Bahrain.
Friday, 13 April 2012
Sexism in Sport
Recently sexism in the sporting world has been a hot topic on the press, with many people arguing either side about whether sport really is sexist. I will intend to argue both sides of the discussion, and hope to draw some conclusions about the sporting world and what we could realistically expect in the next few years.
Sexism is like a cold. It'll always be there because it exists in so many forms, in different degrees of seriousness. There isn't a friendship group alive that doesn't make some sexist jokes, be that male to female or vice versa, even if they are tongue in cheek. So to expect a traditionally male dominated area like sport to not be sexist overnight is ridiculous. That said, it doesn't make it right. Judging someone as worse before you have had a chance to see what they can do is unfair, whatever you base that opinion on. This is what happened to one Lionel Messi as a boy, he was too small, so judged to be not good enough. As we have seen, that was a ridiculous judgement to make. So should women be allowed to play in the same leagues as men in sport? And does the argument that women should get paid the same amount stand up?
The answer to the second question, in my opinion, is largely no. If the male form of the game attracts the most interest/investment/viewers, as is largely the case, then the men should get paid more due to basic economics. The average man is stronger and faster than the average woman, and the same holds at the top of the sports, which would give men an advantage if sports were unisex, so the sports are split according to gender. If a woman wanted to swap to the male side of the sport, she would have to be prepared to be at a disadvantage physically, if not technically. So my answer to the first question would be yes, but on the same conditions as the men. Sport is reaching a tipping point in regards to sexism, but it should not start making it easier for women to play in male sports, as this would risk lowering the viewership of the sport, and making sexism even more of an issue. If the sports governing body are saying that women aren't good enough to play under the same conditions, what are the general public going to think?
I would love to think that in the modern world we live in that we are getting close to a point where women are going to begin playing in male sports, but i don't see it happening for a while. Football is not the sport I think is going to make the breakthrough, because although you may be able to punish the players that behave in a sexist way towards a female player, your average season ticket holder is not going to be worried about sparing the feelings of this first player. Especially the first time this female player gives the ball away. If the breakthrough for women is going to be made, it's not going to be a contact sport, at least not on the pitch.
The fact that there are no women in coaching roles in male sport shows how sexist the game, as well as the players, can be. To have a female manager would have no bearing surely, as it is the technical mind that matters. The only reason I can imagine this not happening is that the players would not respect the female manager, and you can see from people like Ashley Cole and John Terry that they don't respect women anyway, god help it if that woman tried to tell them to do something. Sexism in sport exists because sexism exists, it's never going to completely go away, which is a real shame.
I really hope that sports can become more inclusive, even if its not football. Surely we should look at more purely technical sports to make the first step? Snooker, darts or Olympic sports like Archery? These give no benefit to being stronger/taller/faster, so there should be a much smaller gender gap, if any at all. I would never force sports to be unisex, I would just offer women the chance to try if they wanted to. Tennis is one of the only sports I can think of where the genders are seemingly on equal standing. They have the same prize money, and at times they even play together. There are no rules to favour the women in Mixed doubles either, and there can be no bias if the governing body of the sport wants to eradicate sexism.
So yes, sport is sexist, but that's not sports fault, most of the world is sexist. But that doesn't mean sport shouldn't try harder. F1 has just got its first female test driver, and Bernie Ecclestone has already hit on her. People like him need to be kicked out of sport, and I would love to see more women in technical positions amongst sport, because some of the female coaches I have encountered over my time in sport have been just as good as their male counterparts. If football can make the first move, brilliant, but I think it has to come from other sports for football to take the sexism row seriously.
Someone be brave, please.
Sexism is like a cold. It'll always be there because it exists in so many forms, in different degrees of seriousness. There isn't a friendship group alive that doesn't make some sexist jokes, be that male to female or vice versa, even if they are tongue in cheek. So to expect a traditionally male dominated area like sport to not be sexist overnight is ridiculous. That said, it doesn't make it right. Judging someone as worse before you have had a chance to see what they can do is unfair, whatever you base that opinion on. This is what happened to one Lionel Messi as a boy, he was too small, so judged to be not good enough. As we have seen, that was a ridiculous judgement to make. So should women be allowed to play in the same leagues as men in sport? And does the argument that women should get paid the same amount stand up?
The answer to the second question, in my opinion, is largely no. If the male form of the game attracts the most interest/investment/viewers, as is largely the case, then the men should get paid more due to basic economics. The average man is stronger and faster than the average woman, and the same holds at the top of the sports, which would give men an advantage if sports were unisex, so the sports are split according to gender. If a woman wanted to swap to the male side of the sport, she would have to be prepared to be at a disadvantage physically, if not technically. So my answer to the first question would be yes, but on the same conditions as the men. Sport is reaching a tipping point in regards to sexism, but it should not start making it easier for women to play in male sports, as this would risk lowering the viewership of the sport, and making sexism even more of an issue. If the sports governing body are saying that women aren't good enough to play under the same conditions, what are the general public going to think?
I would love to think that in the modern world we live in that we are getting close to a point where women are going to begin playing in male sports, but i don't see it happening for a while. Football is not the sport I think is going to make the breakthrough, because although you may be able to punish the players that behave in a sexist way towards a female player, your average season ticket holder is not going to be worried about sparing the feelings of this first player. Especially the first time this female player gives the ball away. If the breakthrough for women is going to be made, it's not going to be a contact sport, at least not on the pitch.
The fact that there are no women in coaching roles in male sport shows how sexist the game, as well as the players, can be. To have a female manager would have no bearing surely, as it is the technical mind that matters. The only reason I can imagine this not happening is that the players would not respect the female manager, and you can see from people like Ashley Cole and John Terry that they don't respect women anyway, god help it if that woman tried to tell them to do something. Sexism in sport exists because sexism exists, it's never going to completely go away, which is a real shame.
I really hope that sports can become more inclusive, even if its not football. Surely we should look at more purely technical sports to make the first step? Snooker, darts or Olympic sports like Archery? These give no benefit to being stronger/taller/faster, so there should be a much smaller gender gap, if any at all. I would never force sports to be unisex, I would just offer women the chance to try if they wanted to. Tennis is one of the only sports I can think of where the genders are seemingly on equal standing. They have the same prize money, and at times they even play together. There are no rules to favour the women in Mixed doubles either, and there can be no bias if the governing body of the sport wants to eradicate sexism.
So yes, sport is sexist, but that's not sports fault, most of the world is sexist. But that doesn't mean sport shouldn't try harder. F1 has just got its first female test driver, and Bernie Ecclestone has already hit on her. People like him need to be kicked out of sport, and I would love to see more women in technical positions amongst sport, because some of the female coaches I have encountered over my time in sport have been just as good as their male counterparts. If football can make the first move, brilliant, but I think it has to come from other sports for football to take the sexism row seriously.
Someone be brave, please.
Wednesday, 11 April 2012
Winter Summary
Due to a combination of uni work, forgetfulness and some downright laziness, I realised today that I haven't posted on here since October. Safe to say a lot has happened since then in the world of sport, I'll do my best to roundup the major sports with some look into the next few weeks of sport.
Football
Lets start with the Premiership. At the top of the table Man City went from looking like an unbeatable force to a bunch of squabbling school kids in a matter of months, whilst Sir Alex Ferguson has shown that once again he has the team to last a full season. In my opinion you'd be absolutely mental if you can look at the table now and think Man United are not going to win, unless Mancini does some kind of deal with the devil, maybe if he just refuses to play Balotelli he'd stand a chance. The fight for the remaining champions league places goes on, with Tottenham fading, Newcastle surging, and Arsenal and Chelsea fighting in there too. After their win against city, Arsenal are looking strong to finish in third, and recovering some of the form from previous years. I hope, for Arsenal and the Premier league's sake, Van Persie stays at Arsenal because he is a brilliant player, and Arsenal would not be third without him. Newcastle have shown January signings can work, and Alan Pardew has done brilliantly at creating and shaping a team that has many different dimensions, and genuinely they look genuinely capable of beating anyone right now. Di Matteo has done well restoring confidence to the Chelsea side, but in my opinion they will have to wait another year for any success in the PL. And if Barcelona score first in their European tie, Chelsea may as well go home. The midfield pack is shaping up with the usual suspects, with Liverpool floundering in the new year and Norwich playing some brilliant football of their own. Mr Lambert has to be up for Manager of the year. Towards the bottom of the table and there aren't many surprises here, Swansea are safe due to some brilliant flowing football, but the bottom 3 aren't a shock at all. Wolves and Wigan have both been hovering around relegation for years and i just don't think they're premiership quality. With some of the players Blackburn have they really shouldn't be in this mess, but I think they deserve to go down this year, and have a complete restructuring. I hope Mark Hughes and QPR survive, he's the kind of manager that could do very well with the financial backing he would have at QPR. All in all i don't expect too much movement before the end of the season, maybe Newcastle to take fourth, and as a West ham fan I hope Chelsea can nick fifth from Tottenham.
Championship now and it seems the automatic places are all but decided. Reading and Southampton play each other next for a potential title decider. West Ham's awful home form means they are most likely going to have to settle for third, not what anyone at West Ham wanted. Portsmouth are making a mad dash for survival, and I would (given their financial troubles) love them to make it, but it doesn't look likely. I would expect the playoff places to stay the same now as well, possibly Leicester to sneak in with their nice goal difference cushion.
Cricket
England managed to transform themselves once again, this time from a dominating side into one struggling to even bat out a single day. They need to refocus, and get their batting back to where it was. The bowling has not ever really been in question, they still restrict their opponents to reasonable scores, sometimes very low scores, but the batsmen cannot get the targets that are required. Hopefully after winning the last test against Sri Lanka, they can come back with a bit more confidence and actually put up a fight for their number one ranking.
Rugby Union
Wales were victorious in the Six Nations after playing some wonderful rugby. And although fortuitous against Ireland with the last minute penalty that was a bit dubious, no successful campaign is possible without a small piece of luck. England showed they could still play some decent rugby, in no small part due to Lancaster coming in and getting England back to playing the way they play best, solid with few errors and a reliable kicker. Hopefully England can build on that for the next world cup. Scotland looked like a team completely lacking in ability and confidence, and the Italians took advantage of that in one of the poorest games of rugby I have ever seen. Still the Italians played to their pack strength and got the result. France looked brilliant at points, but so flimsy at others, serious improvement is needed on their part if they want to make any marks on future competitions.
Formula one
McLaren look like they've finally delivered a winning car for their world champion drivers. Red Bull are looking way off the pace, and the Ferrari looks as though it has a Roulette function built in, brilliant one day, undrivable the next. If Lewis and Jenson can stay consistent with their racing, there is no reason they should not win this year. Sergio Perez has to be the talking point so far though, absolutely brilliant drive in Malaysia, and he really outperformed with the car that he had. The next race will be massive.
Tennis
What we've learnt this year in the world of tennis:
Golf
McIlroy v Woods. The showdown that just didn't happen. I just dint know why people thought it would. Woods has been out the running for so long, then he wins one tournament and suddenly people are saying 'he's back to his best'. Not by a long way. As for McIlroypre-tournament favourites. Watson deserved the jacket for some brilliantly solid rounds of gold, as well as a brilliant nervy recovery shot from the trees on the playoff. McIlroy or Woods could win a major this year, but i doubt we'll ever get to see them both finish high up the same major leaderboard.
Football
Lets start with the Premiership. At the top of the table Man City went from looking like an unbeatable force to a bunch of squabbling school kids in a matter of months, whilst Sir Alex Ferguson has shown that once again he has the team to last a full season. In my opinion you'd be absolutely mental if you can look at the table now and think Man United are not going to win, unless Mancini does some kind of deal with the devil, maybe if he just refuses to play Balotelli he'd stand a chance. The fight for the remaining champions league places goes on, with Tottenham fading, Newcastle surging, and Arsenal and Chelsea fighting in there too. After their win against city, Arsenal are looking strong to finish in third, and recovering some of the form from previous years. I hope, for Arsenal and the Premier league's sake, Van Persie stays at Arsenal because he is a brilliant player, and Arsenal would not be third without him. Newcastle have shown January signings can work, and Alan Pardew has done brilliantly at creating and shaping a team that has many different dimensions, and genuinely they look genuinely capable of beating anyone right now. Di Matteo has done well restoring confidence to the Chelsea side, but in my opinion they will have to wait another year for any success in the PL. And if Barcelona score first in their European tie, Chelsea may as well go home. The midfield pack is shaping up with the usual suspects, with Liverpool floundering in the new year and Norwich playing some brilliant football of their own. Mr Lambert has to be up for Manager of the year. Towards the bottom of the table and there aren't many surprises here, Swansea are safe due to some brilliant flowing football, but the bottom 3 aren't a shock at all. Wolves and Wigan have both been hovering around relegation for years and i just don't think they're premiership quality. With some of the players Blackburn have they really shouldn't be in this mess, but I think they deserve to go down this year, and have a complete restructuring. I hope Mark Hughes and QPR survive, he's the kind of manager that could do very well with the financial backing he would have at QPR. All in all i don't expect too much movement before the end of the season, maybe Newcastle to take fourth, and as a West ham fan I hope Chelsea can nick fifth from Tottenham.
Championship now and it seems the automatic places are all but decided. Reading and Southampton play each other next for a potential title decider. West Ham's awful home form means they are most likely going to have to settle for third, not what anyone at West Ham wanted. Portsmouth are making a mad dash for survival, and I would (given their financial troubles) love them to make it, but it doesn't look likely. I would expect the playoff places to stay the same now as well, possibly Leicester to sneak in with their nice goal difference cushion.
Cricket
England managed to transform themselves once again, this time from a dominating side into one struggling to even bat out a single day. They need to refocus, and get their batting back to where it was. The bowling has not ever really been in question, they still restrict their opponents to reasonable scores, sometimes very low scores, but the batsmen cannot get the targets that are required. Hopefully after winning the last test against Sri Lanka, they can come back with a bit more confidence and actually put up a fight for their number one ranking.
Rugby Union
Wales were victorious in the Six Nations after playing some wonderful rugby. And although fortuitous against Ireland with the last minute penalty that was a bit dubious, no successful campaign is possible without a small piece of luck. England showed they could still play some decent rugby, in no small part due to Lancaster coming in and getting England back to playing the way they play best, solid with few errors and a reliable kicker. Hopefully England can build on that for the next world cup. Scotland looked like a team completely lacking in ability and confidence, and the Italians took advantage of that in one of the poorest games of rugby I have ever seen. Still the Italians played to their pack strength and got the result. France looked brilliant at points, but so flimsy at others, serious improvement is needed on their part if they want to make any marks on future competitions.
Formula one
McLaren look like they've finally delivered a winning car for their world champion drivers. Red Bull are looking way off the pace, and the Ferrari looks as though it has a Roulette function built in, brilliant one day, undrivable the next. If Lewis and Jenson can stay consistent with their racing, there is no reason they should not win this year. Sergio Perez has to be the talking point so far though, absolutely brilliant drive in Malaysia, and he really outperformed with the car that he had. The next race will be massive.
Tennis
What we've learnt this year in the world of tennis:
- Federer is still a class act
- Djokovic is bordering on the superhuman in terms of physicality
- Nadal is complaining about the structure of the calendar and ranking system
- No-one outside the top 4 has a chance of winning much this year
- Great Britain are still not good enough to play with the big boys of tennis
Golf
McIlroy v Woods. The showdown that just didn't happen. I just dint know why people thought it would. Woods has been out the running for so long, then he wins one tournament and suddenly people are saying 'he's back to his best'. Not by a long way. As for McIlroypre-tournament favourites. Watson deserved the jacket for some brilliantly solid rounds of gold, as well as a brilliant nervy recovery shot from the trees on the playoff. McIlroy or Woods could win a major this year, but i doubt we'll ever get to see them both finish high up the same major leaderboard.
Wednesday, 12 October 2011
Why are England, as a nation, afraid to play sport their own way?
After yet another early World Cup exit the media post mortem will again draw up the conclusion that they had the players to go all the way, but just couldn't live up to their potential on the field. And no matter what sport you think about, at some point these words could've been applied to the England National team (or players). Tim Hennman in Tennis never won a grand slam and was heavily noted for doing so. In the last 50 years, depite possesing some of the greatest footballers, we have failed to win a Football World Cup. Only recently have we lived up to our potential in cricket, although the one day world cup was a bit of an issue.
After years of watching England go into tournaments with far higher expectaitons that results, it has become very clear that all of them suffer from the same problem. They're all afraid of playing their own way. Sometimes it's not even the players fault, but the sporting associations themselves. After the 90's the Sampras era over Wimbledon was waining, and Britain had themselves the best serve volleyer in the game in the form of Tim Henman. For those of you who remember dear old Tim getting knocked out again and again and are probably pulling a face to the tune of 'as if he was the best', Sampras had said it himself. So this was Britains chance to get a Grand Slam hero for the first time in ages. Instead the All England Club slowed both the courts and the balls down to help baseline play, not exactly what Tim was after. However it was good timing for a little chap called Federer to bring in another era of grass court domination, no chance for Henman anymore. But the governing bodies of sport aren't usually to blame.
Since the start of the Premier League in the 90's it has been heralded as the most competetive top League in the world, with many teams battling for honours and European spots, and very rarely have there been a definite bottom three. There are also more British players in this league than any other, so logic would dictate that England would be regularly challenging at major tournaments. Wrong. Year after year we have all watched England try and play a style of football that we just don't suit, posession football is just not in a English players nature. The fans have demanded fast frantic football with fast wingers and counter-attacks at every opportunity, and the Premier League has provided, but the National team has not. Recently we have started to play more of the football we see week in week out, but watching how other teams play and trying to copy wont work, we just become poorer versions of those teams. Brazil had the samba football their street football upbringing gave birth to, the current Spain and the Netherlands of the past have their 'total football', and in a different way Italy had their stone wall defensive pay, and their players love it because it's the style they want to play, and they get results that way. If we want sucess, we have to play our own way.
The same goes for Rugby. 8 Years ago when Martin Johnson led the English team all the way we had a rock hard defence, a disciplined team, and a well thought out kicking game. Watching the game against France was painful, because we were sloppy, left holes in the defence and the only person willing to put boot to ball was the scrum half, who's box kicks we never won back and didnt gain any ground from. The All Blacks and the Aussies have always goaded us for being a kicking team afraid to take the ball on. But it worked. Our brilliant kicking game allowed us to play most of the match in their territory, and our discipline meant that when the game broke down we usually had more of a chance of leaving their half with 3 points than not. It's great to have line breakers in our team like Tuilangi, but after 6 attempts the French knew what was happening and we got nowhere.
In conclusion, British sport needs to grow a pair and do it's own thing, and not be sucked into whats working for others, every sport would benefit from it.
After years of watching England go into tournaments with far higher expectaitons that results, it has become very clear that all of them suffer from the same problem. They're all afraid of playing their own way. Sometimes it's not even the players fault, but the sporting associations themselves. After the 90's the Sampras era over Wimbledon was waining, and Britain had themselves the best serve volleyer in the game in the form of Tim Henman. For those of you who remember dear old Tim getting knocked out again and again and are probably pulling a face to the tune of 'as if he was the best', Sampras had said it himself. So this was Britains chance to get a Grand Slam hero for the first time in ages. Instead the All England Club slowed both the courts and the balls down to help baseline play, not exactly what Tim was after. However it was good timing for a little chap called Federer to bring in another era of grass court domination, no chance for Henman anymore. But the governing bodies of sport aren't usually to blame.
Since the start of the Premier League in the 90's it has been heralded as the most competetive top League in the world, with many teams battling for honours and European spots, and very rarely have there been a definite bottom three. There are also more British players in this league than any other, so logic would dictate that England would be regularly challenging at major tournaments. Wrong. Year after year we have all watched England try and play a style of football that we just don't suit, posession football is just not in a English players nature. The fans have demanded fast frantic football with fast wingers and counter-attacks at every opportunity, and the Premier League has provided, but the National team has not. Recently we have started to play more of the football we see week in week out, but watching how other teams play and trying to copy wont work, we just become poorer versions of those teams. Brazil had the samba football their street football upbringing gave birth to, the current Spain and the Netherlands of the past have their 'total football', and in a different way Italy had their stone wall defensive pay, and their players love it because it's the style they want to play, and they get results that way. If we want sucess, we have to play our own way.
The same goes for Rugby. 8 Years ago when Martin Johnson led the English team all the way we had a rock hard defence, a disciplined team, and a well thought out kicking game. Watching the game against France was painful, because we were sloppy, left holes in the defence and the only person willing to put boot to ball was the scrum half, who's box kicks we never won back and didnt gain any ground from. The All Blacks and the Aussies have always goaded us for being a kicking team afraid to take the ball on. But it worked. Our brilliant kicking game allowed us to play most of the match in their territory, and our discipline meant that when the game broke down we usually had more of a chance of leaving their half with 3 points than not. It's great to have line breakers in our team like Tuilangi, but after 6 attempts the French knew what was happening and we got nowhere.
In conclusion, British sport needs to grow a pair and do it's own thing, and not be sucked into whats working for others, every sport would benefit from it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)