28 October 2013

Atmospheric Pressure

It was a horrid display of football. Tottenham, trying to split the 10-man defence of Hull, exhausted every possible means to get that first goal. Nothing worked. The possession-orientated play that Andre Villas-Boas has drummed into the squad wasn't enough to break the deadlock, just as it wasn't versus Swansea, just as it wasn't versus Crystal Palace. When Soldado converted his third penalty of the season, a gust of relief swept around White Hart Lane, and the match was won.

After the game, the main complaints about the football was a wide judgement across the season.

  • "Our football is too cautious. It shouldn't be based on possession, but on unrestricted swashbuckle."
  • "Soldado doesn't get enough chances. He's only good for penalties."
  • "This is not the attitude of a top four team."
The football could have been less cautious this season. We certainly have the players to be more attacking and have more bite to it. It's just a case of gathering the right eleven players for it, and that will come with time (that benefiting to a large squad). If we play unrestricted attacking football a la Redknapp, we abandon a fantastic defence (6 clean sheets in 9 games) and I doubt Spurs could last till May. A conundrum, but 'patience' is word of the day. 

The 1882 Movement may be the answer to the dying atmosphere
AVB was surely thinking about tactics on how to improve the football. When faced with problems, he has clearly demonstrated an admirable pragmatic nature, a readiness to solve problems on the pitch through off-the-pitch tactics. AVB did tell the media the cause of the problem, quite explicitly:

"We looked like the away team. We played in a difficult atmosphere with almost no support,"
"Away from home their support has been amazing; we play with no fear and we need that atmosphere at White Hart Lane."
"We spoke about it at half-time. I told the players that we would have to do it on our own. They had to dig deep and look for the strength within themselves. They also believed that it's not easy to play in this stadium when the atmosphere is like this."
"We have a wonderful set of fans but they can do better."

To many Spurs fans (probably the ones inside the ground that day), this was a shocking statement. Their argument was that the team did nothing to get them going, that it was up to them to do their job and we cheer when they complete it, that forking out hundreds gives them the right to complain about it. If they have been quiet, it's because of AVB and the players.

The other camp to this argument supported AVB's verdict, not only supported, but knew it for many years. Their argument was that the Spurs fans have become too expectant, that the high ticket prices has brought in the wrong type of fan (I pay x-amount to watch this shit), that young, energetic fans have been skimmed out White Hart Lane due to the ticket prices. The argument was that White Hart Lane is just another product of modern football.

There's is no doubting that there is a massive atmosphere problem within the Lane. I remember Basel at home last season, where the silence of the Spurs fans was chilling, and the only voices that could be heard were Basel fans. It was no advert for White Hart Lane; it was not the way it should be. 

If the atmosphere has become so negative that the players had to talk to the manager about it, then it seems clear  that something has to change. The supporters don't do enough supporting. The fans are not fanatic enough. If you love your club, you have to do more than pay x-amount to show that. Paying £9 to watch Captain Phillips in the cinema doesn't make me a die-hard Tom Hanks fan. Paying £20 to watch Othello doesn't make you a Shakespeare ultra. You owe Tottenham Hotspur more than what you are giving them.

A 'fan', inside White Hart Lane, playing Candy Crush. Wow.
The majority of fans have become spectators, theatre-goers who would rather criticise the performance than get behind the team. The energy these people have exercising criticism could easily be put into singing 'Oh When The Spurs' or any other song. Why has the players turned you cynical? I idolise them.

I have heard some horrific stories. Fans starting songs, only to get glaring looks from the people around. I've heard of people standing up together, only to be told to sit down and shut up by the overpowered stewards. I've even heard of people reporting other fans for swearing, resulting in a three-game ban for the 'guilty' fan. Does this sound like support to you? 


Why have 90% of Tottenham fans become nihilistic? Why can't they go to the Lane, absorb in the moment and forget about negativity? Why can't they sing their hearts, show their colours, enjoy the moment? What good can criticism possibly achieve?

There are things the club need to do to help change the atmosphere, definitely. Reducing ticket prices, reducing steward and police presence, stop criminalising the fans and supporting safe-standing trials would all contribute towards an improved atmosphere. Outside of England, fans laugh at how stale we have become. Perhaps the 'product' is better, but what's the point if you can't enjoy it? 

Football is not a product, and fans are not customers. You have a duty to your football club. Stop fearing the fans around you, join arms and sing for the shirt you claim to love. AVB has given you a message, and it's time to listen, time to learn: 

Stand. Sing. Support. 

16 October 2013

England Expects: Part 2

England are off to Brazil this summer, and I am as happy as anyone else at this moment in time. The prospect of the World Cup finals in one of the great homes of football is mouth-watering, and for England to be a part of it is honourable. There won't be more anticipation for a world cup till it returns to its first home, Great Britain herself. Although this is an inappropriate time for querying and inquisition, it is my moral duty to stem the tide of optimism.

How England decided to approach qualification this time pestered much of the public (I went into some detail in England Expects). We finished top and we finished unbeaten, and those achievements cannot be cast away and taken for granted. However, what irritated the fans above anything else was the cautious, reserved approach Roy Hodgson took in qualification, despite the distinct lack of quality in the rest of the group.

The best reflection of Hodgson's approach was in his selection policy. He persisted on selecting players that were completely out of form or out of contention at club level at the expense of untried players or players of bottom half teams. Of Roy Hodgson's selections, the stand-out examples are as follows:
  • Danny Welbeck, despite only scoring 2 goals in all competitions for Manchester United last season.
  • James Milner, a player who fails to impress or make an impact at club or international level.
  • Tom Cleverley, heavily preferred to Anderson and Fellaini at (again) United.
  • Ashley Young.
Of course, this was somewhat masked by Hodgson's 'big gamble' in the last 2 qualifiers: Andros Townsend. Townsend played out of skin in both games, taking on his opposition with the fearless inspiration and limitless passion which us fans appreciate more than any record or statistic. However, anyone who has watched Tottenham play this year would not have been surprised by Townsend's performance; he is in such a purple patch that he is keeping the internationally-acclaimed Argentine Erik Lamela out of the first team.


When England came into a group with the teams we had (Poland, Ukraine, Montenegro, Moldova and San Marino), coming first place is expected. Anything less would have been a failure. For much of qualification, the risk of failure became too high. Even though it brought the best out of all of our players, the pressure of the last two games should never have existed. Despite this, the most important thing is that we did come first and we were not beaten.

There is an argument that England has lost a lot of reputation since South Africa. Our national team can no longer align ourselves with the best of the best. Spain, Germany, Italy and Holland are in a different class to us. Rising above them would only be a complete accident. Their squads are filled with world class talent in every position, a prospect we can only dream about. We are not in the top 10 of the world. We are not even close. 

Therefore, the best way to approach this world cup is to go into it with no goals. No 'this is our year' speeches. No 'we have as much chance as any' logic. The players should go out there and enjoy the occasion. Fight for their pride, nor for a quarter final spot. 

The shroud still surrounding this much anticipated tournament will clear in the coming months. The media, being the bloodthirsty cannibals that they are, will ask the impossible over and over again, but it is up to the FA and the national team not to buy into it, not to succumb to the pressure of idiots.

It is obvious that the Greg Dyke and the FA are building towards a bigger future, but their intentions for the here and now should be clear: make the country proud. 

5 October 2013

Sir Alex's shadow will curse Moyes' tenure

This is not a reactionary article. This is not a knee-jerk response to recent events, a hyperbolic statement of concern. These are opinions that I'll stick with for years to come.

David Moyes arrived at Manchester United with a whole new world in front of him, a massive opportunity, the greatest he'll ever have. His future was decided years ago, chosen by Ferguson as the man that he trusts the most to keep his Titanic afloat. 'Back your manager' were the words that resonated from Fergie's mouth at his farewell appearance as United manager. More eyes are looking at him than ever before. More hopes are pinned on his tenure than ever before.

What is the situation now for David Moyes? Well, much the same really. Millions of glass-eyed United fans are staring at him for results, expectations seem to be humungous but it's taking time to click. Fans can be quite reactinary nowadays, but nobody has condemned him to the sack this early (nor is there a case for such condemnation anyway).

Ferguson's legacy will ghost Moyes for years to come
It takes time, they say; it took time before and it will take time now. Comparisons are being drawn out between Ferguson and Moyes already: players used, formations, tactics, even press conferences. A picture of the defeated manager against West Brom, the focus directed to the object that shadows him, the Sir Alex Ferguson Stand, says it all.

What Sir Alex Ferguson did in Manchester was exceptional, and it will never be replicated again. Ferguson entered United in 1985, when they were shadowed by the great bolstering club of Liverpool, right in the middle of their glory years. It took five years after his appointment for him to claim his first prize, the 1990 FA Cup, and from then on, glorious prizes became a commodity at United. 27 years, 38 trophies.

However, times have changed since 1985, since the 'glorious 90s', as it has been dubbed the Red fans. Managers at the highest level are not given time to prove their worth. Clubs don't evolve over a period of 5 years, nor do clubs slowly sink into relegation. Football today is about instant success, revolutions and powerful owners.

You merely need to look at United's neighbours for proof of how much times have changed. Manchester City had a revolution in 2007, very much overnight when they signed Robinho for £32.5million, a Premier League record. Four years later, they beat United in the FA Cup semi-final, going on to beat Stoke in the final. The year after that, they pipped United to the title by goal difference.

Money dictates the game nowadays, not tactics, not individual talent, not a winning mentality. In my eyes, Ferguson was the last remnant of football before the inflated market.

For David Moyes, expectations dictate that he will have to match or come near to matching Alex Ferguson's tenure. This will be an expectation he will never fulfill. This is because money has such a sphere of influence on football, that the only way Moyes can bring glory to United is by spending huge amounts, matching his rivals. Not at one point in Ferguson's tenure has there been spending revolutions akin to the blue side of Manchester.

Moyes is not an idealist, a manager with a tactical mentality, a style of football. He keeps a ship afloat; Everton is proof of that. So his individual mind cannot drive United solely to glory.

I am not condemning Moyes to absolute failure. He will be given a minimum of three years at United in my opinion. Moyes will never move away from the casting shadow of Sir Alex Ferguson. It is too big, too sublime. This would be the case for almost any manager. In this, Moyes' job is a poisoned chalice.

The Sir Alex Ferguson Stand dominates Old Trafford. It is the foundation of their Theatre of Dreams. It is perfection. David Moyes is, and will always be, belittled by its grandeur. The long climb down from this summit has begun for Manchester United. I hope they are prepared.

This.