This is a sensitive subject. He's a man that a lot of people regard highly, very highly, chant about, even deify, a 'legend'. Even for those who do not regard him so much, most still have an utmost respect for the man. However, the time has come to face facts: Jermain Defoe faces the prospect of leaving in January.
Defoe has become a problem. His frequent outbursts to the media whenever the spotlight turns to him has become commonplace. Defoe's demands to be placed above Roberto Soldado in the striker pecking order at Spurs seems to come out every week, most recently after England's game to Chile. The debate over his place in the squad rages in the pubs and on the social networks. We all have an opinion on it.
What is Defoe as a player? Constantly throughout his career, he has been branded as a 'natural finisher' by the British media, even in 2013. Spurs fans know this branding is false. We know that in his years at Spurs, he has gone through spells of either intense form or complete disappearances from the side. Under Jol and Ramos, the combination of Berbatov and Keane was preferred. Under Redknapp, the likes of Crouch and Adebayor were preferred to him upfront. Last season under Villas-Boas, Defoe failed to overcome competition from Adebayor, despite the ex-Arsenal striker's massive lack of goals.
Amongst Defoe's on-field problems include his lack of wider contribution to the team; he refuses to bring other players into the attacking third, instead choosing an individual pursuit. True, his best games make him appear tenacious, a true finisher. His average game, however, is nothing of this sort. Defoe becomes a ghost, frequently found offside, failing that, squandering clear-cut chances. I highlight Defoe's only league appearance this year as proof of that. Just after half time, Defoe managed to get one-on-one with Jaaskeleinen, only to tamely squander the chance. Moments later, we went a goal down.
Knowing these facts, Daniel Levy invested money on another striker, a reputed striker, one of Europe's most prolific strikers: this was in the form of Roberto Soldado. The Spaniard has failed to hit the ground running, but his overall contribution to the team, awareness and movements surpasses Defoe. We did not spend £26million, beg for it to happen in the summer (#SignSoldado), condemn our current strikers, just to have Soldado undermined due to reactionary critics.
Don't get me wrong, I do have massive respect for Defoe. His goal in our 3-1 win to City last April was one of the highlights of the season. He is our highest scorer in European competitions. He is our 5th highest goalscorer of all time. Outside White Hart Lane, he has overcome personal tragedies, losing his father, brother and cousin unexpectedly. To overcome tragedy to that degree takes a lot of courage, and I applaud Defoe for that.
But his demands to play for the sake of his last chance to shine in an England shirt in Brazil massively undermines our manager. It undermines his ability to make decisions, something that destroyed his tenure at Chelsea, giving risk to alienating the fans, the media and even the other players against him. If AVB's tenure in undermined at Spurs, we will see a massive disruption in the club in this crucial season, where we have a chance to break the league mould, just as we did in 09/10.
With interest from West Ham growing due to the long term absence of Andy Carroll, there will definitely be bids for Defoe in January, with or without a transfer request. Therefore, the club would be wise to accept the right offer, stick with the strikers we have, and reinvest it on a young striker in the summer. This is for the good of the club.
AVB cannot bow to pressure. He saw Defoe's incapabilities this season and last, as have every Spurs fans. No matter how many pundits big Defoe up, how many goals he scores against teams like Tromso and Sheriff Tiraspol, or how many more of his personal claims of ability appear in the papers, his inabilities will remain and only more problems will be caused.
For the good of the squad, the tenure of the manager, even our league ambitions, it is time we face the prospect of parting company with Jermain Defoe. As the song goes, time to say goodbye...
24 November 2013
10 November 2013
Inverted wingers IS the answer
After intense note-taking and debating on twitter, I have found the right team. It’s a long time coming, and my goodness, AVB needs to find the right team before our lack of goals becomes harmful to our league position. However, I believe this team for today’s match against Newcastle will work.
The main debate regarding the formation has been over inverted wingers. Many people believe inverted wingers makes the midfield congested and harms free-flowing creativity. However, that does not explain how teams such as Bayern Munich have reached dizzy heights operating a similar system.
I have kept Sigurdsson and Lamela as the inverted wingers. Lamela has shown in midweek what he possesses, taking the full back with distinct forward attacking play, either posing as a goal threat or a creative threat. Sigurdsson has scored 4 goals in this spot and, although not the most involved player, his qualities will pose useful in sorting out our goal problem. They will still cut in and take shots, but with an added twist.
The No.10 spot has been much debated, and frequently talked about as the reason for our goal drought. Central in creating chances, the No.10 is vital in winning games. However, for Chelsea, Arsenal and Man City (No.10′s being Oscar, Ozil and Silva respectively), their most creative threat is not fixed in the middle. He interchanges with the wingers, providing crosses as well as through balls, offering different angles for the striker(s).
Eriksen gets the pick for today’s match, much becuase he better suits the system as a two footed player. Holtby shows glimpses of creativity, alongside work-rate and aggressive play, but it is not his main focus, unlike Eriksen. At home, often in front of a back 9, the focus of the No.10 must solely be breaking down the opposition. Eriksen, therefore, has the most ability to complete this should Sigurdsson or Lamela be central.
The demands for width have been loud and clear, and natural wingers seems the most obvious answer to this. However, looking at our summer activity (Lamela and Chadli, Townsend in the squad), inverted wingers appears to be the system AVB will keep with as a primary option. Therefore, the width, I believe, intends to be provided by the full backs (wing backs in this purpose).
Walker is naturally a wing back and revels in hugging the touchline. Under AVB, he has refined his play to become more defensively sound, and has been one of our best players this season. Before injured, AVB stuck Rose at left back, and did a fantastic job after playing regular first-team football for Sunderland last season. His wing play suits the formation, but owing to his absence, Vertonghen has to fill-in. Although less effective, the professional class the Belgian possesses will more than make up for Rose’s play.
There is no question who starts upfront. It is the £26million striker. It is the man with one of the best goal scoring records in all Europe last season. It’s the No.9 that we begged for in the summer. Roberto Soldado. If we create chances for him, the kind of chances he thrived on last season, he will flourish.
Ultimately, we have to play football against Newcastle. Attack them. Pepper the goal from all angles. Create chances for the front man. We have commanded possession, but not commanded the final third. We have solidified the castle walls, but our artillery is inaccurate and wasteful. Over time, these problems will reduce, the ‘gelling process’ will give a greater abundance of goals.
Till that moment, I ask for patience, as has AVB. There’s a reason why glory football and tactics of our has never actually brought much glory since the Premier League’s inception. There’s a reason AVB’s football has.
The main debate regarding the formation has been over inverted wingers. Many people believe inverted wingers makes the midfield congested and harms free-flowing creativity. However, that does not explain how teams such as Bayern Munich have reached dizzy heights operating a similar system.
I have kept Sigurdsson and Lamela as the inverted wingers. Lamela has shown in midweek what he possesses, taking the full back with distinct forward attacking play, either posing as a goal threat or a creative threat. Sigurdsson has scored 4 goals in this spot and, although not the most involved player, his qualities will pose useful in sorting out our goal problem. They will still cut in and take shots, but with an added twist.
The No.10 spot has been much debated, and frequently talked about as the reason for our goal drought. Central in creating chances, the No.10 is vital in winning games. However, for Chelsea, Arsenal and Man City (No.10′s being Oscar, Ozil and Silva respectively), their most creative threat is not fixed in the middle. He interchanges with the wingers, providing crosses as well as through balls, offering different angles for the striker(s).
Eriksen gets the pick for today’s match, much becuase he better suits the system as a two footed player. Holtby shows glimpses of creativity, alongside work-rate and aggressive play, but it is not his main focus, unlike Eriksen. At home, often in front of a back 9, the focus of the No.10 must solely be breaking down the opposition. Eriksen, therefore, has the most ability to complete this should Sigurdsson or Lamela be central.
The demands for width have been loud and clear, and natural wingers seems the most obvious answer to this. However, looking at our summer activity (Lamela and Chadli, Townsend in the squad), inverted wingers appears to be the system AVB will keep with as a primary option. Therefore, the width, I believe, intends to be provided by the full backs (wing backs in this purpose).
Walker is naturally a wing back and revels in hugging the touchline. Under AVB, he has refined his play to become more defensively sound, and has been one of our best players this season. Before injured, AVB stuck Rose at left back, and did a fantastic job after playing regular first-team football for Sunderland last season. His wing play suits the formation, but owing to his absence, Vertonghen has to fill-in. Although less effective, the professional class the Belgian possesses will more than make up for Rose’s play.
There is no question who starts upfront. It is the £26million striker. It is the man with one of the best goal scoring records in all Europe last season. It’s the No.9 that we begged for in the summer. Roberto Soldado. If we create chances for him, the kind of chances he thrived on last season, he will flourish.
Ultimately, we have to play football against Newcastle. Attack them. Pepper the goal from all angles. Create chances for the front man. We have commanded possession, but not commanded the final third. We have solidified the castle walls, but our artillery is inaccurate and wasteful. Over time, these problems will reduce, the ‘gelling process’ will give a greater abundance of goals.
Till that moment, I ask for patience, as has AVB. There’s a reason why glory football and tactics of our has never actually brought much glory since the Premier League’s inception. There’s a reason AVB’s football has.
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.
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."
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 |
"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).
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.
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 |
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. |
15 September 2013
Soldado's strike gives Spurs the victory
Club record signing Roberto Soldado scored the winning penalty for Tottenham Hotspur on his debut, beginning Andre Villas-Boas's second season at the club with a win against promoted club Crystal Palace.
The first game of the season is always a special occasion for any club, whether that be a club challenging for European honours or a club appearing in the top division for the first time in eight years. The vibrant reception that the Crystal Palace team received throughout the game, however, made this meeting particularly special. With any luck, this atmosphere will carry the Eagles this season in their attempt to avoid relegation.
Like many games last season, Spurs held most of the possession in midfield between the strong middle pairing of Mousa Demb ele and £17million-signing Paulinho, also making his first appearance for the Lilywhites. Both impressed throughout, controlling the tempo of the game and at times threatening the goal, with Dembele's shot in the first quarter almost breaking the deadlock.
Other close chances from Gylfi Sigurdsson and other debutant Nacer Chadli in the half were promising for Spurs, while the Pally's saw very little of the ball. With the surprise appearance from injury-threatened Jan Vertonghen in defence, this would be a common feature of the game. Despite this, the half ended all square.
However, the chance to break the deadlock came in the 49th minute when Dean Moxey handled in the area after blocking a cross from Aaron Lennon. Referee Mark Clattenburg did not hesitate in giving Spurs the penalty. The clinical Spaniard Soldado, who scored 30 goals last season in 46 appearances for Valencia, slotted the penalty in the keeper's right-hand corner with ease.
The Spurs defence proved a brick wall for Palace, one that they could not break down, despite the appearance for the wily Kevin Phillips and ex-Gunner Marouane Chamakh. They held the match for a 1-0 victory.
The most impressive display, however, did not come from any of the Spurs players, but from Aussie Mile Jedinak, Palace's skipper. Jedinak, a holding midfielder, patrolled the pitch with ease, breaking up many of Tottenham's attacks with strong tackles and interceptions. He received many plaudits during and after game, despite missing out on Man of the Match, which was given to Paulinho by Niall Quinn.
Spurs may not be fully happy with their performance. but they can be pleased that they got what they deserved. Whilst in many ways this victory away from home was reminiscent of Spurs last season, they also had something else in their style, a certainty that they would not be beaten. Should this be the case for the season, their target of a place in this years top four is likely to be achieved.
The first game of the season is always a special occasion for any club, whether that be a club challenging for European honours or a club appearing in the top division for the first time in eight years. The vibrant reception that the Crystal Palace team received throughout the game, however, made this meeting particularly special. With any luck, this atmosphere will carry the Eagles this season in their attempt to avoid relegation.
Like many games last season, Spurs held most of the possession in midfield between the strong middle pairing of Mousa Demb ele and £17million-signing Paulinho, also making his first appearance for the Lilywhites. Both impressed throughout, controlling the tempo of the game and at times threatening the goal, with Dembele's shot in the first quarter almost breaking the deadlock.
Other close chances from Gylfi Sigurdsson and other debutant Nacer Chadli in the half were promising for Spurs, while the Pally's saw very little of the ball. With the surprise appearance from injury-threatened Jan Vertonghen in defence, this would be a common feature of the game. Despite this, the half ended all square.
However, the chance to break the deadlock came in the 49th minute when Dean Moxey handled in the area after blocking a cross from Aaron Lennon. Referee Mark Clattenburg did not hesitate in giving Spurs the penalty. The clinical Spaniard Soldado, who scored 30 goals last season in 46 appearances for Valencia, slotted the penalty in the keeper's right-hand corner with ease.
The Spurs defence proved a brick wall for Palace, one that they could not break down, despite the appearance for the wily Kevin Phillips and ex-Gunner Marouane Chamakh. They held the match for a 1-0 victory.
The most impressive display, however, did not come from any of the Spurs players, but from Aussie Mile Jedinak, Palace's skipper. Jedinak, a holding midfielder, patrolled the pitch with ease, breaking up many of Tottenham's attacks with strong tackles and interceptions. He received many plaudits during and after game, despite missing out on Man of the Match, which was given to Paulinho by Niall Quinn.
Spurs may not be fully happy with their performance. but they can be pleased that they got what they deserved. Whilst in many ways this victory away from home was reminiscent of Spurs last season, they also had something else in their style, a certainty that they would not be beaten. Should this be the case for the season, their target of a place in this years top four is likely to be achieved.
11 September 2013
England expects
"England expects": the words that are repeated over and over at every single international tournament; the words that represent our desire to see our country play and play well; the words we all stand by. Last night, English football lost all expectation.
Ukraine away was played up as the most important fixture in our search for qualification. A win would all but guarantee our ticket to Rio next summer. A loss would be devastating. A draw would keep qualification most definitely alive going into our home games at Wembley, if not neccessarily setting it in stone.
To my utter dismay, it was the latter of those which our manager decided to aim for from the first minute.
Ukraine are not a nation known for their footballing class, nor will they ever I doubt. The Dombass Arena is, no doubt, an intimidating ground due to the loud eastern European, with loud cracks of flares and fireworks going off at random points, silencing the England faithful in the opposite corner of the ground. The England team though, full of professionals well-paid and well seasoned, should be prepared for such grounds. No matter what situations, England expected a win against the team in yellow.
The England team that former Fulham, Liverpool and Albion manager Roy Hodgson took to the Dombass was a weakened one, not at first by choice due to 'injuries', but certainly such weakness was increased due to the selection of James Milner.
Milner, now (regretably) a regular international and Premier League winner, is a consistent player, no doubt, but consistent at being average. Sure, tags of 'high workrates' and 'puts in a good shift' are ones Milner has earnt. Yet I have never seen a player so less befitting to the tag of 'world class' than Milner. He posseses no finesse, no style, no distuingishable talent, nor is he a game changer or match winner.
In that sense, James Milner is Roy Hodgson's playing representative. Hodgson is a manager who has never even come close to the heights of management, failing at his highest post at Anfield, nor has he won a domestic trophy. He is not known for any specific style of play, except perhaps grinding out satisfactory results.
What does this show for English coaching, or indeed the FA, that a man with very little credentials or talent in his profession can elevate to the highest post in Enlgish management?
Am I harsh to criticise Hodgson? Well, let me dissect the Ukraine game and we'll find out.
From the first minutes, England looked dodgy, with England's number one making a rash challenge on Ukranian striker Roman Zozulya in the box, the referee pointing for a corner and not to the penalty spot.
A flatly driven long pass into the box from midfielder Edmar opened up another chance for Ukraine in the box, to which England only just defended.
England's chances, however, were limited to a few long range shots and corners, with zero creativity coming from Jack Wilshere or Steven Gerrard. Rickie Lambert, a classic number nine, did not profit as a result and barely made a shot in the entire game.
As the game wore on, you would expect teams to settle down and become more confident on the ball. On the contrary, both teams became insufferably poor in midfield and with very little football played by England in the final third.
Ukrainian winger Konoplienka was by far the stand out player from this match, terrorising Spurs full back Kyle Walker all match. His bursts of pace and moments of skill, however, results in many clear cut chances. Walker, however, was suspect throughout the whole game. In fairness to him, the entire team were just as poor, even if England's faithful do like to scapegoat the Sheffield-born man.
Hodgson made some unconvincing substitutions in the second half, bringing on Ashely Young for Jack Wilshere and Tom Cleverley for Theo Walcott. As you would, neither contributed anything notable to the game.
The game finished all square, with most people struggling to pinpoint the exact words to describe the performance. Whatever it was, it left me ditraught at the ninety minutes of my life I would never get back. As ever, cheers Roy.
Many Englishman understood the slightly positive implications of the result, in a whole 'job done' attitudes whom many adopt. Many, however, expected more.
Me? I have lost all sense of expectation. Ever since Hodgson took charge at the Euros, England's football have resembled the same negative style of football. Players from the 'best league of the world' lacked flair and composure, often outdone by Ukrainians. Players who have been in the international setup for years and years lacked cohesion with thier teammates, as if they had been thrusted together for the first time. No creativity. No depth. This is what I have come to expect from England now.
English football is near beyond any treatment. While countries even as small as Belgium overtake us in every sense, England remains in purgatory. Hope? What hope? Expectation? What is there left to expect? We have been left for dead due to the attitudes of the FA. And yet, it is up to them to revive English football. Or else, The only thing "England expects" will be disappointment.
Ukraine away was played up as the most important fixture in our search for qualification. A win would all but guarantee our ticket to Rio next summer. A loss would be devastating. A draw would keep qualification most definitely alive going into our home games at Wembley, if not neccessarily setting it in stone.
To my utter dismay, it was the latter of those which our manager decided to aim for from the first minute.
Ukraine are not a nation known for their footballing class, nor will they ever I doubt. The Dombass Arena is, no doubt, an intimidating ground due to the loud eastern European, with loud cracks of flares and fireworks going off at random points, silencing the England faithful in the opposite corner of the ground. The England team though, full of professionals well-paid and well seasoned, should be prepared for such grounds. No matter what situations, England expected a win against the team in yellow.
The England team that former Fulham, Liverpool and Albion manager Roy Hodgson took to the Dombass was a weakened one, not at first by choice due to 'injuries', but certainly such weakness was increased due to the selection of James Milner.
Milner, now (regretably) a regular international and Premier League winner, is a consistent player, no doubt, but consistent at being average. Sure, tags of 'high workrates' and 'puts in a good shift' are ones Milner has earnt. Yet I have never seen a player so less befitting to the tag of 'world class' than Milner. He posseses no finesse, no style, no distuingishable talent, nor is he a game changer or match winner.
In that sense, James Milner is Roy Hodgson's playing representative. Hodgson is a manager who has never even come close to the heights of management, failing at his highest post at Anfield, nor has he won a domestic trophy. He is not known for any specific style of play, except perhaps grinding out satisfactory results.
What does this show for English coaching, or indeed the FA, that a man with very little credentials or talent in his profession can elevate to the highest post in Enlgish management?
Am I harsh to criticise Hodgson? Well, let me dissect the Ukraine game and we'll find out.
From the first minutes, England looked dodgy, with England's number one making a rash challenge on Ukranian striker Roman Zozulya in the box, the referee pointing for a corner and not to the penalty spot.
A flatly driven long pass into the box from midfielder Edmar opened up another chance for Ukraine in the box, to which England only just defended.
England's chances, however, were limited to a few long range shots and corners, with zero creativity coming from Jack Wilshere or Steven Gerrard. Rickie Lambert, a classic number nine, did not profit as a result and barely made a shot in the entire game.
As the game wore on, you would expect teams to settle down and become more confident on the ball. On the contrary, both teams became insufferably poor in midfield and with very little football played by England in the final third.
Ukrainian winger Konoplienka was by far the stand out player from this match, terrorising Spurs full back Kyle Walker all match. His bursts of pace and moments of skill, however, results in many clear cut chances. Walker, however, was suspect throughout the whole game. In fairness to him, the entire team were just as poor, even if England's faithful do like to scapegoat the Sheffield-born man.
Hodgson made some unconvincing substitutions in the second half, bringing on Ashely Young for Jack Wilshere and Tom Cleverley for Theo Walcott. As you would, neither contributed anything notable to the game.
The game finished all square, with most people struggling to pinpoint the exact words to describe the performance. Whatever it was, it left me ditraught at the ninety minutes of my life I would never get back. As ever, cheers Roy.
Many Englishman understood the slightly positive implications of the result, in a whole 'job done' attitudes whom many adopt. Many, however, expected more.
Me? I have lost all sense of expectation. Ever since Hodgson took charge at the Euros, England's football have resembled the same negative style of football. Players from the 'best league of the world' lacked flair and composure, often outdone by Ukrainians. Players who have been in the international setup for years and years lacked cohesion with thier teammates, as if they had been thrusted together for the first time. No creativity. No depth. This is what I have come to expect from England now.
English football is near beyond any treatment. While countries even as small as Belgium overtake us in every sense, England remains in purgatory. Hope? What hope? Expectation? What is there left to expect? We have been left for dead due to the attitudes of the FA. And yet, it is up to them to revive English football. Or else, The only thing "England expects" will be disappointment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)