I haven't written anything for quite a while now because my dissertation and assorted other 3rd year work has been taking up all my time.
Here are a list of things I could have written about/might write about in the future:
- The reaction to snoods in the UK media, specifically Mr Shearer on MOTD, as a perfect example of why there isn't an openly gay footballer in the UK (have a look at the Secret Footballer here for a very good argument along the same lines)
- The relative lack of quality in the England squad and the glaring omission of Scott Parker.
- The overreaction by some Arsenal fans to their recent form.
- Why Arsenal should play Robin Van Persie in the Cesc Fabregas role (the same position Bergkamp used to play) and play Bendtner/Chamkh in front of him.
Hopefully I'll have time to write something relatively soon but I am more or less completely swamped with work until early May. I am not looking forward to the next month.
Tuesday, 22 March 2011
Sunday, 6 March 2011
Football authorities need to get their priorities right
Before kick-off in yesterday's games FIFA announced their decision to ban snoods from the 1st of July (when it'll be warm enough that no one will wear them anyway):
"The IFAB agreed that in relation to Law 4 - Players' Equipment, the wearing of snoods should not be permitted"
At the same time they said that discussions of video technology would continue for another year. This is, quite frankly, ridiculous. The level of technology available is clearly at the level required to be useful to the football. It is used in tennis, rugby and cricket. It is used in the media to lambast referees when they've made the wrong decisions. And it is fast enough to stop the main objection to its use, that it would slow the game down too much. The game stops anyway after contentious decisions are (or are not) made when players crowd the referee.
There is supposed to be a 'respect' campaign being run by the FA but time and again players from top teams are seen attempting to intimidate the referees and assistants but yellow cards are not normally given out.
The lack of respect for referees would be addressed if big decisions, ones that could potentially change the course of a team's season, didn't rely on split second judgement calls. The burden on the referee would be lessened if they had the safety net of a video replay. The fourth official watches a monitor during the game anyway, for goodness' sake. If the players knew that they could shout and scream at the official all they liked but the decision would ultimately be made on the basis hard evidence then the intimidation would become pointless.
Another key bone of contention is the fact that the FA (under threat from FIFA) are loathe to review incidents that have been 'dealt with' by the referee on the day for fear of undermining him. This doesn't seem logical to me. If you are wrongfully arrested by a police officer you don't go to court and hear that unfortunately you'll have to be sent to prison because the CPS don't want to undermine the policeman's authority. Surely we want to protect the players on the pitch and the game itself, rather than the referee's ego.
It would also seem logical to have referees explain decisions that they made during the game. The laws of the game regarding certain actions are complex and require very specific interpretation. The average football fan doesn't have the relevant level of understanding of the laws and even top journalists and pundits get the rules wrong. If the referee gave a post-match interview and explained why they had made certains decision then they would promote understanding of the rules, and referees as a group would not be seen as the unaccountable closed circle that they appear to be currently.
The infamous Rooney elbow from Manchester United's game with Wigan springs immediately to mind when discussing this but there are countless other similar examples. During today's game between Manchester United and Liverpool, Jamie Carragher wanted to let Nani 'know he was there' (to use the oft-quoted line) and caused a potentially serious injury.
Because of the fact that both incidents were 'dealt with' at the time (bizarrely Mark Clattenburg told the FA that he felt he had dealt with the Rooney incident properly; either he didn't see the elbow, in which case he's a liar, or he did see it and still felt that he dealt with it properly, in which case he is incompetent) no further action can be taken. Rooney gets away with not punishment for elbowing a fellow player in the head, and Carragher gets away with a yellow card having made a challenge that could have caused a very serious injury.
And the net result of these events is even closer scrutiny of, and consequently even more pressure on, the officials. Human error is inevitable, especially when there is such intense pressure involved, and therefore it is baffling that the powers-that-be haven't brought in video replays already. It seems especially peculiar given that replays of the incident are often shown to all inside the ground on the big screens anyway. Alleviating some of the pressure on referees, and helping them out with their near-impossible job will lead to less perceived errors and bias. It will also make the game itself the main focus once again.
NB Wanting to make the rules of football applicable at all levels is not an acceptable reason not to use technology any more. Sunday pub team games do not involve the vast sums that are involved in top level football. The standard of the officials, pitches and equipment involved are not the same. It is the same game, but played under vastly different circumstances and with vastly different repercussions.
"The IFAB agreed that in relation to Law 4 - Players' Equipment, the wearing of snoods should not be permitted"
At the same time they said that discussions of video technology would continue for another year. This is, quite frankly, ridiculous. The level of technology available is clearly at the level required to be useful to the football. It is used in tennis, rugby and cricket. It is used in the media to lambast referees when they've made the wrong decisions. And it is fast enough to stop the main objection to its use, that it would slow the game down too much. The game stops anyway after contentious decisions are (or are not) made when players crowd the referee.
There is supposed to be a 'respect' campaign being run by the FA but time and again players from top teams are seen attempting to intimidate the referees and assistants but yellow cards are not normally given out.
The lack of respect for referees would be addressed if big decisions, ones that could potentially change the course of a team's season, didn't rely on split second judgement calls. The burden on the referee would be lessened if they had the safety net of a video replay. The fourth official watches a monitor during the game anyway, for goodness' sake. If the players knew that they could shout and scream at the official all they liked but the decision would ultimately be made on the basis hard evidence then the intimidation would become pointless.
Another key bone of contention is the fact that the FA (under threat from FIFA) are loathe to review incidents that have been 'dealt with' by the referee on the day for fear of undermining him. This doesn't seem logical to me. If you are wrongfully arrested by a police officer you don't go to court and hear that unfortunately you'll have to be sent to prison because the CPS don't want to undermine the policeman's authority. Surely we want to protect the players on the pitch and the game itself, rather than the referee's ego.
It would also seem logical to have referees explain decisions that they made during the game. The laws of the game regarding certain actions are complex and require very specific interpretation. The average football fan doesn't have the relevant level of understanding of the laws and even top journalists and pundits get the rules wrong. If the referee gave a post-match interview and explained why they had made certains decision then they would promote understanding of the rules, and referees as a group would not be seen as the unaccountable closed circle that they appear to be currently.
The infamous Rooney elbow from Manchester United's game with Wigan springs immediately to mind when discussing this but there are countless other similar examples. During today's game between Manchester United and Liverpool, Jamie Carragher wanted to let Nani 'know he was there' (to use the oft-quoted line) and caused a potentially serious injury.
Because of the fact that both incidents were 'dealt with' at the time (bizarrely Mark Clattenburg told the FA that he felt he had dealt with the Rooney incident properly; either he didn't see the elbow, in which case he's a liar, or he did see it and still felt that he dealt with it properly, in which case he is incompetent) no further action can be taken. Rooney gets away with not punishment for elbowing a fellow player in the head, and Carragher gets away with a yellow card having made a challenge that could have caused a very serious injury.
And the net result of these events is even closer scrutiny of, and consequently even more pressure on, the officials. Human error is inevitable, especially when there is such intense pressure involved, and therefore it is baffling that the powers-that-be haven't brought in video replays already. It seems especially peculiar given that replays of the incident are often shown to all inside the ground on the big screens anyway. Alleviating some of the pressure on referees, and helping them out with their near-impossible job will lead to less perceived errors and bias. It will also make the game itself the main focus once again.
NB Wanting to make the rules of football applicable at all levels is not an acceptable reason not to use technology any more. Sunday pub team games do not involve the vast sums that are involved in top level football. The standard of the officials, pitches and equipment involved are not the same. It is the same game, but played under vastly different circumstances and with vastly different repercussions.
Friday, 25 February 2011
Carling Cup Final
I haven't blogged about anything for a while now, the curse of being a final year student, but I found time to write a preview of the Carling Cup final on Sunday
Then the BBC published this; http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thefootballtacticsblog/2011/02/how_birmingham_can_unsettle_ar.html
And made most of the same points as me.
Anyway, here's my preview:
The big news from an Arsenal perspective is the injuries to Theo Walcott and Cesc Fabregas. The fact that they're not playing is obviously a big loss but won't affect the way Arsenal play. Arshavin will probably play instead of Walcott (although Bendnter could come in because of his height) and the man who comes in for Fabregas will probably be one from Diaby, Denilson or Rosicky. If he's fit I think Diaby will be Wenger's choice with Wilshere pushed further forward into the playmaking role. Denilson coming in would probably see a similar shift in the midfield three, whereas Rosicky would obviously be the playmaker if chosen.
The real interest in the game will be to see how Birmingham play. Their normal approach, and the widely-held idea of how to play against Arsenal is to defend deep and narrow, deny space between your midfield and defence, and look to exploit Arsenal's weakness in defending set pieces (they have conceded 51.9% of goals from them, the highest proportion in the Premier League. Stat from @optajoe). The best man for this tactic would be Nikola Zigic. Although his lack of pace would make it easy for Arsenal's defenders to hold their high line, being 6'8" tall makes him a clear aerial threat (he did score a header in the league game at the Emirates).
The better way, I think, to play against Arsenal is to use quick, mobile forwards (as West Brom did with Jerome Thomas and Peter Odemwingie) and Birmingham do have potential to do this with Cameron Jerome, Matt Derbyshire and the seemingly evergreen Obafemi Martins. The support from midfield that Craig Gardner provides (he's the joint top scorer with 7 goals this season) could also provide crucial and, as always, Arsenal's midfield will have to be alert defensively to track his runs.
The size of the pitch at Wembley will favour Arsenal (by affording them more space to work in) and the state of the turf could favour Birmingham but predictions go out of the window in a cup final don't they.
Here's to a good game and an end to the much-publicised trophy drought.
Then the BBC published this; http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thefootballtacticsblog/2011/02/how_birmingham_can_unsettle_ar.html
And made most of the same points as me.
Anyway, here's my preview:
The big news from an Arsenal perspective is the injuries to Theo Walcott and Cesc Fabregas. The fact that they're not playing is obviously a big loss but won't affect the way Arsenal play. Arshavin will probably play instead of Walcott (although Bendnter could come in because of his height) and the man who comes in for Fabregas will probably be one from Diaby, Denilson or Rosicky. If he's fit I think Diaby will be Wenger's choice with Wilshere pushed further forward into the playmaking role. Denilson coming in would probably see a similar shift in the midfield three, whereas Rosicky would obviously be the playmaker if chosen.
The real interest in the game will be to see how Birmingham play. Their normal approach, and the widely-held idea of how to play against Arsenal is to defend deep and narrow, deny space between your midfield and defence, and look to exploit Arsenal's weakness in defending set pieces (they have conceded 51.9% of goals from them, the highest proportion in the Premier League. Stat from @optajoe). The best man for this tactic would be Nikola Zigic. Although his lack of pace would make it easy for Arsenal's defenders to hold their high line, being 6'8" tall makes him a clear aerial threat (he did score a header in the league game at the Emirates).
The better way, I think, to play against Arsenal is to use quick, mobile forwards (as West Brom did with Jerome Thomas and Peter Odemwingie) and Birmingham do have potential to do this with Cameron Jerome, Matt Derbyshire and the seemingly evergreen Obafemi Martins. The support from midfield that Craig Gardner provides (he's the joint top scorer with 7 goals this season) could also provide crucial and, as always, Arsenal's midfield will have to be alert defensively to track his runs.
The size of the pitch at Wembley will favour Arsenal (by affording them more space to work in) and the state of the turf could favour Birmingham but predictions go out of the window in a cup final don't they.
Here's to a good game and an end to the much-publicised trophy drought.
Wednesday, 16 February 2011
I hate to say I told you so
Well, well, well. What were the odds of that result with 13 mins left? Longer than the 16/1 it was at half time.
Arsenal's first ever win against Barcelona. And they did it without compromising Wenger's inimitable style.
The winning goal came from Andrey Arshavin (who still hasn't been in a losing Arsenal team in the Champions League), from a splendid counter attack. Wilshere played an excellent quick ball to Fabregas who, in turn, released Nasri down the right. He held the ball for just long enough to get support and Arshavin stroked the ball into the far side of the net. The Russian will surely have his old confidence back after that.
Barcelona were the better side in the first half, especially after the game had settled down from the frantic early exchanges, but Arsenal grew in the second half and ended up dominating the last 20 minutes. I believe there were three crucial factors that helped that turnaround.
The first was Barcelona's mentality change after 68 mins. Guardiola brought Seydou Keita (a more defensive midfielder) on for David Villa and pushed Andres Iniesta into the left-sided forward role. This may not have made a great deal of difference tactically, and was probably Guardiola trying to get more energy into a combative and congested central midfield area (see point 2), but what it did do was to hand the initiative to Arsenal. Barcelona gave the impression that they were content to go home with a 1-0 lead and Arsenal seized on this opportunity.
The second factor was physical fatigue. The intensity of Barcelona's pressing puts immense pressure on the opposition but also means that their own players are constantly moving around the pitch. The effort required to keep that intensity up for 90 minutes would be almost superhuman and, although many would argue that technically Barcelona's football is exactly that, their players tired and the tempo noticeably dropped around the time Arsenal scored.
The third and final factor was the effect of the crowd. The main criticism wheeled out about modern stadia is that they can never recreate the atmosphere found at more 'old-fashioned' grounds but last night is a prime example of just how wrong the critics are. Van Persie credited the '12th man' in his post-match interview and there can be no doubt that while Barcelona players' legs became heavy, the Arsenal players fed off of the energy of the crowd and finished the game the stronger side as a result.
This isn't intended as a full post-mortem of a game. Koscielny gave a performance that belied his inexperience at this level. Wilshere gave a performance that was astonishing given his age and inexperience. The same goes for Szczesny in goal but the most impressive thing about the game was the quality of the football throughout. Arsenal may have ridden their luck and Barca may have fluffed a few good chances but surely this is the best result for the tie overall. Barcelona will probably get through to the next round but what a game we should be seeing in three weeks time.
Arsenal's first ever win against Barcelona. And they did it without compromising Wenger's inimitable style.
The winning goal came from Andrey Arshavin (who still hasn't been in a losing Arsenal team in the Champions League), from a splendid counter attack. Wilshere played an excellent quick ball to Fabregas who, in turn, released Nasri down the right. He held the ball for just long enough to get support and Arshavin stroked the ball into the far side of the net. The Russian will surely have his old confidence back after that.
Barcelona were the better side in the first half, especially after the game had settled down from the frantic early exchanges, but Arsenal grew in the second half and ended up dominating the last 20 minutes. I believe there were three crucial factors that helped that turnaround.
The first was Barcelona's mentality change after 68 mins. Guardiola brought Seydou Keita (a more defensive midfielder) on for David Villa and pushed Andres Iniesta into the left-sided forward role. This may not have made a great deal of difference tactically, and was probably Guardiola trying to get more energy into a combative and congested central midfield area (see point 2), but what it did do was to hand the initiative to Arsenal. Barcelona gave the impression that they were content to go home with a 1-0 lead and Arsenal seized on this opportunity.
The second factor was physical fatigue. The intensity of Barcelona's pressing puts immense pressure on the opposition but also means that their own players are constantly moving around the pitch. The effort required to keep that intensity up for 90 minutes would be almost superhuman and, although many would argue that technically Barcelona's football is exactly that, their players tired and the tempo noticeably dropped around the time Arsenal scored.
The third and final factor was the effect of the crowd. The main criticism wheeled out about modern stadia is that they can never recreate the atmosphere found at more 'old-fashioned' grounds but last night is a prime example of just how wrong the critics are. Van Persie credited the '12th man' in his post-match interview and there can be no doubt that while Barcelona players' legs became heavy, the Arsenal players fed off of the energy of the crowd and finished the game the stronger side as a result.
This isn't intended as a full post-mortem of a game. Koscielny gave a performance that belied his inexperience at this level. Wilshere gave a performance that was astonishing given his age and inexperience. The same goes for Szczesny in goal but the most impressive thing about the game was the quality of the football throughout. Arsenal may have ridden their luck and Barca may have fluffed a few good chances but surely this is the best result for the tie overall. Barcelona will probably get through to the next round but what a game we should be seeing in three weeks time.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)