The Football League – Bringing us the drama TV tells us we need

By John Buckwell

Next week the football season starts. “Incorrect!” many cry, “The Premier League doesn’t start for two weeks!”. Although true, it is not what I mean. I’m talking about the Football League… Real football.

Sure the Premier League has the pace and the power; Obviously Spanish football has tika-taka and the best team on the planet; and Italian football has… er… political intrigue. But the Football League has what ITV and Sky keep trying to force us to believe these three leagues have: Drama.

Last year, QPR won the league at the canter that most expected but who foresaw newly promoted Norwich following them? Sheffield United dropped down to League One and Swansea completed their rise through the leagues.

In League One Southampton were dead certs to walk the League and Sheffield Wednesday were looking forward to reigniting the fires of the Steel City derby by bouncing straight back to the Championship. Yet Brighton stormed the League with relative ease and Sheffield Wednesday languished in mid-table with other recent Premier League relegatees Charlton.

League Two was all drama, with Chesterfield taking the title but with three teams Bury, Wycombe and Shrewsbury battling for the last two automatic playoff spots on the last day of the season. Barnet performed a great escape condemning Lincoln City and Stockport County to the misery of dropping out of the football League.

What the Football League offers is unpredictability and excitement.

In the Championship, Leicester City and West Ham should walk back up to the Premier League this year but Nottingham Forest, Birmingham City and Reading will think differently. Ipswich, Middlesbrough and outsiders Leeds and Southampton will all have high expectations…

Compare this to the main 3 Leagues: Manchester United or Chelsea (and Man City if they spend enough) will win the League in England, Inter or AC Milan will win Serie A and Barcelona or Real Madrid will win La Liga. What chance is there that Fulham will win their league? Or Stoke? Or even giants like Valencia or Juventus? Drama? None to be seen here.

Then there’s the managers. The Championship boasts two of the last three England managers in Steve McLaren and Sven Goran Eriksson. Then there’s the ego that is Sam Allardyce dropping down to haul West Ham back into the big time. The charismatic Gus Poyet has an ambitious chairman and high expectations and all-round nice guy Chris Hughton has a point to prove. Ian Holloway has charisma and incredible likeability along with the pressure of proving his Blackpool side can repeat their heroics of the season of 2009/10.

Press conferences will be interesting and the top managers will actually talk to the media and also entertain. Football has moved away from entertainment at times to focus on technicality and the enforcement of minor infractions of the laws.

The point is that drama comes of unpredictability; an open league where anyone can win it; managers with big personalities and not wildly disparate budgets; clubs over-performing to win the league and clubs failing to meet expectations.

The Championship race is described by Sky as the race for the biggest prize on earth, but is it? Winning the league almost always leads to swift relegation or mid-table mediocrity. The excitement comes from taking a point or three from the big boys or staying up. I can guarantee that West Ham fans will enjoy this season more than the last because they will be in a league where there is no glass ceiling and a successful season is finishing 6^th.

Don’t get me wrong, the Premier League will always be the Holy Grail, but the Football League is where the excitement is.

Shay Given – Why does nobody love me?

By Ollie Adams

Repeat something enough times and it becomes common knowledge, even if it’s not entirely true. This is particularly pertinent in the world of football, where now and again a phrase will become the common opinion amongst fans, pundits and commentators despite evidence to the contrary. Years ago it was ‘Lee Sharpe is a better winger than Ryan Giggs’, whilst a more up-to-date example is ‘Barcelona, they’re vulnerable at the back you know’. Right up there is the opinion that Shay Given is one of the best goalkeepers in the Premiership.

Over the last year Shay Given has been welded to the Manchester City bench. People ask themselves; why is such a talented keeper not playing first team football? However, surely the question should be; why since his emergence in 1997 has Shay Given never attracted the interest of the Premiership’s top sides?

Keepers have come and gone at Manchester United and Arsenal in that time, a significant number with limited success it must be said, yet never have Fergie or Arsene Wenger so much has glanced in Given’s direction. This summer United look set to splash out over £15 million of the gifted, yet relatively inexperienced, David De Gea whilst Wenger will trust the emerging Wojciech Szcznesny with gloves at the Emirates next year. There’s been no approach from either to a supposedly World Class keeper whose frustration at not playing first team football; “I miss the buzz of first team football and I just want to get playing football again,” grows with each passing day.

Roberto Mancini’s first major decision at the beginning of last season was who to pick as his first choice keeper, Given or Joe Hart. Hart at this point wasn’t England’s number one and, although had a successful loan period at Birmingham behind him, was unproven at the level that Mancini and City aspired for. Mancini plumped for Hart. That makes him the third manager of the top four this season that are clearly unconvinced by Given.

But why? Given is clearly a great shot-stopper. He has excellent reflexes and reactions; put a sequence together of some of the best saves from the Premierships last ten years and Given will be in there. However, shot-stopping is a goalkeeper’s bread and butter. There’s not a goalkeeper in the top two divisions who could be described as a bad shot-stopper; all of them can, and do, make great saves as a matter of course. What is equally, if not more important is illustrated by a certain Mr Henry’s ‘contribution’ for France vs Republic of Ireland back in November 2009

Blatant cheating aside, what’s noticeable about the goal is, despite the ball travelling nearly forty five yards, it lands in the six yard box without Given attempting to come and claim it. He is rooted to his line. Roy Keane, ever the lone wolf, was clear where the blame lied:

“If that was my team I’d go into the dressing room and I wouldn’t even mentioned the. I’d just say; ‘why did no-one put their head on it. And where was my keeper.’

A modern keeper needs to dominate his area, he needs to relive pressure from defenders and organise them at will. Claiming balls into the box creates opportunities for counter attacks and creates an aura of calm through the back four. Given has never done this. It’s easier to attach blame to a keeper if they make a manoeuvre and it goes wrong than if they simply do nothing and the ball ends up in the back of the net. Given prefers to stay on his line. As Stuart Robson stated; “He’s a very good goalkeeper, we all know that, but he’s more of a shot stopper than someone who’s going to dominate his penalty area.”

If Given leaves Eastlands there’s no doubt he’ll get a chance somewhere else. However, it’s likely that a midtable side will come a knocking rather than the big boys. Whilst many feel the likes of Wenger, Redknapp, and Fergie are missing a trick by not signing him, the level Given finds himself at now; the bench at a Top 4 club, is probably the best he’ll manage.

Stuart Pearce – The wrong man for the Under 21’s

By Ollie Adams

As a player, Stuart Pearce was an England fans favourite; fiercely patriotic, determined, supremely physical and highly vocal. He also must have been a nightmare to play against for the very same reasons. He was however, whisper it, the epitomy of all that was and is wrong with our national players; the prioritisation of physical attributes over technique, of power over intelligence. Lest we forget, Pearce is often remembered for his penalty miss against Germany in the 1990 World Cup, a blasted missile of a shot with little co-ordination that threatened the break legs of Bodo Illgner more than the net. This moment, and Pearce’s redemption, a converted penalty in Euro ’96 complete with iconic celebration, encapsulate both his limited technique but incredible will.

It was hoped though, with Pearce heading up the Under 21’s and seemingly being groomed for the senior team manager’s role, that Pearce would refine his more agricultural aspects and seek to introduce the more technical approaches that are clearly essential for progress for the national teams, approaches  he’s hopefully picked up by working closely with Fabio Capello. Ideally, this would combine with his admirable pride in playing and working for his country, rub off on his players. The signs however are not good, and Pearce the manager is more obviously with every passing day a natural continuation of Pearce the player.

Firstly, for someone so experienced in the game to exclaim after England’s 1-1 draw with Spain that; “If we’d had the amount of possession that Spain had, we would’ve won 4 or 5 nil, easily,” is bewildering. Such analysis betrays a shallow appreciation of even the basic mechanics of the game. Unfortunately, with Danny Welbeck’s late equaliser gaining a precious point, the approach is seemingly justified.

And this really is the crux of the matter; what is the priority of the Under 21’s? Is it to win or is it to continue the growth of young players? Perhaps it’s not Pearce’s fault, but the overwhelming feeling is that they’re there to win; “Now’s the time to go to major tournaments with your best players and try and get a trophy in the cabinet,” he said when announcing his provisional squad. The desire at all ages throughout the English game to win over the importance of learning is hampering the senior international team. England won the Euro U’21 tournament in 1982 and 1984 – what good did it do us? Practically none.

Pearce talks of the importance of ‘tournament experience’, but little of the skills needed to do well at such competitions, talking mysteriously about Spanish and Italian styles and how an English style is different. But if we want this age group to develop they must not repeat the errors of senior teams of the last 50 years and blindly concentrate on winning above all else and then discover we don’t have the ability to do so.

By tapping into this approach Pearce provides little, or no, development. He pushed and pushed for Jack Wilshere to join the squad when doing so would’ve actually harmed his progress. A player who has cemented his place in the full England team who, had he played, would’ve played non-stop football for a year and a half up to Euro 2012. Watching Wilshere’s performances against Barcelona, it’s clear that there’s no need for him to play for the Under 21’s, the same as it was pointless for Wayne Rooney to do so.

What did Pearce say when Wilshere eventually pulled out of the squad? ‘It’s irrelevant to me what he does at Arsenal next season.’ So from being a vital component of his squad, Wilshere’s progression is suddenly of no consequence? Yet again, Pearce shows himself to be lacking in strategic thinking and the needs of his players. He doesn’t even mention how someone else will get an opportunity in the absence of Wilshere. He quotes how many times certain German or Spanish players have played this season, but neglects to mention the winter break they have, or how the pace of the game is different from the Premier League.

The Under 21 team should be about preparing players for the senior team. Therefore, it should be given to a coach who is progressive, as Capello ultimately wishes his team to be. Pearce’s heart is clearly in the right place, and his passion is to be admired, but ultimately his priorities seem to be based around how to win, not how to play, and therefore the team will suffer. He talks of spirit and the ‘English way’, but little of the weaknesses of this approach.

England may have a decent tournament, they may even win it. But ultimately, under Pearce, they are singing the same old song, and the last 50 years have shown us how that ends up.

Jack Wilshere is reprising the Fernando Redondo role

By Ollie Adams

To many, Fernando Redondo will forever be associated with that piece or breathtaking skill at Old Trafford in 2000. A piece of skill that ultimately finished off reigning Champions Manchester United and arguably led Fergie to rethink his approach to European competition. Whilst this divine moment distilled the magical ability of the Argentinean, in many quarters it has come to define him almost completely.

Watching that great contest between Madrid and Man United again today, the best two players on the pitch are Steve McManamann and Redondo. McManaman is tireless; defending when required, but playing effective and simple passes all over the pitch and pushing United on the back foot with several penetrating runs. Redondo is, outrageous back heel aside, less eye-catching, but no less effective. His control and use of the ball, often taking it in tight areas and shielding it from the opposition, is faultless. He seems immune to tackles; manipulating the ball and his balance at will, always looking to get forward.

He does this undertaking a deep lying role, but whereas many of the teams of the decade operated a primarily destructive or holding player in this position, for example Edgar Davids at Juventus or Roy Keane at Man United, Redondo uses the space afforded to him in this Madrid team as a consequence of his position in a variety of ways. If he needs to hold and break up attacks he does; after all he was no shrinking violet. But crucially he is creative in his passing and forward running. In comparison to the master of the ‘regista’ role, Andrea Pirlo, Redondo mixes up his role with dynamic forward spurts and controlled short passing. Equally adept at bursting into space or exploiting it with an effective pass, it’s difficult for the opposition to predict his next move

Fabio Capello described him as ‘tactically perfect’, and it’s this football intelligence and decision making that provided the bulk of Redondo’s greatness. Whereas many ‘all-rounders’ in central midfield were powerful physical specimens like Patrick Viera or Michael Essien, Redondo largely held his own in a different way, using his intelligence and positioning.

Perhaps this increased emphasis on power prevented the rise of the ‘Redondo’ role. If he hadn’t suffered a career ending knee injury after his move to AC Milan maybe he could have inspired tacticians and other players more (an injury that ironically gave an opportunity to the aforementioned Andrea Pirlo). However, perhaps the closest to the multi-functional Argentinian in contemporary football is someone whose age hadn’t even reached double figures at the time of Redondo’s Old Trafford master class; Jack Wilshere.

The rise of Wilshere from the Arsenal Youth team to first XI has been rapid, but it’s interesting that the position he’s occupied for Arsenal thus far is not the one most presumed he’d originally been groomed for. Wilshere spent most of his young career either on the right flank as an inverted winger or behind the striker in a trequartista-esque role. In both positions he was charged with dribbling and creating goal scoring chances. But now, Arsene Wenger has opted to play Wilshere deeper, in a central midfield grouping with Alex Song and Cesc Fabregas.

What is interesting about this grouping is its ability to interchange positions, although Fabregas is usually deployed higher up the pitch supporting and often running beyond the central striker, whilst Song and Wilshere form a double pivot. Song has been given license to move forward more than previous seasons, a change designed to win the ball further up the pitch, particularly at the Emirates, whilst Wilshere has the responsibility for dictating play from deep and inspiring transitions of play. In this way his play is often strikingly similar to Redondo’s; the almost visible moments of decision making, bursts of pace over ten yards in congested areas and the desire, even when placed deep, to be creative. Take October’s Arsenal vs. Birmingham game at the Emirates.

Apart from the impressive pass completion rate (67/73), the chalkboard illustrates Wilshere’s responsibility to both pick up the ball deep (bearing in mind Arsenal’s high defensive line) yet also look forward with a creative impulse. Indeed, one of Wilshere’s ‘Redondo-esque’ drives forward lead to him assisting Marouane Chamakh’s winner. Similar ventures forward against Partizan Belgrade, Braga, Tottenham and Blackpool, further highlight his ability to do this regularly.

With many teams opting to field a 4-2-3-1, 4-3-3 or variants of it, midfields are more congested than ever. Encouraging for both Arsenal and England is Wilshere’s obvious ability to retain and feed possession in such conditions. What perhaps separates him from many midfielders and harks back to Redondo is the ability to predict and then dictate midfield encounters when with the ball. Just when a tackle seems close or a chance to pass seems gone, a spurt of pace or a turn immediately opens another option. Coupled with an immaculate technique, it’s a potent combination, and ensures when playing alongside the likes of Fabregas, Nasri and Van Persie he never looks out of place. On the defensive side, the double pivot with Song is adept at closing the midfield space when without the ball, pressing when required, making the defensive shape more compact and therefore more likely to win the ball back quickly.

Fernando Redondo only played 29 times for Argentina, but it would have been many more but for disagreements with both Calos Salvador Bilardo and Daniel Passarella. It’s his time in Madrid that probably reflects his ability best, somewhere he’s fondly remembered still. Wilshere clearly still has some work to do to reach such levels, but his immaculate performance against Barcelona when faced with Xavi, Iniesta and Busquets suggests it’s merely a matter of time. Those with anything less than superlative technique wilt in the face of such competition, but Wilshere simply rose to the task. Both he and Redondo share the technique, flexibility, tactical nous, injections of pace, defensive positioning and desire to create opportunities for others. Most importantly though is the ability to combine all of these talents and execute them at the right time within the context of a fast paced game.  ‘Redondo was celebrated as a strategist,’ says Real President Jorge Valdano, whilst Arsene Wenger claims of Wilshere; ‘He can play any position because he is tactically intelligent.’ Perhaps though, the last word should go to a manager who has worked with them both, although one considerably more than the other; Fabio Capello; ‘He wins back the ball, he passes, he turns, dribbles, goes and shoots. I saw everything.’ What’s telling is, he could have said it about either of them.

‘Londonism’ Will Generate Success

By Ollie Adams

1993 seems like a lifetime away. After winning the inaugural Premier League, Manchester United were knocked out by Galatasaray in the second round of the Champions League, Brian Clough announced his retirement, and Graham Taylor oversaw the calamity of England’s USA World Cup qualification campaign. Away from football, John Major’s government struggled to deal with an ongoing recession, massive unemployment and IRA bombings. Britain was colourless, faltering and quite frankly a largely depressing place to live.

London didn’t escape.  Stephen Lawrence was murdered in Eltham, the BNP had a councillor elected in Tower Hamlets, a bomb exploded in Bishopgate, and 10% unemployment took its toll, socially and economically on the capital. Salvation was not to found on the football pitch – London’s top club in the Premier League’s first year was QPR, who finished 5^th, behind Man United, Norwich, Aston Villa and Blackburn. A pre-Wenger Arsenal lost 16 times and finished 10^th, whilst Abramovich’s millions seemed light years away as Chelsea came in 11^th.

Fast forward to the present day and London clubs occupy three of the top five positions in the league, with only the mega-brand of Man United and mega-billions of Man City breaking the trend. Just this week, Tottenham have triumphed over AC Milan in the San Siro whilst Arsenal scored a thrilling victory over the proclaimed best club side in world, Barcelona. This is not a coincidence – Chelsea, Arsenal and Tottenham owe much of their success to geography; London, despite the recession, is now the place to be.

In the years since the inception of the Premier League, London has progressed rapidly. As mayors, both Ken Livingston and Boris Johnson have pursued a path of opening markets, embracing high finance, and pro-immigration. Despite different political ideologies they have both seen the benefits for the capital of fostering good relations with the City both in job creation and tax revenues.  Wealth has been generated in order to fund transport, housing and social projects, and although the recession has applied the handbrake somewhat, Johnson continues to see the benefit in making London ‘open to all’, even to the extent of clashing with his party colleagues. Quite simply, London is the most outward looking, cosmopolitan city in Europe, with more languages spoken there than any other city on earth. It has embraced globalism and the world markets and as such has become an incredibly desirable place to live. It no longer feels like it’s on the margins of Europe, but bang in the centre of it. As a businessman, its attractions are clear.  As a football manager, player, or owner, even more so.

In terms of football, London now has massive advantages over other areas of the country. The pro-immigration line of both Livingston and Johnson is clearly mirrored by the likes of Arsene Wenger and Carlo Ancelotti, who recognise the best talent creates the best product, and if that talent is from overseas, then so be it. In turn, players (and their families) like the  feel of a city that, no matter how small, will have a community they recognise. Even if their club isn’t producing, at least their life away from the pitch will be comfortable. And let’s face it, with all the free time they have, London is more likely to produce a wider range of experiences to stimulate the senses than say, Birmingham or Sunderland. Since the early nineties London’s cultural dynamism has exploded; more New York than Newcastle.

Roman Abramovich chose Chelsea to a large degree because he could incorporate it into a business and social world of his liking. London was a world he could relate to because it is now more European than English. Investors like London clubs because they like London. It’s the hub of their networks and businesses. It is outward looking in a way that most of the rest of the country isn’t, and therefore more attractive to foreign interest. Luka Modric chose Tottenham even before they cracked into the top four, and when recently signing a new contract exclaimed, ‘London is such a great place’. Fernando Torres and Yossi Benayoun swapped Merseyside for West London.

Naturally, with the likes of Abramovich, Stan Kroenke, Wenger, Ancelotti, Modric, Arshavin, Fabregas and Van Der Vaart being drawn to London, the attraction increases for others, and the momentum accelerates. The time where clubs such as Middlesbrough and Newcastle can attract real top level players such as Juninho or Faustino Asprilla has passed. Robert Pires still has a house in North London; it’s doubtful whether Christian Karembeau still has one in Middlesbrough. Norwich and Blackburn will never again experience the heights of the first Premier League season; the horse has bolted. Even in these hard times, Arsenal can still attract 60,000 fans at every home match, Chelsea can spend £50 million in the blink of an eye and Tottenham now have a couple of World Class players that will lead to more arriving.  Even QPR have backing from global businessmen, and they now top the Championship.

 

The only clubs that seem to be able to complete; Manchester United and Manchester City live side-by-side in probably the second most outward looking, cosmopolitan city. Man United can compete as they have a winning combination of an outstanding history and brand to trade off, a settled, brilliant manager, and (up to now) massive financial backing to both buy and pay players. Man City will catch the eye of the best talent because money talks, and they can pay whatever it takes. But more and more, the progressive nature of London continues to create an environment ripe for talent, financial backing and ideas. As a city it is leaving others behind, and as such its clubs will reap the benefits.’ Londonism’ is a developing ideal; culturally and economically progressive, outward looking, accepting and receptive of ideas. Place that in a footballing context and it’s an ideal environment for success. Don’t be surprised if, for the first time ever, a London club wins the Champions League in the near future. Expect that to be the first of many.