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.