Tracking Back

Referees in Crisis

Who would be a referee? A snarling cauldron of hate and abuse from the stands, the same torrent of swearing and bile from the players that you’re trying to officiate and a post match scrutiny of every decision you have made, replayed frame by frame. Your own mistakes slow motioned in front of millions, a cinema of your own worst bits to be derided by men, women and children up and down the country. Yes, you have to be an extraordinary person to decide that you want that as your profession and all of the consequences that undoubtedly spill into your personal life.

Mark Clattenburg this week experienced the very worst of it. But are we doing enough to protect and help the officials, without whom our glorious game would end up reduced to grown men wrestling over a football and threatening to go home for their tea every time the ball went out for a contentious throw in.

Over the last 50 years as football moved into a modern professional era, the game has quickened beyond recognition. Players are fitter, they’re trained better, and they have access to pills, potions and machinery that would look like a NASA space program to a player of old. On top of that the rules such as offside have been subtly changed to keep the game free-flowing and provide more goals. Millions of pounds wash through the game, and the difference between a win and a loss can be huge financial gain, or the despair of an entire city. Within that swirling hurricane flies the referee, armed with a whistle and a couple of assistants, with no more help than his colleagues from the 50’s and 60’s would have had.

The time has clearly come to offer more assistance to the officials for the good of the game. They’re human beings trying to witness a match at intense speeds and as such they’ll make mistakes. Step one has to be the implementation of video assistance for incidents relating directly to goals. Goal line technology is a must, and potentially even offside decisions that result in the ball hitting the back of the net. All of these things can be reviewed and decided within 30 seconds and do not interrupt the flow of the game. Certainly no more than a crowd of remonstrating spittle-expelling players do.

In fact, watching a referee backtrack as several players shout and jab fingers at him is one of the least edifying footballing scenes to be played out each week on our screens. It’s time for the authorities to take a genuine look at Rugby Union and think about whether we should take their example and only allow the captain to speak with the referee.

Whilst doing that, it’s easy to follow the Rugby Union example even further and allow the conversations to be heard by the fans. The Clattenburg case doesn’t occur in a game where the players’ and referees’ conversations are laid out in front of the public. As formerEnglandhooker Brian Moore stated, there would be chaos for six weeks, and then the players would realise that swearing and intimidation give themselves and the club such a terrible reputation that it would end.

Not that the referees should have it all their own way. They’re not demi-gods overseeing football with a flick of a wrist and a dash of red or yellow. They’re accountable as any other professional should be, and the rules on retrospective decisions need to be altered. It’s not undermining their authority, but helping them further. If a referee sees a stamp or an elbow but doesn’t deem it worthy of a sending off, then currently retrospective action cannot be applied if the video evidence actually shows it to be worse than it first appeared. The power to overrule the referees and add more definitive justice is also much needed at the highest level of our game.

Football has changed for the players beyond recognition. They’ve been jumpstarted into the modern professional era with huge advances in every aspect of their working lives. Let’s do the same for the officials to allow them the same level playing surface.

More from Nick Bell @tracking_back

Kicking it Out

During these last few murky weeks, football has really had to sit down and examine whether it has a problem with racism. It’s been a painful introspection, and brought a lot of voices to the fore, notably players such as Jason Roberts, association heads such as Gordon Taylor and campaigning bodies such as Kick it Out. Not all of them have been unified, and a clear vision seems a long way out on the horizon at present.

Perhaps the most visible response to the recent FA charge of John Terry, (but presumably a response in general to heightened racial tension within the game) was Jason Roberts’ refusal to wear pre-match Kick it Out shirts. Other players such as Rio Ferdinand supported him in the gesture, designed to show their frustration with the perceived lack of a strong response to a growing blight in the game.

Refusing to wear the t-shirts has implicitly linked the debate to Kick it Out and whether they are doing enough to fight racism. Patches on clothing seems like a rather meek response to a lot of people, but it’s an unfair load for the masses to lay at their door. Kick it Out is a charitable organisation with no legislative powers. It is part funded by the FA, PFA and Premier League, but is not controlled by any of them. It exists to educate about discrimination and promote inclusive practices within the footballing community.

However, the funding from the FA ties the organisation to them, and with the FA handing John Terry a noticeably short 4 game ban, the players have been placed in a situation where they are being asked to wear an anti-racism t-shirt from an affiliate of the very body that had just demonstrated racism to be marginally more serious than a straight red card. It’s not hard to understand why the players may have considered it offensive and decided not to wear them.

What the debate has really shown is that the players are able to wield more power than the charitable bodies. Refusing to wear Kick it Out t-shirts has highlighted the issue that football has, more in one week has than a season of slogans and advertising hoardings could ever do. At this point it’s important to note that the ‘issue’ is not nearly as bad as it was in the late 70’s and 80’s when black players could expect fearsome abuse from the terraces. Looking at the appalling scenes in the recentSerbiavs England Under 21’s match really highlights how far we have come as a nation in promoting tolerance and respect for other regardless of skin colour or ethnicity. The ‘issue’ is whether we deal with racism effectively in the blessedly rare instances in which it occurs.

So the light shines on the FA, PFA and the clubs themselves. The players clearly think that not enough has been done in recent events, so what should the response be? The clubs themselves are more often than not driven by money and unwilling to punish their players too punitively for fear of losing them.

Liverpoolsent their players out in Suarez t-shirts at the height of an impossibly ill judged PR campaign to protect their player.Chelseahave handed John Terry a ‘record fine’, but still retain his service as captain and talisman of the club. They have even gone so far as to issue an apology to the Ferdinand family through Bruce Buck, who was quoted as saying,

 “We understand what they have gone through and Chelsea Football Club would like to apologise to them because it has been a very difficult time for them.

“They didn’t do anything wrong, they shouldn’t be suffering and we’re sorry.”

The club in this instance have protected their player, who has apologised for the language himself but not directly towards the Ferdinand family in the same way the club has.

The fans themselves might see the apology but also see their clubs endorsing their heroes straight after being convicted by the FA of racist behaviour. Terry has been fined but still leads the club on the field. So if you can’t trust the clubs, can the FA or PFA intervene?

Gordon Taylor at the PFA has swiftly announced a 6 point plan designed to speed up the process of processing the racism enquiries, and potentially hand out stiffer punishments. Most interesting was the possibility of making racial abuse gross misconduct and therefore potentially a sackable offence. Laughable of course to everyone else currently in any working environment who already knows that racial abuse would see them sacked, but nonetheless a step in the right direction.

If it can be written into players contracts then you place the clubs in a much more pressured situation to sack their players, and that is not a situation without precedence. Remember thatChelseawere content to sack Adrian Mutu back in 2004 for drugs offences, his own gross misconduct. Of course, another key part to that was a lengthy ban in the offing, and that is where the FA come in. We’ll be awaiting with baited breath over the coming weeks to see if there is any possibility of further, stronger action from them in the future. After all, if you can be up in arms expecting the Serbian FA to get their house in order, the least you can do is make sure that you’re doing the same.

More from Nick Bell @tracking_back

The Culture of Diving

As sure as the leaves turn brown and start dropping from the trees, the debate over diving rears its head every Autumn as the Premier League starts getting into its stride. This season, it’s Suarez, Bale and Welbeck. In previous seasons, it’s been Nani or Gerrard, Busquets or Drogba. There’s not a club that isn’t tainted by it, and the issue is bigger than petty tribal rivalries. But is it possible to stamp out, or is it something that is so ingrained in football culture that we have no choice but to let them gracefully fall to the ground?

In British society we’re particularly outraged by cheating, and there’s a sociological argument to be made that the working class roots of football respects a robust challenge, or even an honest punch in the face, but can’t accept a more white collar fraud like feigning injury. It’s not a position that is universally held, and there is plenty of opinion that in South America for example, diving is more considered to be the poor man getting one over on the authorities. It might not be encouraged, but it’s part of the cat and mouse game that is attacking and defending.

And it’s not limited to a far removed culture such as South America. Compare the most stark and systematic program of cheating perhaps ever seen in sport, with the recent Lance Armstrong doping scandal. Michael Calvin, writing in the Independent recently described the continued ‘canonisation’ of Armstrong in a United States society largely ignoring the cheating aspect of his career. It’s a generalisation of course, but cheating does seem to pique British minds more than elsewhere.

Assuming that even though we care more than other cultures about the problem, most people would still want to stamp it out, how could we go about changing the current situation? What do we constitute to be a dive? Most people would argue that you have dived if you have gone to ground without being touched, or not being touched with significant enough force to produce that reaction. On first look, the former seems fairly easy to spot, and the latter is more difficult to prove.

At the recent ‘Leaders in Football’ conference at Stamford Bridge, Pierluigi Collina, without doubt the most respected referee in the history of modern football argued that ‘If touched and fouled, a player has every right to go to ground’. So if you’re illegally clipped without the defender getting the ball, you’re entitled to go to ground to win the penalty. At the same conference, Michael Owen said that most players will do exactly that, and agreed that he had done so in the past, notably against Argentina at the World Cup in ‘98 and ’02

As an attacker, if you’re marginally fouled but it puts you in a worse position to score than you were before, players will make the instinctive decision to go down and regain that lost advantage. This is especially true when referees tend not to give penalties for slight fouls that don’t actually knock the player of his feet. It’s rare to see a penalty given for a slight body check or shirt pull that in other areas of the pitch would be instantly blown up for a free kick. Is being able to draw that contact and make the most of it part of the skill in being an attacking player? Can tempting the defender into making illegal contact, whether it be though leg contact, or shirt pulling, or holding be part of our beautiful game?

Most spectators will still instinctively say no, that it still ultimately constitutes a fraud. So what can we do about it if we’re going to put a stop to it? It seems apparent that with the pace of the modern game, referees can’t be expected to get every decision right, and stopping the game for every decision would change the flow of the game beyond recognition. So retrospective action seems to be the popular opinion, with a three match ban the most oft cited punishment. Yet that puts the punishment alongside bans for violent conduct such as elbowing or stamping on opponents. Surely an attempt to injure a fellow professional is worse than trying to con your way into a penalty?

Given the difficulty in judging the weight and severity of contact, and whether it is sufficient to unbalance a player, I think that it’s unlikely that a panel would be able to make a clear accusation of diving and impose a ban. Indeed it’s likely to alienate the very players that we are paying to entertain us. More plausible is that there could be retrospective punishment introduced for clear cases where there is no contact, and I would propose that a single match ban with the stigma that comes from that a sufficient punishment. It’s a limited step forwards, but draws an important theoretical line in the sand over what we deem to be acceptable behaviour in the sport.

More from Nick Bell @tracking_back

Footnote – Gary Neville’s peerless punditry on the matter is highly recommended. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNx5ok60U6A

The Moyes Effect

In a glorious summer for British sport, the start of the new football season crept up on everyone, and was off before people had quite put down their bunting and picked up their scarves. Most teams were able to prepare in relative peace, and Everton, having pulled out of their pre-season tour toJakartahad a more low key pre-season than most. David Moyes was plotting a new campaign, having fended off a summer of stories linking him with the vacant managerial position at Spurs.

With the first five games of the new season gone, we’re in a position to begin understanding the teams that might struggle, and conversely those that have their eye on higher success. One of those teams that have jumped out of the blocks and impressed are Everton, traditionally not the Usain Bolt starters of the EPL. Every man on the street can tell you that the Toffees dawdle their way to Christmas and then finish in a terrific burst that threatens the Europa spots. But having roared into the upper echelons of the table, are Everton able to maintain that pace? Could they become potential Champions League candidates?

Money has always been tight at Goodison, and David Moyes has built up a reputation as an incredibly shrewd businessman, eking every last drop of transfer money that he gets, to produce competitive teams. But the last six months has seen quite a lot of change, particularly with regards to the attacking options. Mikel Arteta left in the January transfer window for Arsenal, bright young prospect  Jack Rodwell made the shorter trip over toManchesterCity. And then perhaps most surprising, Tim Cahill swapped the greyMerseyskies for the bright lights of the Big Apple. That’s a big hole for any team to fill, and fans would have been forgiven for thinking that with limited transfer funds, there could be doom and gloom on the horizon.

And true to form, there have not been any stellar signings. Steven Pienaar, criminally underused at Spurs, came back home to his first love. Kevin Mirallas, perhaps better known as a striker also arrived from Olympiakos, alongside the Jelavic transfer in January. Two strikers and a returning alumni. Not on paper a recipe for gold medal success. But that is where the genius of Moyes has shone through. 

With the departure of Cahill, Moyes has pushed the giant Marouane Fellaini further up the field. Previously employed as a wrecking ball in the middle of the park, he is now operating as major headache for centre-backs up and down the country. Cahill liked to arrive from deep, but Fellaini offers a much more obvious focal point, pushing teams backwards and giving Everton’s midfield more space to operate in. This has been particularly effective when he is employed up against smaller full-backs, or players not so comfortable in the centre-back position, as Michael Carrick will testify to.

But pushing the opposition back line towards their own goal has also allowed Everton’s own full-backs to raid a lot higher up the pitch. Everton probably have the most devastating left hand side combination in the Premier League with Pienaar and Leighton Baines overlapping. They like to overload that side, creating space for Baines to cross and with Fellaini in the box, chaos frequently follows. Having lost Arteta as the conductor of the midfield, the temptation to funnel everything through him has also gone, meaning that there is a greater balance coming from the centre of the field, and crucially they look more like a team.

So the ingredients are all there for success. But can it be maintained? With most of their major rivals distracted by chasing European success and the added tiredness this brings, Everton might be better positioned than in recent years, and should have the legs even towards the end of the season. But it still may yet come down to injuries. Everton’s squad is not that deep, and players like Anichebe and Naismith are going to have to deliver big seasons when players ahead of them get rested. But then with Moyes at the helm there is always hope. Perhaps keeping him away from the interest of Spurs over the summer will prove to be the biggest signing of all.

More from Nick Bell on @tracking_back

Hillsborough: The Legacy for Fandom

On the 15^th April 1989 the world witnessed one of the most devastating sporting disasters that it had ever seen, with 96 fans crushed to death and never to return home to their families. 23 years later, that national tragedy finally spilled its secrets and turned into a national disgrace. On the 11^th September the Hillsborough Independent Panel released their findings after studying more than 400,000 documents surrounding the events from that fateful day, and a nation united in their sadness for the victims and the revulsion for the authorities’ cover-up.

It’s worth repeating those awful, gut wrenching truths. And how poignant that we can now call them truths, after the deceitful attempt at undermining them at every turn. A complete failure to police a large group of arriving fans, and the eventual death sentence to open the exit gates at theLeppings Laneend resulted in an unstoppable crush of men, women and children into the crumbling pens behind the goal. 96 fans lost their lives in that crush, many of whom may have survived if the police had put into effect their disaster plan, but a lack of organisation and leadership compounded those previous failings. Realising the enormity of their own inadequacy, and the horror of the aftermath,South Yorkshirepolice set in motion a plan to discredit and smear the reputations of fans in order to protect themselves. Imagine the grief of being told that your child is dead, and that in the consideration of the authorities it was their own fault, and that of their friends.

Being a football fan in the 1980’s was not an enviable life choice. In a new football age birthed by the Taylor report and the Premier League, it’s easy to forget that back then, stadiums were embarrassingly decrepit (Hillsborough didn’t even have a valid safety certificate at the time), and the fans were treated very much as criminals in waiting. The family friendly atmospheres and policing geared towards helping fans that you see today didn’t exist. Modern football was born into a world that didn’t love it, and at its peak with Hillsborough had treated its victims worse than animals.

The football that we watch today is a magnificent cut and thrust, bringing the finest talent in the world to our shores and putting on a fantastic show for an enraptured audience. But the fans shouldn’t forget the roots of this new glamorous game. They’re all in the same comfy boat now, but should also look back as one to the stormier times when they were all thrashing about in unwelcoming seas together.

The independent report was released by coincidence on the anniversary of another human tragedy, the September 11^th attacks on the world trade centre. This was also a senseless loss of life that brought people together in their grief. Borders were ignored and people were one in their sadness. Hillsborough is also a human tragedy that crosses boundaries of club, city and culture. It could have been any club, any fan. It was a punch in the face reminder to all fans that they deserved better, and the subsequent panel review, a wake up call to everyone that they all share a duty to prevent it from ever going back to those dark days. It’s a clarion call for everyone to stand up and declare that we are not animals, that we expect safety and moral authority from the people that are supposed to protect us. And that is why the chanting has to stop. Now.

Part of the legacy of the recent Hillsborough findings is that fan groups must forget those city and club divides and realise that some events transcend puerile point scoring. Hillsborough is one such event, and the Munichair disaster is another. There is no point in trying to establish who started what first, it just stops. Of course, on Saturday against Wiganit was very much an isolated minority that were singing “Always the victims, it’s never your fault”, and Sir Alex has rightly condemned those involved, calling for and end to it. But there is also a responsibility of fans everywhere to root out that kind of disgusting chanting and throw it out of their club, whether you’re red or blue, north or south or any of the other kaleidoscope rivalries that exist. I can’t stress enough that it is absolutely not just a United problem, it happens in all clubs, in all stadiums, but will be brought sharply into focus at the game between them and Liverpoolon 23^rd September.

Rivalry and loyalty are what built football, the passion of those beliefs sustain and feed it. But remember that we’re not animals being herded into pens, we’re better than that. And we still need to prove that every week to make sure that 96 fans are honoured properly.

Nick Bell can be followed at @tracking_back

Are Moves to the Russian Premier League Here to Stay?

Hulk, Axel Witsel, and David Bentley. Yep, David Bentley. I think it’s fair to say that at the beginning of the season, no-one would be bracketing them in the same category. And to be fair to the two Portuguese league players, their career trajectories are taking vastly different routes from the boy from Cambridgeshire. Yet they all find themselves recent additions to the Russian top flight, transfers that have left many scratching their heads. David Bentley may not be at the peak of his talents, but for all three there is a lingering question mark over whether this is a step in the wrong direction.

But why? The rise of the Russian Football Championship and its compatriot, the Ukranian Premier League, has been relatively swift over the past few seasons and they sit 9th and 7th respectively in the club co-efficients for the Champions League. Not up to touching the might of La Liga and the Premiership just yet, but other divisions would be wise to be looking over their shoulders. Hulk and Witsel probably represent the first two world stars plucked at their peak, but it’s a trend that is likely to continue. The raising of eyebrows at such transfers, and the questioning over player motives will become lessened over time.

Russian football is in a hurry. Massive structural advances are necessary in order to host a successful World Cup in 2018, and of course the Ukraine has just co-hosted what turned out to be a very successful Euros. With these advances and investment come better players and coaches. Fabio Capello is of course the new Russian national manager but the Championship has some other very high profile names in its top positions. Spalletti, formerly of Roma is in charge of Zenit, Guus Hiddink at Anzi, and Unai Emery has recently taken the reigns at Spartak having previously held the managerial role at Valencia. These are big names to rival any of the top European divisions and can only bring further success.

And what of the clubs themselves? Whilst big name signings are a relatively new phenomenon, the clubs themselves should be familiar to any follower of European competition, both within the Champions League and the Europa League. It makes sense to start with Zenit, backed by Gazprom’s oil millions and flexing their muscles in the transfer market. They’re not a new force in football, having won the then named Uefa Cup in 2008, and subsequently the Super Cup with a memorable victory over Manchester United. With a spot in the last 16 of the Champions League last season, and a group this year (featuring a desperately weak Milan) that they seem sure of qualifying from, Zenit are starting to represent one of the newer powerhouses in world football. 

Shakhtar of Ukraine, also won the Uefa Cup the following year in 2009 and Spartak were in the quarter finals 2 seasons ago. Even Anzi, newcomers to Europe have started very impressively, reaching the groups to face Liverpool by thrashing AZ in qualifying. They will be a stern test indeed for the Brendan Rodgers Anfield revolution.

So we shouldn’t be looking down on Russia as being a poor cousin, and we shouldn’t be surprised with the sudden demonstration of financial might. Hulk and Witsel have made a move to a club with a recent excellent track record, and a club who can legitimately call themselves contenders to be in the final stages of the Champions League, and there aren’t many clubs out there that can say that. In years to come we may be looking back on them as pioneers for the league rather than failures for not joining a La Liga or Premiership team. 

Which brings us back to David Bentley. It may be that no Premiership team wanted him or trusted his ability to shine anymore, his weary injury prone body and apparent lack of enthusiasm for the game too much a risk. Rostov are very much a mid table side, but he’s joining an exciting league which is surely better than another loan move back down into the Championship. Who knows, perhaps with a little luck we’ll one day be looking back on him as a pioneer as well. 

Mercenary or Forward Thinking? Scott Sinclair’s Move to Manchester City

When the transfer window slammed shut on Friday evening and fans surveyed the scene before them, one transfer seemed to particularly leave a bad taste in the mouth for both the partisan and the neutral. Scott Sinclair’s move to Manchester City is a rare move that seemed to unite everyone, City fans excepted. 

On message boards and pubs up and down the county Sinclair was labelled as a mercenary, another Premier League footballer more concerned with the trappings of wealth and fame than actually playing games on the pitch. The assumption of course is that he will get very little game time, and so what could be the motivation for the move up the M6 beyond money? 

The transfer was further enraging to many by Sinclair appearing to be a direct replacement for Adam Johnson, now of Sunderland, but formerly another City squad member and promising wing talent. It was as if his career trajectory was being laid out in front of him by exactly the man that he was being brought in to replace. And then on top of that, Sinclair had also been forced to leave Chelsea earlier in his career in order to find some first team football. How could he not see it, they claimed? It must be the money, was the answer.

Sinclair’s career has led him up to the fringes of the England team without having thus far being selected. Starring in a Swansea team that surprised everyone last season, and catching the eye in the Olympic squad has left his stock high. The move makes an enormous amount of sense for Manchester City who need to keep their quota of homegrown players up since that rule was introduced in the 2010-2011 season. Not blessed with burgeoning academy talent, bids for good young players at other clubs will continue. So if it makes sense for City, does it make sense for Scott? Are we quick to label players as money grasping, or could there be other motives for Sinclair opting for the Etihad?

Confidence is vital for a footballer, arrogance even. You need to believe that you’re better than the players against you, that you can take them on and win. Scott will believe that he’s good enough to be there. He’s proved himself to be one of the best young players in the Premiership, and the natural next step is to move to a club where those talents can really flourish. In his first interview for the club, he mentioned the challenge being a key factor in his decision. There isn’t a challenge left for him at Swansea, and not a lot more that he can hope to achieve, so battling for position in a team that will be challenging for the title represents a way for him to push forwards and not become stale.

Pushing forwards is actually the key objective for him in this deal. He wants to become a better player, and by having access to the best coaches and facilities in the world, he has an amazing opportunity to learn. He’s also going to training day in and day out with some of the finest talent on the planet. Of course it’s a gamble, but one that you would regret as a professional if you didn’t take. These are some of the key years in a player’s development, and so learning in the best environment that you can find is surely something to be applauded. We’ve all chastised the Matt Le Tissier’s of the world who chose to remain a big fish in a small pond rather than extend themselves with the best in the world.

Lastly, he will also have serious international ambitions, and playing for one of the big clubs even in a limited capacity puts you in the shop window for international selection. Roy Hodgson will want to know that his players can handle the pressure of intense scrutiny, and matches of tremendous importance. With Manchester City, Scott Sinclair has much more opportunity to get experience in those games. He might not play in every singe one, but appearances against the likes of Real Madrid, Ajax and Borussia Dortmund add strings to his bow that make it more likely to succeed at international level.

I’m sure that a large increase in salary doesn’t hurt and is a delightful perk to a young man, but there are plenty of other factors involved, and as supporters of the game we should be applauding Scott’s bravery and desire to succeed instead of cynically beating him down over his wage packet.

@Tracking_Back

Hitting the Onion Bag

Or why it’s all about the strikers, and how you service them. 

Everton put Aston Villa to the sword at Villa Park, with Nikica Jelavic adding another goal onto his burgeoning CV. A natural finisher, Jelavic has thrived under a hard working midfield that will allow him to conserve his energy. He loves running onto the ball and is an extraordinary one touch instinctive finisher. When you add Marouane Felleini’s knock downs and sheer physical presence alongside him, it’s a heady mix (literally) that will create plenty of chances for him to polish off.

Over at Old Trafford, another master finisher was scoring his first goal for the club with the kind of deft flick of a left boot that made him so beloved at Arsenal. With Wayne Rooney and Shinji Kagawa in the squad, it seemed difficult to know exactly where Van Persie might fit into the first team. He likes to be more withdrawn rather than an on-the-shoulder kind of striker, and that’s obviously Wayne Rooney’s preferred position on the pitch as well. Would the two of them dovetail well, or be cramping each other’s space? With Rooney being cast to the bench, and now injured for up to 2 months, Van Persie is a guaranteed starter and can stake a claim to keeping that berth even when his English compatriot is back to full fitness.

With Van Persie gone, even the most optimistic of Arsenal fans must looking at their two nil-nil draws and start wondering where the goals are coming from. Podolski and Giroud will shoulder most of the responsibility, but with Arsenal facing massed and packed defences week in week out, do either of them possess the guile to pick those locks? One man that has that in abundance is Santi Cazorla, and his service to those front two will probably have the biggest impact on how their season goes.

Over in south Wales, Swansea are busy proving that you don’t need your strikers scoring goals when you have a rampaging midfielder arriving in the box like Michu. Whilst Danny Graham grabbed a goal to round off another excellent Swansea move, it’s the lolloping grace of Michu that has caught the eye. The Swans still pass as well as ever, but have a bit more directness about them under Michael Laudrup. With Graham putting a lot of graft in up front and occupying defenders, it allows Michu space, and when he has space he’s proved to be devastating.

Another man in devastating form is Fernando Torres, excellent against a Newcastle side who were threatening in places but probably tired from mid-week European exploits. When he’s not over-thinking what he’s doing Torres is a magnificent instinctive finisher, and the improvised toe-poke which whistled past Tim Krul on Saturday was a masterclass in technique. Hopefully his rebirth will continue at pace as Chelsea are genuine title contenders if he can keep playing in this vein.

Another man in need of finding that groove is Darren Bent. After rupturing his ankle ligaments last season, this is a new campaign for finding old form. The similarities with Jelavic are notable. Slightly more of a box finisher, but with the same one touch striking ability and desire to run onto balls, Bent has yet to get off the mark this season. The gulf in quality and drive between the Everton and Villa midfields was very apparent, and if you’re going to get the best out of Bent then you’re going to have to service him a lot better. Without some addition of new faces before the transfer window ends, it’s tough to see where that service is going to come from, and it looks like they have the wrong striker for the job they need doing. Villa in their present incarnation need a bit more dog up front, a terrier to work the defence, lead from the front and bring others into play. They have in Bent an excellent finisher who needs others to be doing the work for him, and that is an unhappy marriage at present. They should be looking towards the Everton revival and midfield to understand how to get him more goals.

The Terry/Ferdinand Conundrum

Or why did England get themselves in this unfathomable mess.

Back at the beginning of October, England were riding on the crest of a wave. A solid, if occasionally jittery qualifying campaign was under the belt and England were showing some green shoots of revival under Capello. There was a sense of optimism, largely unjustified after some flaky performances and the spectre of World Cup 2010 still in the air. But the old guard had one major tournament left in them, and could mix well with a blend of exciting youngsters that were coming through the ranks.

By the end of October, the England captain was in the spotlight over racist allegations made to a fellow player, and significantly the brother of his fellow England centre-back, Rio Ferdinand. By the beginning of February the saga had claimed Capello.  Frustrated at the captaincy being taken out of his own hands, and chastised after publicly speaking out on Italian television, Capello handed his notice in and plunged England into doubt on the eve of a major finals.

Now it has to be said that Terry strongly denies the accusations, and will undoubtedly defend himself as not guilty. The video evidence would be completely damning had Ashley Cole not been strolling in front of the camera during the initial stages of the outburst. But it’s tough not to wince when you see the final few words tumble out of his mouth. So what effect has this had on England, their reputation and their chances at Euro 2012?

Neither Terry nor Ferdinand are good enough to carry us Maradona style to tournament victory. Both have been exceptional players with very different defensive qualities, making them an ideal partnership. But both have started to suffer the effects of age, volume of games and the combative nature of the Premier League. Injuries have taken their toll, and both have question marks over their pace and their ability to play several games in a short space of time. Indeed Sir Alex Ferguson was quoted as saying “You play something like a game every four days at the Euros and Rio couldn’t do that,”. But more about that later. The fact that neither offers a hugely compelling reason to be picked above their peers means that the FA could have avoided any fallout by picking neither and it would have been entirely justified for ‘football reasons’.

But John Terry was picked in the squad whilst Rio Ferdinand was left out, and Ferdinand’s exclusion has been thrown into the spotlight following the injury to Gary Cahill that has forced his withdrawal from the squad. Can Hodgson still be leaving him out for ‘football reasons’ and not so that the boat isn’t rocked by the presence of those two personalities in the changing room?

Sir Alex has given him the perfect get out of jail free card with that quote about his fitness. No, you probably shouldn’t be picking players that can’t handle playing in every game. We’ve been there in the past with broken metatarsals, and if Rio is not up to the task of playing then he should gracefully accept that. But he certainly seems to think otherwise, and in the season just gone has played more games than in previous campaigns. And if he is only there as defensive cover, then he might not have to drag his body through every game, and could have a valid role to play. 

So why has Hodgson picked Martin Kelly, an internationally green full-back ahead of the hugely experienced Ferdinand? It’s certainly compelling to think that it must be purely so that the atmosphere doesn’t deteriorate in the England camp, but that’s a hugely unpalatable thing to think. A man excluded from his nation’s team so as to not offend the sensibilities of another man who may or may not have racially abused his brother. What else could be behind the thinking?

Hodgson has four centre-backs, in Lescott, Terry, Jagielka and Jones. Jones can also deputise at right back for Glen Johnson, but it’s not his preferred position. There’s certainly a case to say that we need additional cover in that slot rather than in the middle. The squad was arguably unbalanced in that area, and with Johnson having looked shaky all season, another option might be necessary. Roy should probably be given the benefit of the doubt, because an additional centre back is not required at this stage.

So why select Terry at all? It’s already been argued that he has not been so exceptional in his position this season as to definitely merit inclusion. The FA have already decided that he cannot be captain in his circumstances, so why can he represent England at all? Have the rest of the players not heard enough stories and tales from their colleagues to have built up an opinion of what happened on that fateful day in October? And thus already feel uncomfortable? Surely Terry’s presence at all represents a threat to the harmony of the squad? The FA had a perfect opportunity to select neither player for footballing reasons and avoid this issue at all. We could be talking about the ineffectiveness of other squad areas instead of being forced into raking through the racism issue time and time again.

And finally, onto the other major problem with Terry’s inclusion. Panorama exposed the the fascist and racist underbelly of Polish and Ukranian football. Several hideous images of multiple nazi salutes, beatings and other terrible sights at football stadia in those nations has rightly thrown a spotlight on a problem that UEFA need to take very seriously. Racism has also hit the Premier League this season. The abuse given to Tom Adeyemi at Anfield was a particular lowlight, but is not to be taken in the same context as the more organised fascism seen elsewhere in Eastern Europe. However, we are the only team taking a player to Euro 2012 who has an upcoming court case for abusing a fellow pro. And that undermines our position. You can imagine the response from the Polish FA should Ashley Cole be subjected to monkey noises, and the FA release a holier than thou statement about it.

It’s been a mistake to pick Terry. It’s not been a mistake to not select Ferdinand, but the Terry error throws an uncomfortable light on it. Heaven help the FA if by extraordinary co-incidence England and John Terry are waving aloft the trophy at the Olympic Stadium on 1st July, and then just 2 short weeks later he is pictured being convicted of racist abuse. Because it is only then that the depth of that mistake will be known.

by Nick Bell @Tracking_Back

Should We Be Down on Stewart?

Downing. Downer. Down and out. I’m not saying that changing his name to Johnny Wondergoals is going to have much of an impact on his public perception but sometimes you wonder if it’s too easy for people to get on his back. So should we be? Of all Hodgson’s decisions so far, the selection of Stewart Downing ahead of other wingers such as Adam Johnson, Aaron Lennon or Daniel Sturridge has been the most ill received by the stern clattering of fingers on keyboards.

I’ll get that stat out of the way first. Zero Premier League goals and zero Premier League assists in the 2011-12 season. It’s not fantastic viewing for any player who’s being paid on the strength of his creative talents and ability to change the game. Yes, he’s been very underwhelming in a Liverpool side which it has to be said has been unable to ‘whelm’ any players this season. Played frequently as an inside out winger, Downing has often cut a bereft figure out on the touchline, running up blind alleys of not having the confidence to cut back inside and shoot.

So why pick him? What has Roy seen in him that the masses haven’t? Opinion is that Downing will give you a certain tactical discipline. He’ll hug the line, he’ll deliver crosses into the box, and above all he’ll track back to help the full-back. He’s also a natural left footer so playing him on the left gives you genuine width. The feeling is that the Johnson’s and Lennon’s of this world love the Fancy Dan work in the final third but care less for a lung bursting run back to your own goal to  prevent an overlapping full-back from bombing forward.

So how did he perform in the Norway friendly? Given a starting spot on the left of the team in front of Leighton Baines, there is a strong indication that Roy sees him as a starter rather than a squad player. Up against Tom Hogli of Club Brugge and later Espen Ruud of OB you would hope that there would be plenty of attacking intent, and a lot of effort to get to the byline to get some crosses into the giant Andy Carroll.

And that’s exactly what we saw in the first 5 minutes, with a great cross for a chance that Carroll really should have scored. That should have been the tone for the rest of the night, but in a largely workmanlike performance he failed to put himself into enough dangerous positions to really have an affect. With 25 minutes gone we saw him beat a man and put another dangerous cross in, but that was the last we saw until he was substituted in the 84th minute.

So what about that work-rate and famed defensive nous? There was certainly effort to track back, that was clear, but there were also some dangerous lapses in concentration, the first of which after 11 minutes resulted in him losing his man and being bailed out at the expense of a corner. A corner from which Morten Gamst Pederson rattled the post. A second lapse would have allowed in Braaten had his first touch not been terribly poor.

However, the right wing was largely untroubled for England and the problems came more from John Arne Riise on the other flank, a situation that resulted in Roy swapping Downing over to the right to try and shore up the potential threat. It worked to an extent, indicating that it is perhaps more to do with Downing taking up generally more defensive positions rather than any particular ability in the tackle.

If truth be told, in a competitive game he will have Ashley Cole behind him, arguably the best left back in the world. If anyone gives you the confidence to try and be a bit more attacking then he should. With Walcott and Milner also failing to unlock the Norwegian defence, and with neither player being able to beat the man of put in a cross, Downing’s performance is neither better nor worse than his colleagues on the field.

If you’re going to make use of Andy Carroll’s attributes, the wingers need to be freed to push further up the pitch, and in those positions he is probably the best crosser in the team. Allow him more licence to attack and we may yet see the man the persuaded Fenway Sports Group to shell out £14 million for his services. So lets not be too down on Stuart this early. If we can learn some lessons from tonight we may yet see him blossom during the Euros.

by Nick Bell