March 5, 2012

Image: Gene Hunt via flickr Creative Commons

On the face of it, 11 successive seasons in the Premier League is a remarkable achievement for Bolton Wanderers. During that time the club has reached the League Cup final in 2004, eventually losing out to Middlesbrough, appeared twice in the UEFA Cup and ruffled a fair few feathers along the way. Indeed with Sam Allardyce at the helm they, somewhat unfairly, acquired a reputation for playing an attritional brand of football which nevertheless yielded impressive results, with top 10 finishes in each of his final four seasons at the Reebok. Yet for all this success Bolton, now precariously positioned in 19th place, have been rudely awakened to the existential absurdity of the Premier League.

Received wisdom states that England’s top division is awash with money, promotion to the ranks of the gilded elite often touted as a £90 million dream ticket. Surely if this were true Bolton should be materially much better off than they were back in 2001. Increased ticket prices, sponsorship deals, the ever escalating cost of the Premier League’s collective TV deal, a modest club like Bolton must be living the dream. However, a cursory examination of the club’s accounts reveals a debt to the tune of £110 million, an astronomical sum largely accrued during participation in the moneyed environs of the Premier League. That this situation could occur in such an ostensibly enriching competition is a clear indictment of its fundamentally flawed business model.

Clubs outside the top division are forever financially crippling themselves in pursuit of promotion, but even the Promised Land itself has proved home to mere theoretical riches. The vast influx of money is immediately consumed by increased wage demands and, as Bolton’s recent losses attest, even seeking to tread water amidst the mid-table stragglers can prove a costly exercise. Given the game’s current trajectory, and the plight of clubs like Portsmouth, who overspent on short term playing staff to the detriment of long term infrastructure, we could soon reach sugar daddy saturation point, where the only means to stand still, let alone compete for honours, is to be backed by an inordinately wealthy owner.

With 14 of last year’s 20 top flight clubs in debt to varying degrees, the myth of the Premier League gravy train must surely be debunked. It has become an ultimately futile struggle to stay afloat for all but the biggest sides, so while the efforts of Norwich and Swansea this season can be seen as an admirable riposte to such accusations of monotony and predictability, the rarity value of such ascents should be considered too. As those on the outside looking in strain for the right to be beaten more frequently and lose even larger sums of money, you have to wonder why the Premier League continues to enrapture so many.

For club accountants it is inevitable that participation at the top level is prioritised as they try in vain to cover ever increasing shortfalls, but such a depressingly singular focus on the bottom line seems to occupy the thoughts of far too many supporters and managers. This unremitting obsession with the Barclay’s Premier League, as Owen Coyle gratingly insists on calling it, comes at immense cost to the prestige of cup competitions and supporters’ dreams of glory. There are countless examples, from Aston Villa in Moscow and Bolton away to Sporting Lisbon, of clubs sacrificing potential cup success at the altar of Premier League stability. On the domestic front, even Paul Lambert, rightly praised for his emphasis on playing positive football at a revitalized Norwich, left out numerous first team regulars for the visit of Leicester in the Fifth Round of the FA Cup.

In such an uncompetitive environment where winning the league is a distant dream for everyone except the same select sides, cup football should be becoming more not less important. As the League Cup has demonstrated with its more varied roster of winners, and such unexpected finalists as Wigan, Cardiff and Tranmere in recent times, the opportunity to actually win a trophy rather than just grind along in the league is there if clubs were willing to take the chance. However, while caution continues to be prized out on the pitch and extravagant expenditure off it deemed a necessity, travails like those seen at Bolton will remain the norm.

At the Reebok there is even evidence of supporters voting with their feet. Despite average attendances consistently exceeding 25,000 during their first five seasons back in the Premier League, there has been a marked decline in numbers as the novelty has worn off and fans have become wearied by the experience. Poor league finishes since Allardyce left and the ignominious reign of Gary Megson have hardly helped matters, but a sense that the club has hit the glass ceiling of attainable ambition seems to have set in. Even the boost provided by the arrival of the chirpy Coyle, an adapted style of football, and a run to the FA Cup semi-finals last year, has proved temporary as the harsh realities of the Premier League hit home once more.

No comments

February 28, 2012

WBC Heavyweight Champion Vitali Klitschko, Image: TheDailySportsHerald via flickr Creative Commons

There was once a time when a dominant heavyweight champion defending his world title was big news. The likes of Muhammad Ali, Mike Tyson and Lennox Lewis all drew huge attention to their fights, and kept boxing at the forefront of the public’s minds.

But in terms of dominance over their competitors in boxing’s premier weight division, the Klitschko brothers have arguably eclipsed their illustrious predecessors. With a total of 31 title fight victories between them, you would expect every one of Wladimir and Vitali’s fights to be a must-see event. Yet, to put it bluntly, they aren’t. One by one, a series of smaller, often clearly overweight opponents have promised to end the brothers’ dominance, but have been beaten into submission by the technically sound Ukrainian duo. The next lamb set to be slaughtered by Wladimir on Saturday is Jean-Marc Mormeck, a 39-year-old whose CV at heavyweight consists of just three unconvincing points victories, and not a single knockout win. To make things worse, he was stopped by David Haye, Wladimir’s last victim, and stands seven inches shorter than the Ukrainian. With opponents of such a poor calibre, it’s no wonder the Klitschkos have been accused of boring boxing fans to tears.

Yet heavyweight boxing appears to be working its way back into the public’s consciousness, but not for the right reasons. At first glance, the violent brawl which marred the post-fight press conference of Vitali Klitschko’s WBC heavyweight title defence against Dereck Chisora in Munich would appear to be a disaster for boxing. As Chisora threatened to “shoot and burn” former WBA champion David Haye, who was present in the audience, calling out 40-year-old Vitali, Haye was seen hitting Chisora while holding a glass bottle and even picking up and swinging round a camera tripod during the brawl, causing a facial injury to Haye’s own trainer, Adam Booth. This came after Chisora had slapped Vitali at the weigh-in and spat in Wladmir’s face in the moments leading up to the fight.

The incident has given fuel to boxing’s detractors, strengthening their argument that boxing encourages mindless violence, rather than teaching self-respect. The boxing community has been quick to recognise this, with Robert Smith of the British Boxing Board of Control noting that Chisora could possibly receive a life ban for his actions. However, with German police electing not to charge Chisora for his role in the incident, a life ban looks highly improbable, with a suspension and fine the more likely outcome.

Yet that wouldn’t even be the first time that Chisora has been suspended. His career has been notable for a bizarre mixture of contrasting incidents since he turned professional in 2007. The first of these came in only his tenth fight, when he was suspended for four months and fined 2,500 pounds for biting the ear of opponent Paul Butlin during a fight, just like Mike Tyson had done against Evander Holyfield in 1997. Chisora later claimed he had done so because he was “bored” and that he would “probably bite it off next time”.

A more amusing Tyson-esque incident followed in 2008, when during a pre-fight staredown with Carl Baker, Chisora repeated Tyson’s famous “I’m gonna make you my girlfriend” line, before entering territory that Tyson never did by planting a kiss on the lips of Baker. Yet this was juxtaposed with more unsavoury incidents, such as Chisora’s criminal conviction in November 2010 for assaulting his girlfriend, which attracted Wladimir’s anger. “Your ex-girlfriend can’t punch back” he said. “I intend to punish you”. Chisora hit back by describing Klitschko’s own girlfriend, actress Hayden Panettiere, as “three feet tall”.

Chisora might be a confrontational, dislikeable character, but his persona is succeeding at bringing the headlines back to heavyweight boxing. The quarrel with Haye was front-page news, in contrast to the drab borefests that have characterised the long Klitschko reign. As well as their dull fighting style inside the ring, the Klitschkos also have a polite, respectful image outside of the ring, always giving credit to their opponents before fights and then inevitably praising their “heart” and “bravery” after being pummelled for twelve rounds. I’m not arguing that Chisora’s behaviour is necessary to attract attention to fights, but it does more to bring interest to the sport than the often sterile atmosphere of a Klitschko fight.

The incident’s aftermath looks set to continue for a while yet, with Haye fleeing to Las Vegas as the German police announce their intention to question Haye over his use of weapons in the incident – unlike Chisora, Haye could still be facing criminal charges – while Chisora has been milking his status as the pantomime villain in Germany by turning up ringside at the Alexander Povetkin versus Marco Huck fight on Saturday, drawing loud jeers from the hostile crowd every time the cameras focused on him. Meanwhile, Britain’s boxing promoters are undoubtedly rubbing their hands with glee at the prospect of a Chisora versus Haye showdown later this year – as both boxers attract media attention in the next few weeks, interest in the proposed fight will grow. Furthermore, Chisora’s credible performance against Vitali in the ring shows that he has the skills as well as the talk, and with both Klitschko brothers entering their twilight years in the sport, we could be seeing Chisora as champion rather than challenger in the not-too-distant future.

At its best, boxing is the noble art, a sport that leads deprived young people out of poverty, instilling confidence and teaching them self-discipline. Yet a sport that, ultimately, focuses on ruthless violence is always going to attract characters that undermine that mantra. Chisora is undoubtedly one of these, yet the enormous surge of attention in the Zimbabwe-born fighter shows that despite the positive influences that the sport can have, it is often its uglier side that draws the crowds.

1 comment

February 23, 2012

This Sunday sees the return of Varsity, as our rivals from Hull travel up here for the second time after replacing York St John last year.

It may be a relatively new experience for them, but even more so for me – this will be my first taste of Varsity and of covering any tournament of this size.

Excited as I am, and as you all are of course, I have detected just a hint of apathy towards Varsity in my time here.

The idea seems to be that we always win, nobody cares that much, it’s cold and we miss the Carling Cup Final.

A rehearsal for Roses (the one that really counts) is apparently the best justification the majority of people can come up with for it.

But, as an open-minded and optimistic fresher, I refuse to be dragged down by these dreary cynics.

After all, every University needs a few rivals – and from what I understand Hull are far more competitive than our previous opponents.

And although Lancaster are the arch-enemy, there is certainly room for one more.

For me, this situation would be the equivalent of Sunderland playing Middlesbrough rather than Newcastle.

True, most Sunderland fans barely take a game against Middlesbrough to be a derby, but anyone who witnessed the recent FA Cup clashes between the two sides will surely testify differently.

If there are any lessons to be learned from that match (and many others like it up and down the country) it is that if the fans get involved and invest some time and emotion then it can be a hugely enjoyable experience for all present.

And so what if it’s just a practice for the big event in the Summer Term, that doesn’t mean we can’t enjoy it nonetheless.

If clubs want to use it to breed some new talent then let them.

If it means that there are a few unexpected upsets in the results, then all the better.

The bottom line is that we should get out and enjoy the competition, whatever the weather and whatever the standard because events like this are unique and we won’t get the chance to see too many of them.

So then, I implore you to get out there on Sunday and support your teams.

It will probably be cold and you might be able to do something more productive, but believe me you’ll enjoy it.

1 comment

February 12, 2012

Parker in his West Ham days, Image: wonker via flickr Creative Commons

An unexpected side-effect of Fleet Street’s perfect storm of intrigue and upheaval, which saw Harry Redknapp acquitted over tax-evasion charges, John Terry stripped of the England captaincy and Fabio Capello resign in response to the FA’s decision, is that the nation’s collective bout of Scott Parker syndrome seems to have gone from bad to worse.

With the armband once more available and no obvious alternative to the twice-deposed Terry presenting itself, the combination of Redknapp as manager and Parker as captain is widely seen as a powerful English antidote to the fusty Italian and his erstwhile loutish sidekick. This proposed alliance of two tabloid favourites and former West Ham icons has, quite mystifyingly, been received with rather more enthusiasm than a white van man’s ultimate wet dream deserves. Such a pungent expression of patriotism is not to be taken lightly, signalling as it does the misguided belief that sheer desire trumps all other concerns.

The inexorable rise of Scott Parker in the public’s estimation has troubled me for some time, as the tough-tackling dynamo has become the poster boy for gritty English passion in the increasingly cosmopolitan Premier League. His reputation as a capable midfield general has deservedly been revived since the dark days at Chelsea and Newcastle, where his early promise was mislaid amidst the wreckage of both clubs’ spending sprees, but, in seeking to applaud the often underappreciated aspects of the game which he represents, many have overstepped the mark.

Parker is widely revered as something of a throwback to the days of yore, a wistful reminder of when pitches were bobbly, tackles were strong but fair, foreigners were virtually absent, and a dogged English spirit prevailed. Perhaps it’s no surprise that he has acquired this status as the last bastion of our stout-hearted masculine ideal given his somewhat anachronistic appearance. From his plain black boots and unfussy playing style to his weather-beaten face and sharp side-parting, there is an essential dignity in Parker’s distinctly old school inclinations which understandably sees nostalgic yearnings for alpha males of the past projected onto him.

It was during his spell at West Ham that Scott Parker syndrome, once a fringe affliction, began to spread rampantly through the mainstream. Named Hammer of the Year for three of his four seasons at Upton Park, Parker benefited from being comfortably the best player in an inconsistent team whose very nadir, relegation to the Championship last year, was to prove his personal highlight. Thriving on the adversity of playing in such an error-strewn and rudderless team, Parker usurped the placidly ineffective Avram Grant to become the club’s de facto leader, even delivering the team talk which supposedly left Carlton Cole with a tear in his eyes and sparked a second half comeback away to West Brom.

West Ham’s poor form saw Parker enhance his reputation through shows of defiant and purposeful play, further elevated in the public’s imagination by the knowledge that they were to no avail. The popular view that he singlehandedly railed against the dying of West Ham’s light gave an almost tragic edge to the season’s end, as the Premiership’s monument to manliness was forced to confront relegation with due steely eyed stoicism.

As Parker’s fortunes seemingly bore an inverse relationship to those of the club he played for, it was only fitting that in a year in which West Ham were relegated he should have a long awaited recall to the international setup and be named the Football Writers’ Player of the Year ahead of arguably more deserving candidates. Following these accolades Parker’s stock is now at an all-time high, and, given Wayne Rooney’s impending suspension, Steven Gerrard’s fitness worries and Rio Ferdinand’s increasingly poor form, it wouldn’t be a massive surprise if he was made captain. However, it would indicate a worrying continuation of media led consensus and a belief that national pride and chest-thumping passion is sufficient to overcome England’s many shortcomings.

4 comments

February 9, 2012

Capello resigned yesterday after disagreeing with the FA over John Terry's captaincy, Image: Dekuwa via flickr Creative Commons

What has been most noticeable around Fabio Capello’s departure as England manager is that there is no sense of crisis, never mind mourning, amongst most fans and pundits.

Under normal circumstances, an international manager resigning their post a matter of months before a major championship would provoke panic, particularly when the manager in question has as good a record on paper as Capello does.

Yet, the dramatic events of yesterday, beginning with the conclusion of Harry Redknapp’s court case, seem to have given way to a new-found optimism among many.

The truth of the matter is that Capello never connected with the England players or fans, at least not to the extent that would be expected. It was said last night that Capello only wanted to be a manager of a football team, not the leader of a nation that the England boss is inevitably cast as, and that seemed to be an accurate assessment.

To my mind, the Italian should never have been appointed in the first place, quite simply because of his nationality. That view does not stem from some fervent nationalistic sentiment, rather from a desire to preserve the basic principles of international football. By appointing a foreign coach, first with Sven-Goran Eriksson and then Capello, the FA forgot that international football is not about buying success – it’s about pitting the best of one nation against the best of another. What is more, appointing a foreign coach undermined the abilities of all of the English candidates available as well as the FA’s own coach development system.

Two and a half years later, Capello should have left after the World Cup, and probably would have had the FA not been short-sighted enough to hand him a lucrative new deal before the tournament started. It was clear then that he was not the man for the job, and a ‘loveless marriage’ between the boss and the FA is all that we have witnessed since the disappointment in South Africa.

Having said that, Capello’s resignation has come at a remarkably poor time for England. Whoever replaces him will have to quickly acclimatise to the job to lead England in Poland and Ukraine, not to mention appoint a new captain as the John Terry saga continues.

Added to that, England were actually doing pretty well – qualification was as easy as could be expected and the likes of Danny Welbeck, Jack Rodwell and perhaps even Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain provide hope for the future. It was certainly telling that a lot of England’s youngsters expressed their sadness at Capello’s departure yesterday.

The timing also makes it more difficult to appoint the obvious choice to succeed Capello – Harry Redknapp, though had he not been acquitted of tax evasion charges it would have been an almost impossible situation. But Redknapp will surely be loath to leave Spurs at this stage of the season, with them flying in the Premier League. With Stuart Pearce taking charge for the friendly against Holland next month, the most likely option looks to be Redknapp taking over permanently at the end of the season, though this is a far from ideal scenario given that he will have little time to prepare properly for the European Championships.

The question of whether Redknapp is the right man to lead England forward is a difficult one to answer. He is clearly the popular choice, but the last time the FA listened to popular opinion was when they appointed Kevin Keegan, and we all know how that turned out.

I realise that I have significantly reduced my options by stating that the new England manager should be English – in fact, I think the likes of Mourinho, Hiddink or Wenger (all of whom have been mentioned as potential successors) would be better suited to the role, but that’s not the point.

I’m certainly not Redknapp’s biggest fan, and a part of me fears that he lacks the tactical nous to be a success on the international stage. Nevertheless, he is the preferred candidate and would provide the confidence boost that England so desperately need going into the Euros.

One thing is for certain – if Harry doesn’t get the job then the FA will have to do a lot of explaining and their new man will be left in almost as precarious a position as Capello was. That new wave of optimism could very quickly disappear if the next manager can’t get the public on his side immediately, and the FA must get it right or face a return to the melancholy of the Capello regime.

No comments

February 7, 2012

Terry was stripped of the England captaincy last week, Image: CC_TX_UK via flickr Creative Commons

By now we must all be used to the fact that football does not exist in the same world as the rest of us. Governed by both money and the greedy back-slapping TV executives that crave it, what was once the beautiful game is now so far removed from reality that we watch it with the same zombiefied doltishness as we do The Jeremy Kyle Show. The soap opera has outstripped the sport with players gaining more credit for a witty post on twitter than for a net-busting 30 yard volley, more eyes on a pre-match handshake than a mid-match moment of brilliance.

The truth is though, that all this shouldn’t matter. Just like we have to tolerate the unerringly moronic presence of the cast of TOWIE on our screens, we can tolerate the papers will be full of Joey Barton’s latest genius outbursts, pretending to understand ancient Chinese proverbs or the words of Oscar Wilde. And just like we grudgingly submit to existing in the same universe as Katie Price and Peter Andre, we can do the same with Robbie Savage and his stupid hair.

But it does matter. Because occasionally, when you’ve picked through all the endless, mindless and pointless drivel, you’ll find a piece of news with very real and harmful reverberations right here in the real world.

For months the papers have been full of accusation, rumour and speculation about what may or may not have happened between John Terry and Anton Ferdinand. Without going over the same ground that has been trampled to death by the mainstream media, suffice to say, the issue of race has once again reared its contextually ambiguous head and it seems everyone simply must open their traps about it. From journalists to ex-pros, to the PFA, to the panel of Loose Women (whose opinion we should apparently care about), everyone with a mouth or a keyboard has had to share their thoughts on an incident they were not present to, and have no true knowledge of.

Of course, people pretending to know more than they clearly do has long been common place in football, but this is different. We’re not deciphering the intricacies of the offside rule or questioning the merits of the zonal-marking; we’re debating whether a man has committed a serious criminal offense and re-opened an incredibly delicate can of worms that we thought football in our country had long ago sealed.

By taking the armband from the England captain, The FA has blatantly and gutlessly succumbed to media pressure. If Fabio Capello had made the decision to take the captaincy off Terry, had he cited the need for calm in the build-up to the Euros, had he assured us all that it was a football decision taken to give us the best chance of success while at no time punishing Terry or implying his guilt it would have been somewhat understandable. The travelling circus that accompanies England to every tournament is plenty distracting enough without a captain with a race charge hanging over his head, and it could be easily accepted that for the sake of the team, a change has been necessitated.

But when the FA stick their nose in, when they read the red tops and use the headlines as some sort of opinion poll and then declare they are taking these actions to preserve the stature of English sport’s most revered position, they make a mockery of that position and the so-called principles they say that it stands upon.

I do not know if John Terry did the things he’s been accused of. I don’t know if he is a racist, or if he said a racist thing. I don’t know if I should believe his word, or Ferdinand’s, or even, God help us, Joey Barton’s. But then again, neither do the FA.

What we do know, is that at this exact moment in time, as I type this and as the FA took their decision, John Terry is still an innocent man. He remains as such until proven otherwise, and any punishment administered before that time is every bit as unjustifiable as his alleged crime would be.

It’s hard to criticise an organisation for taking a stand against racism and it would be lovely to think the FA had done this with only noble intentions at heart. But they didn’t. And as long as our game’s governing body seek approval from a media that cares only about ratings and readerships, their crusade will mean even less than the unfounded nonsense that gets spouted about it.

No comments

February 7, 2012

England captain Andrew Strauus, Image: thesportreview via flickr Creative Commons

The recent three match series against Pakistan in the United Arab Emirates was the first that England had played since becoming the number one Test side in the world. Pundits and fans were positive, and most believed that England would prove they deserved their number one ranking by triumphing over the subcontinent team.

However, things did not go to plan, England succumbed to a 3-0 whitewash and looked like a shadow of the team who broke all sorts of records in 2011. Pitches which were flat in the first days of each test match bamboozled the England batsmen, and at times they looked amateurish with poor shot selection and non-existent footwork. England must learn the lessons from this series, and fast, as they face Sri Lanka in similar conditions in March and April.

The whitewash defeat means that if South Africa beat New Zealand 3-0 in the upcoming Test series then England will lose their number one ranking. The series defeat was so shocking because experts were predicting that it would be the bowlers who would struggle on flat, docile pitches. The direct opposite occurred. Not one English batsman managed to score a century, with Alastair Cook the only man getting anywhere near, scoring 94 in the first innings in the second Test match in Abu Dhabi. The persistent problem England faced was that of spin bowling with Saeed Ajmal, Abdur Rehman and Mohammad Hafeez taking 48 wickets between them. Ajmal was the most impressive and he single-handedly wreaked havoc with figures of 7-55 in the first innings of the first Test match.

Andy Flower and Andrew Strauss must now react to the consistent failures of batsmen throughout the series with Eoin Morgan and Ian Bell’s places looking particularly vulnerable in the team. Bell scored 51 runs in six innings and was dismissed on four occasions by Saeed Ajmal, suggesting that the Warwickshire man who has been in such fine form needs to adopt a new approach in the subcontinent against spin. Similarly, Morgan only scored 82 runs at an average of 13.66 and was out to spin five times. The Irishman looked inexperienced and unsure of the best approach to take and this was reflected in his low scores.

Another man who has to be under pressure is Kevin Pietersen. KP, who is generally regarded as the best natural talent England have at their disposal, has consistently been troubled by left-arm spinners and this problem resurfaced in the UAE. Abdur Rehman continually troubled the charismatic Pietersen and, as Nasser Hussain has stated, “he has to face up to the fact that he has a problem against left-arm spin; the sooner he does that, the sooner he can start solving the problem.”

So who should England turn to if they are to make changes to the batting line up in their Test side?

The obvious choice would be Ravi Bopara – he has been in and around the side for the past year or two and when selected as had reasonable success. He has good footwork against spin and has played in the IPL against elite spinners. Bopara has to be selected if you are looking to combat the effectiveness of spin. Ian Bell would be the likely man to miss out. Another player who has been talked about is the young Leicestershire star, James Taylor. He averages nearly 50 in the County Championship and has experienced conditions in Sri Lanka on the recent tour with the England Lions.

England coach Andy Flower no doubt remains cautious about making such radical changes and is convinced that the players selected for this tour are the best England has to offer. However, being bowled out for under 200 on four separate occasions, and an appalling 72 in the second innings of the second test chasing just 145 to win proves that there is a significant problem. Former England captain Michael Vaughan suggests that the “same players should be selected for the Sri Lanka series”, but many other critics are calling for a rethink. For too long, Alastair Cook and Jonathan Trott have been relied on to score massive runs, taking the pressure off of the middle and lower order batsmen and this series has awoken many English fans to the problems that the players have in adapting to subcontinent conditions.

One positive for England was the exceptional bowling performances and the re-emergence of Monty Panesar, who took 14 wickets in the two matches he played. He was supported superbly by Stuart Broad, Graeme Swann and James Anderson who all had success with the ball. If the batsman had done their jobs it would be quite conceivable that we would be talking of an English whitewash and the Test side would now be firmly established as the best in the world.

England will hope this is a minor diversion on their quest for world domination and this series has proven to be a major wake up call for any England players who had become complacent.

No comments

February 2, 2012

With today being the last day of the January transfer window, it seems unfair that when looking at the runners and riders for the York Sport Presidency, I am unable to stand in front of a large plasma screen, complete with a countdown clock, screaming fervently that the President of one sport or another has thrown their hat into the ring.

Alas, it is only within the confines of this very column that I am able to run the rule over those jostling for position to replace Sam Asfahani as York’s sporting supremo.

Exactly who will put themselves up for election is unclear but a little bit of prediction, rumour and gossip never hurt anyone – unless those rumours turn out to be false and forever besmirch someone’s name but hey, take your sob stories to the Leveson Inquiry.

The best place to start is the York Sport Committee; the inner sanctum of Asfahani’s administration, his faithful cabal, similar in many ways to Blair’s ‘Sofa Government’ but less powerful. Two people who seem set to run for the position are College Sport Officer Charlotte Winter and
Tournament Secretary Ben McGladdery.

McGladdery has previous, he unsuccessfully challenged Asfahani last year before heavily implying he’d be back for another crack at the top job. Name recognition could be a big factor for the man who donned a Scooby Doo costume in the run-up to last year’s election (as you do…) but Winter will pose a significant challenge. A Lacrosse player, she will be able to count on significant club support and her role within College Sport has certainly added to her exposure.

If I was a betting man, and I am, I would be backing her for the role. Unfortunately when I nipped into William Hill, I was met with looks of bemusement when I asked the odds for the York Sport Presidential race – amateurs.

To predict who else might run is less clear-cut but equally as fun. Other members of the York Sport Committee could all be logical bets, Netball president, Shadyn Nikzad, perhaps the most likely, team-mate Kay Masterson could also be worth a punt. The man in charge of the money, Andreas Papadolambakis, may also decide to chance his arm but he would probably need to improve on the election message he used in his attempts to become treasurer; ‘being Greek’ and ‘good with money’ might not be enough to catapult him to victory here.

Another group of people who may become runners and riders are the Presidents of Sports Clubs. If the whispers are to be believed – which they rarely are – then Sam Morrison of the Rugby Club could be a name to consider.

To use a sporting cliché, it could be anyone’s.

No comments

February 2, 2012

As you sit and read this the January transfer window will be drawing to a close.

Jim White’s eyes will be popping out of his head, Bryan Swanson’s phone will be on the verge of meltdown, Harry Redknapp will be conducting an interview in his car whilst holding up traffic around Spurs’ training ground, and numerous footballers will be in helicopters hovering over various cities in an attempt to confuse us.

Or at least, that’s how it normally works.

This year has (so far) failed to live up to the high standards set by previous deadline days, most notably last season’s when Andy Carroll and Fernando Torres were involved in two of the biggest transfers in English football history.

And that was after a month in which Darren Bent had already swapped Wearside for Villa Park (a transfer that still irks loyal Sunderland fans like myself), and Luis Suarez, David Luiz and Edin Dzeko had all completed big-money moves to the Premier League.
In comparison, this January has been somewhat of a let-down, though I am writing this a few days before the window slams shut (cue dramatic graphic on Sky Sports News) so there is still time for a bolt from the blue.

But all the important deals that have gone through so far have lacked a certain fanfare and excitement.
Gary Cahill’s move to Chelsea was sufficiently protracted to make us all bored of the affair by the time it was concluded, and Papiss Demba Cisse was quickly whisked off to the African Cup of Nations after his move to Newcastle.

Even the two real shocks of the window have been somewhat tainted – Thierry Henry’s return to Arsenal by the fact the great man is not his former self and will soon return to New York, and Paul Scholes’ surprise comeback by the knowledge that he is not the long-term solution to Manchester United’s midfield woes.

All I can say right now is that I hope something stunning happens on deadline day; but if it doesn’t, then we’ll all probably be glued to the TV anyway.

Managers may be united in criticism of the January window, but for fans it has become a source of excitement and wonder, even when nothing is really happening.

Such is the draw of the transfer window, a lack of any genuine action cannot serve to dampen our enthusiasm.
Even if you think your club doesn’t stand a chance of signing anyone, you never know, so we sit for a month with one eye firmly fixed on live transfer updates, constantly checking our Twitter feeds.

It may be filled with unfounded rumours, banal non-stories and pathetic acts of desperate panic-buying, but we endure it all in the hope of that one earth-shattering move.

Perhaps Carlos Tevez will finally find a way out of Manchester City, or Kenny Dalglish will finally bite the bullet and try to find Liverpool a natural goalscorer to supplement Suarez.

But if there is one defining and endearing feature of the window, it is that it captivates us all regardless of what is happening on the transfer front.

No comments

February 2, 2012

The Super Bowl is fast approaching and once again it is that time of the year when everyone pretends to care about American football.

The cursory patronising articles in the newspapers, bars begging you to give them some rare Sunday service and TV channels goading you into justifying the money they paid for the right to show the ‘biggest game in the world’.

As a genuine fan of gridiron, I find this all to be rather annoying, as the sport is actually gaining in popularity in this country, and deserves more than the annual perfunctory hat-tip it currently garners.

As far as tangible evidence for this goes, there is the rampant success of the NFL International Series, which has sold-out an NFL regular season game at Wembley Stadium every year since 2007, and plans to do so until at least 2016.

The NFL itself estimates there to be around “11 million fans in the UK” and Sky Sports have seen their ratings for the sport increase by “91 per cent since 2006”, all of which the NFL is using as support for a potential London franchise in the future.

In terms of less tangible variables, the advent of the internet has obviously made American sports much more accessible to the modern fan. Those who were interested in the sport only 15 years ago had to rifle through papers to find minimalist box scores, whilst today fans can easily follow games as they happen on their phones.

Whilst the NFL has not embraced YouTube in the same way the NBA or NHL has (in fact they were one of the companies that supported the recent SOPA/PIPA bills in Congress), their website offers free highlights pretty much instantaneously, something the Premier League has failed to capitalise on in this country.

For the more dedicated, NFL Game Pass and Sky Sports offer high definition quality coverage of matches on their computers or televisions; and if they don’t feel like paying there are always the slightly more nefarious corners of the internet that offer alternatives.

Whether you are a diehard or not, this year’s game promises to be special as it is a rematch of Super Bowl 42, one of the best Super Bowls in recent memory and all-time classic.

In that game four years ago the underdog New York Giants beat the previously undefeated New England Patriots, preventing them from completing a staggering 19-0 season, as Eli Manning led a game-winning drive in the fourth quarter.

Whilst the squads involved this time are admittedly noticeably different from their last encounter on this grand stage, the fans will not have forgotten.

Some players and coaches may have moved on, but the head coach-quarterback combination for both teams remain, and once again New York’s Tom Coughlin and Eli Manning will be attempting to out-duel their more illustrious New England counterparts, the three time Super Bowl winning duo of Bill Bellichick and Tom Brady, who are appearing in their record-breaking fifth championship game together.

While all the headlines before and after the game will inevitably belong to the quarterbacks, I personally feel that they will not have that great an effect on the outcome of the game; instead the result will hinge on the performances of the Giants’ defensive line and the Patriots’ secondary.

The Giants pass rush is the best in the league, and if they can generate pressure on Brady and force him to make mistakes, they will be able to keep, and the score low, whilst Patriots’ secondary on the other hand is the league’s worst, something Manning and his receivers will look to exploit. An above average performance by them could well be enough though, whether they are up to this is debatable however.
History has already repeated itself to pit these teams against each other, and I suggest you tune in on 5th February to find out if we have another potential classic on our hands.

No comments

January 30, 2012

Ospreys take on Biarritz in this year's Heineken Cup, Image: Sum_of_Marc via flickr Creative Commons

Every January the rugby press is inundated with articles and blogs analysing the implications of Heineken Cup qualification for the Six Nations Championship. The fettle of the clubs in the former is read as symptomatic of their respective nations in the latter and what follows is an influx of opinion articles predicting the Six Nations champion as whichever country is performing most admirably thus far in European club matters. Such articles are tedious, their methods crudely over-simplistic and I am yet to be convinced that a strong correlation exists between Europe’s top club competition and its annual international tournament.

With a quick glance at the history books, the argument already starts to fray around the edges. In the twelve seasons since the Six Nations’ inception, only four have seen the winners of the Heineken Cup and the Six Nations come from the same country. Wales have never provided a Heineken Cup winner, yet won Six Nations Grand Slams in 2005 (when no Welsh province reached even the quarter final stage of the European Club tournament) and 2008. This year, floundering pundits will point to the qualification of three Irish provinces as evidence of the national team’s good health, yet in only four of the last twelve seasons have the Six Nations champions been the nation with the most representation in the last eight of the Heineken Cup.

The temptation for pundits is obvious: why should the success of a country’s clubs not carry over to the international scene? The answer is a whole host of reasons. Most obviously, clubs are not populated entirely by players qualified to play for that particular nation. With the likes of Isa Nacewa (Leinster), Sitiveni Sivivatu (Clermont Auvergne), Lifeimi Mafi (Munster) and Schalk Brits (Saracens) all adding foreign talent to their respective European sides, clubs simply cannot be seen as constituent parts of corresponding international teams. Granted, in many cases these expatriates operate in conjunction with a host of home-grown talent, but at times it is hard to ignore the match-turning input that a club’s foreign contingent makes. A third of the Ulster XV that humbled Leicester in round five, for example, were not of Irish blood. The impression clubs give of national form is further distorted by examples like Ben Morgan, an English forward plying his trade with the Scarlets in Llanelli, and Tommy Bowe, Ireland’s potent winger who plays for the Ospreys in Swansea.

Imported talent aside, though, injury and squad rotation often mean that club form cannot be used as a barometer for that of national teams. English fans who watched Munster overwhelm Northampton last weekend might take heart that Courtney Lawes, Tom Wood and Chris Ashton, variously unavailable for the Saints are all likely to start when England take on Ireland on 17 March. Those who think Ulster’s dismantling of Leicester makes an Irish victory all but certain at Twickenham when the national sides meet – an argument the Ulstermen who jeered a tongue-in-cheek rendition of ‘Swing Low, Sweet Chariot’ that night might adhere to – may have forgotten that only Tom Croft and Ben Youngs from the Tigers’ lineup are likely to start for England in the Six Nations’ final fixture.

Observers who think that Heineken Cup rugby pre-empts the Six Nations also seem to be ignoring the often substantial role that contingency plays in rugby. With a change in the wind here or a different call by a referee there, an entirely different group of teams might have qualified for the last eight. In both rounds 1 and 2, final-play drop goals by Munster’s Ronan O’Gara brought the men from Limerick victory; clearly neither match was a foregone conclusion and without those victories Munster may not have qualified at all, let alone secured the top seed spot. In November, Edinburgh edged Racing Metro 48-47 in a thrilling game that evidently could have gone either way; a week earlier Glasgow had claimed a victory over Bath with a fortuitous last minute try. Of course the very nature of professional sport comes down to fine margins and although teams with more class tend to succeed in the long run, there are indisputably times when luck is needed on top of merit to secure a win. In a tournament where each team is afforded just six games to secure a quarter-final spot, there are English, Welsh and French clubs who might all argue that, but for a little misfortune, they could and should have qualified.

The simple fact is that for all of the passion and talent on display in the Heineken Cup, international and club rugby in Europe remain two very different phenomena. The lack of both ‘home’ and ‘away’ ties in the international arena can skew results at times (no Six Nations side can any longer feel safe when playing away, even in Rome) and the bonus point system, which brings an added level of nuance to the club tournament, is not present in the international championship. The difference in pressure between playing for club and country is even bigger than the difference in scale and much will come down to how well players with little international experience deal with such pressure.

Don’t get me wrong – a fruitful Heineken Cup campaign can put a country in good stead for the Six Nations, but nothing more; my point is simply that success in the former is neither a pre-requisite nor a guarantee of success in the latter. Ireland’s provinces have been playing well and French clubs have shown touches of brilliance in Europe this season but crucially, transferring club success to international dominance is not an exact science. The man who confidently predicts a Six Nations champion before the tournament has begun is a braver one than I. The impending championship, thanks to a host of new international players (at the dawn of a new World Cup cycle) as well as three new coaching setups, is even more difficult than normal to predict. So, when February 4 rolls around, count on nothing, expect anything and enjoy the spectacle that the 2012 Six Nations promises to be.

1 comment

January 30, 2012

Doncaster's Keepmoat Stadium, Image: bevkevtrev via flickr Creative Commons

Currently languishing second from bottom in the Championship, and five points from safety, Doncaster Rovers’ four season stay in the second tier of English football looks to be coming to a close.

The last decade has signalled almost constant expansion and improvement for the South Yorkshire club, who, backed by Chairman John Ryan, have risen three divisions and now occupy a 15,000 all-seater stadium which is a far cry from their previous Belle Vue home. However, having abandoned the philosophy that underpinned this remarkable ascent, when sacking manager Sean O’Driscoll after a poor start to the present campaign, Rovers’ dramatic change in direction has yielded little reward on the pitch or respect off it.

Formerly heralded as a model of the respectable family club making the most of limited resources, the replacement of the popular and innovative O’Driscoll with the more pragmatic Dean Saunders also coincided with the arrival of controversial agent Willie McKay, who is the orchestrator behind their present superstars transfer policy. The arrangement has witnessed the arrival of numerous out of favour Premier League players on heavily subsidised loans, with the intention of taking a sizeable cut from any eventual sell-on fee. In essence, Rovers have been acting as a convenient shop window for bigger clubs to display their disillusioned wares in the hope of financial gain for all parties involved in the deal.

So far this has seen such familiar faces as Chris Kirkland, Marc-Antoine Fortuné, Habib Beye and Hérita Ilunga, amongst others, arrive on loan, while the previously unattached El Hadji Diouf, Pascal Chimbonda and Lamine Diatta have also pitched up at the Keepmoat on short-term contracts. This array of ageing internationals undoubtedly have self interest at heart, using this ailing second tier side as a stepping stone on the way back to bigger things. When the plan was initially announced supporters were concerned that this revolving door policy would compromise the very continuity which had been so key to their club’s success. Such fears seem well-founded as a number of loanees have already returned to their parent clubs after failing to inspire an upturn in Donny’s fortunes.

McKay’s misguided belief that this could be a model for clubs of Doncaster’s size and limited fan base to survive in the Championship significantly overlooks the last three years in which they have punched well above their weight, even securing a top-half finish in the 2009/10 season. The club has long taken into account its inherent disadvantage in the transfer market, but has prospered nevertheless by recruiting players ready to slot into a pre-ordained system of passing football. All the while the necessity of selling has never impeded their progress, with substantial profits being made on a conveyor belt of talent including the likes of current Leicester duo Richie Wellens and Matt Mills.

O’Driscoll, following on from the groundwork laid by Dave Penney, always built with an overarching ideal in mind and created a team which was greater than the sum of its parts. This is in marked contrast to the current alliance of Saunders and McKay, who have overseen an influx of talented yet often temperamental players. A club once without ego, and who used the loan market for its primary purpose, to test out young players like Jordon Mutch and Jay Emmanuel-Thomas, has since become a bizarre experiment in discontinuity and the first port of call for McKay’s stable of clients and contacts.

The astonishing long-term transformation the club has undergone during Ryan’s tenure is at risk of being irreparably damaged by a series of short-sighted decisions. Just a day before dismissing O’Driscoll, Ryan even cited fellow Yorkshire side Sheffield United, and the three managers they used in last year’s relegation to League One, as an example of the potential perils arising from unnecessary upheaval. Yet having failed to heed his own highly prescient advice, Doncaster are now facing not just the prospect of relegation, but of losing their hard-won reputation for forward thinking and good football.

2 comments

January 25, 2012

Tom Brady of the New England Patriots, Image: Keith Allison via flickr Creative Commons

The Luck of the Patriots

The media narrative running up to Super Bowl 46 will be about the great Bill Belichick, the other-worldly Tom Brady, and their chance to add to their already historic legacy. This is misleading though, papering over the cracks of an obviously flawed team that has relied on the deficiencies of others and some incredible luck to get them this far. During the regular season, the Patriots’ defence was ranked 31st in the league, a shocking statistic that led to every New England game becoming a ludicrous shoot-out. The fact that such a feeble defence could rise to the number one seed in the AFC is an indictment of how poor the conference was this year, a fact that was evident in the teams representing it in the playoffs. The Bengals and Texans were never realistic threats with rookie quarterbacks at the helm, the Steelers had too many injuries, and the Broncos had a quarterback whose best asset was an unwavering (and frankly obnoxious) belief in God. Compared to the loaded NFC, where all six playoff teams could claim a legitimate chance of winning it all, only two teams really stood out as championship calibre, leaving the Patriots essentially a single victory away from the Super Bowl

After dismantling the Broncos the week before, the Patriots were finally facing their first real test in the playoffs, the Baltimore Ravens, and by all accounts they played terribly. Brady was outplayed by Joe Flacco, throwing two interceptions with no touchdowns and giving the Ravens a huge opportunity to go to the Super Bowl. Baltimore could comply however, handing victory to the Patriots via two crucial miscues in the final minute. First of all Lee Evans could not hold on to a potential game-winning touchdown, and seconds later, Billy Cundiff missed a regulation 32-yard field goal which would have sent the game into overtime. The New England Patriots are heading to the Super Bowl for the fifth time under coach Bill Belichick, but for the first time as a fraudulent team.

Joining the Patriots in Indianapolis on February 5th will be the equally lucky New York Giants. Playing the San Francisco 49ers on the road and with the game in overtime, the Giants were forced to punt the ball, giving the home team the chance to drive and score a field goal that would take them to the Super Bowl. The 49ers returner Kyle Williams fumbled said punt however, leaving the Giants in field goal range themselves. Lawrence Tynes succeeded where Billy Cundiff could not, propelling the Giants into a rematch of Super Bowl 42.

Super Bowl XLII Déjà Vu

Both of the conference championship games were defined by the mistakes the losing teams made in crucial positions, but this will be quickly forgotten as this year’s Super Bowl is a rematch made in heaven. The Giants and Patriots met in the championship game only four years ago. That Patriots team was undefeated, attempting to go an unprecedented 19-0, and had destroyed any opponents who had dared stand before them. The Giants on the other hand were a plucky 10-6 team that had been forced to win three straight road playoff games to reach the big stage. The game was dismissed a mismatch, David versus Goliath, and the Patriots were favoured by twelve points according to bookmakers. But for those who know their Biblical history, the bigger the man, the harder they fall, and Eli Manning led the Giants to a shocking victory, one of the biggest upsets in Super Bowl history. This loss is still fresh in the minds of many New England fans, especially as the team has struggled ever since. They will be desperate for revenge. The Giants on the other hand will be eager to prove that the last Super Bowl victory was no fluke, and that the Tom Coughlin-Eli Manning combination is equally as great as the much lauded coach-quarterback team in New England.

Injuries Galore

The NBA is a pretty ugly product at the moment. Chris Paul, Dwayne Wade, Tim Duncan, Dirk Nowitzki, Derrick Rose; you could make a historically good team with the guys currently riding the bench in street clothes for their teams, nursing ‘minor injuries’. I add scare quotes there because if it were the playoffs, these guys would be out there every game. In fact, even if it were merely a normal 82 game season, I would imagine that they would be playing more. But due to the compressed schedule in the wake of the lockout, teams are acutely aware of how little the regular season matters this year, opting to rest players over gaining meaningless wins. The aims of teams have shifted from ‘win as many games as possible in the hope of securing home court advantage in the playoffs’ to ‘just get in the playoffs injury free’. There is a precedent for this as well. After the last lockout in 1998, the New York Knicks scraped into the playoffs as the Eastern Conference’s 8th seed, and ended up reaching the Finals. The same could easily happen again this year, as with training camps hugely truncated, teams had little to no time to practice together before the season started, turning the regular season into an extended preseason as teams hope to peak heading into the playoffs. All of this is not good for the fans though as the games are noticeably worse, missing star power and offensive cohesion. Just like the NBA teams themselves, we are going to have to wait until April for the real quality.

No comments

January 20, 2012

Sepp Blatter (right) has long been an opponent of goal line technology, Image: World Economic Forum via flickr Creative Commons

Of all the sticks used to beat Sepp Blatter with, including allegations of corruption, cronyism and downright incompetence, both the least justifiable and the most tiresomely predictable is FIFA’s failure to adopt goal line technology.

Proponents for change see it as an essentially unarguable point, an unavoidable next step on the way to eradicating the influence of human error over a match’s outcome. Yet if football’s administrators were to make such a concession, it would serve only to undermine rather than aid the officials whose benefit it is purportedly for.

After each round of fixtures we are currently treated to the same line-up of familiar managerial faces either railing against unjust decisions or professing relief over getting that little bit of luck they deserve, depending upon which way the result has gone. A manager’s appraisal of the referee’s performance has never knowingly been noted for its sense of proportion, perspective or impartiality, but in a sporting culture where players must be shielded from criticism at all costs, they are forever drawing attention to refereeing errors in order to explain away their own team’s shortcomings.

Complaints against the inconsistency of officials’ decision-making, especially concerning the punishment meted out for two-footed tackles, has become a staple source of manufactured outrage and controversy in recent weeks, especially since Vincent Kompany’s red card in the Manchester derby. Yet this highly subjective area of the game, which is inevitably prey to personal interpretation, could become the next target for video referrals should they be introduced to deal with supposedly more clear-cut cases like whether a goal should be given or not.

If we’ve survived just fine without goal line technology up until this point, why is its introduction any more critical now? This can be attributed to a misplaced belief that the occasional mistake is somehow of greater consequence since football has become the endlessly over-analyzed, financially-bloated behemoth it now is. The mantra for football’s new seriousness seems to be much like that of the recent Sky Bet advertisement, which depressingly asserted that the result “matters more when there’s money on it”.

The suggestion that with football’s enhanced status there is now too much money at stake for the occasional wrong call, and that technology should be brought in to deal with these tragic imperfections, is a perfect example of approaching an issue the wrong way round. To me the idea that a goal line decision could matter so much signals that the money involved is the problem, rather than the means of making such a decision, and that we should tackle the warped mentality responsible for deeming any football result to be of such earth-shattering importance to begin with.

Instead, the introduction of technology would merely feed into football’s sense of its own significance, while irritation over offsides or penalty decisions, which occur far more often than any qualms over whether the ball has crossed the line, would continue unabated until they too became the subject of in-game video analysis. The problem is only exacerbated by the media’s incessant courting of controversy and the overbearing demands of pundits and fans in search of an unattainable perfection.

That technology is yet to encroach on the game of football should be a source of pride, proving that for all the upheaval it has undergone it remains fundamentally the same sport from grass roots level to the very top. This state of affairs would only be threatened by the arrival of prohibitively expensive technology, widening the gulf between the haves and the have-nots of league football even further, so that games in the Premiership would, quite literally, take place on a different playing field altogether.

No comments

January 13, 2012

In-form England wing Charlie Sharples, Image: PaulSh via flickr Creative Commons

The selections made for the England rugby squad by Stuart Lancaster’s interim coaching staff betray their intent in terms of how they hope the team will play. Whether they can match intent with ability is their next obstacle, and therein England may find that their ‘new era’ is still plagued by some very old – as well as some new – problems.

The attributes of the selected players give a very clear impression of the kind of rugby England will strive to display in the Six Nations. Perhaps most strikingly, Lancaster is trying to build a hard-running, athletic, mobile pack of forwards with good handling skills. The inclusion of the likes of uncapped Callum Clark, Joe Marler and Ben Morgan, along with the more experienced Tom Croft, Dylan Hartley and Courtney Lawes, demonstrates the coaches’ desire for a group of forwards, all of whom are quite comfortable roaming the full breadth of the pitch – be it carrying, offloading, tackling or rucking.

It is also evident that Lancaster and his coaches want two ball-players in their England midfield. The inclusion of Charlie Hodgson, Owen Farrell and Toby Flood (and Alex Goode, deputising for injured Flood) signifies that one centre, as well as the fly half, will be primarily a passer of the ball, rather than a carrier. This will be in stark contrast to the model previous manager Martin Johnson adhered to for so long: two centres designed to simply batter the opposition defence into submission.

The game-plan, then, is relatively clear. Quick forwards beat their opposite men to each ruck, supply England with fast recycled ball, from which their two ball-players thrive. One centre, as well as these athletic forwards, carry the team through a number of phases until a gap opens up in a tired and confused opposition defence. The electric finishers then arrive, – the likes of Charlie Sharples, Ben Foden, Mike Brown, all in fine form – finish the well-worked try and the Red Rose of England is happily on track for glory once more. What could possibly go wrong?

Well, actually, quite a lot. Notably, England lack a truly eye-catching number sevem. The players selected in the back row are among the most talented in the country, many of whom have played at seven for their clubs, but, crucially, none of the flankers in the squad are what rugby pundits call ‘out-and-out open-sides’. The over-used phrase refers to the type of player who flirts with legality in the ruck, getting away with whatever he can in order to prevent the opposition winning the contest easily, and perhaps more crucially winning the ball for his own team. Many players in the English Premiership do this quite well, yet none do it to a world-class level. Open-side flankers are all too often the architect of victory in rugby and if England cannot find an effective and legal way of securing the ruck, their good intentions might never materialise.

Additionally, the clarity of England’s game-plan is shrouded in the midfield. If England, as suspected, desire a duo of passing maestros and one centre more heavily built for ball-carrying and defence, how do injuries to Toby Flood and Manu Tuilagi affect their intent? What if Owen Farrell gets injured? Brad Barritt and Jordan Turner-Hall are admirable carriers and tacklers for their clubs at inside-centre; should either be trusted in an international outside-centre jersey? Successful midfields are carefully balanced and if Lancaster begins to put his players into positions they do not regularly play for their clubs, the national side might find its attack blunted and its defence porous.

What concerned me most when I perused the squad was that an area of traditional strength for England suddenly seems more vulnerable: the scrummage. The likes of Steve Thompson, Andrew Sheridan, Louis Deacon, tight-five forwards known for their strength in the set-piece are all unavailable for various reasons. There is no doubt that the players who replace them bring youth, pace, and skill (Joe Marler, Dylan Hartley, Dave Attwood are among the names that spring to mind), but in scrums where brute strength and experience tend to win the day, England’s new forwards might struggle.

Make no mistake there is much that is good about this squad. Their finishers are among the best in the Northern hemisphere: Chris Ashton and Ben Foden are the two high-profile scorers included, yet Charlie Sharples and Mike Brown are in scintillating form this season and even the likes of Manu Tuilagi, Owen Farrell and Ben Youngs have proved themselves prolific try-scorers. I expect England’s lineout to provide plenty of possession with Croft, Wood and Palmer to the fore, and more generally the team will benefit from greater mental freedom than it had under the previous regime, in the knowledge that their coaches are (probably) not permanent and the team will not be judged too harshly for losses if they perform well.

The big question that underpins this article is whether England will achieve what they believe they can. If they find an effective way of contesting breakdowns, strike a good balance in midfield and hold their own in the scrum, I expect England to do well. If they fail to address these issues, they will finish the Six Nations in the bottom half of the table. Either way, they will be utterly compelling to watch over their next five games.

No comments