Mails: Chelsea running scared of Spurs

You know what to do – watch Manchester United and e-mail us your views at theeditor@football365.com

 

Bored of the Champions League
Was it just me, or was Tuesday night one of the most boring nights of Champions League football that we’ve all had the misfortune to experience?

Sure, you can wonder at the skills of Barcelona and Bayern, but if you want one-sided strolls you can watch them week in, week out in La Liga and the Bundesliga.

The Champions League is meant to be the pinnacle, but Tuesday night was devoid of any serious competitive action among major teams. Bayern eased to a 4-0 win, Barcelona were showboating while thrashing a shoddy Roma team 6-1. Arsenal never looked threatened in a 3-0 stroll in front of a sparse Emirates crowd, and Chelsea put four past an utterly out-of-their-depth Maccabi Tel-Aviv. Porto were poor against Kiev, while AVB’s Zenit steamrollered Valencia.

Yes, you could have watched a tight match between Lyon and Gent, or BATE vs Leverkusen, but these are contests that scream ‘Europa League’.

The Champions League this year just feels very formulaic. The seedings are designed to ensure the big teams get through the group stages as easily as possible, even at the expense of competitive matches. The only group that has been vaguely balanced is Manchester City’s.

From a British perspective, I don’t think we’ve been helped in the excitement stakes by the switch to BT Sport. Their coverage is incredibly dull, especially with commentators like Michael Owen and Owen Hargreaves. A few old pros sitting around and uttering platitudes feels out of date in the era of advanced stats, social media and instant touch-screen analysis. Innovations like the goals show with James Richardson are just too amateur to be engaging viewing.

Champions League used to be exciting with the music and the atmosphere and the biggest teams playing each other. We seem to have lost that this year. It is so predictable. Despite the best efforts of the English clubs to screw it up, they will all limp through to the last 16, and no doubt get knocked out then.

Maybe it is just an awkward combination of the teams that made it through qualifying this year, and the Financial Fair Play-induced domination of a few large-revenue teams. Sure, when Barca and Bayern finally play each other, it is going to be essential viewing – but we’ve got a heck of a lot of tedious matches to get through before we reach that showdown.

They won’t do it, as they are utterly craven and don’t give a damn so long as the money is rolling in, but I’d love UEFA be bold and shake up or abandon the seedings altogether, to ensure the Champions League is worth watching in the group stages, and not just the semi-finals.
Charlie, THFC, Somerset

(We have certainly seen a dip in interest in Champions League analysis/reporting this season. Not being on terrestrial television has dealt a massive blow to interest in the competition in England – MC</I>

 

Chelsea fan scared of playing Tottenham
So I wrote in after Chelsea’s last Champions League game against Kiev because nobody else did, and looks like I’ll be flying the blue flag by myself again.

To start, Maccabi were terrible. The gulf in class was massive and evident from the get go. The worrying factor is, that whilst we controlled the game we barely had any efforts on goal in the first half. Tal Ben Haim (the ex-Chelsea one) decided it was a good idea to boot Diego Costa right in front of the ref before the end of the first half, so we should have had a stroll in the park after that against 10 men. It took until the 72nd minute after a few dangerous Macabbi chances to put the game to bed.

It seems churlish to complain after a 4-0 victory, but I could understand Mourinho’s frustration at the team and Costa in particular at half time. If he’s not going to even bother attempting to run towards goal when Hazard (who is thankfully finding a bit of form) is running to the by-line then give Remy a go. He looked totally disinterested for large parts of the game in making any movement to help our wingers out.

I assume Tottenham will come out quick at us and not give us half an hour to decide what to do with the ball like Maccabi did. At the moment, I can only see tiredness from Tottenham’s long trip on Thursday, or another Willian free-kick (how good is he?!) saving us from a similar result as last year at the Lane. For the first time I can remember, I’m scared of playing Tottenham and writing that makes me sad!
Jimmy (Three-point lane no more) Sham

 

Choosing losing well over winning badly…
I thought I’d write in with something that I’ve been rolling around my mind for a while now. I read the mailbox pretty much every day and so have read countless emails this season, from Man United fans, that fall into two camps:

1) We are Godawful to watch and LVG needs to go.
2) We are winning and up near the top of the league so who cares.

It got me thinking about the following scenario and which I would prefer as a football fan. Would I prefer: a) To win the league with every game either being 1-0 or 0-0 or b) To come close to winning, playing exciting football but ultimately lose.

Don’t get me wrong, winning things is important. Football wins have given me some amazing highs (Champions League 2005) and losses has brought some crushing blows (the slip). However, entertainment has to come into it too. Otherwise what’s the point? For footballers, obviously they would choose option a). They get the glory, the plaudits, the medals and the money so it doesn’t matter to them how they win. But as a fan, I get none of these things. So it matters to me how the team plays. If I’m watching a match I want to actually enjoy it not sit there as my time grinds out a 1-0 win. I remember listening to a West Ham fan talk about Sam Allardyce. I said, “At least he will keep you in the league” to which he replied “Yes, but if we’re playing like this, why bother?” It wasn’t actually fun to watch, so again, what is the point?

I look back on the 2013/14 season and think of the sheer joy that I had that year. The 5-1 v Arsenal, 3-0 against United, 3-2 against City, 4-0 against Everton and watching an absolute master of the game in his prime was incredible. Yes, we lost the title that year but the memories of those games remain. I would guarantee I had more fun that year than some United or Chelsea fans have had in some of their title-winning years. Winning the league would have been fantastic, but for me it’s not the be all and end all. I have never, ever enjoyed football as much as that year.

There is obviously a caveat here. For underdogs, you care a lot less how you win. When Greece won Euro 2004, I’m sure their supporters didn’t care one bit that the football was physically painful to watch. If Scotland achieved even a basic level of success I wouldn’t give two hoots how we did it. But if you’re a ‘big club’ and you have the ability to craft an exciting team to watch, then surely that is what you would want. Otherwise why are you going?

A great manager once said football is much more important than life and death, but we all know that it isn’t. So do other fans agree? Am I in the minority? Which would you prefer: losing well or winning badly?
Mike, LFC, Dubai

 

Leicester do not have title-winning defence
Regarding Leicester City and their ability to win the league this season: of course they can. They are leading the way with a third of the season gone.

However I think the point that needs to be raised is that although they are sitting at the top of the league with the most goals scored, only six teams have conceded more than them. Those six teams occupy positions 15-20 at the moment (West Ham in sixth have also conceded 20).

Leicester have conceded an average of 1.5 goals a game. Carried over to a full season that equates to about 58 goals. To put that into perspective the highest any team has finished after conceding so many in the last five seasons is 9th (2010/11); last season it was 15th.

That being said Leicester are scoring an average of 2.2 goals a game, averaging out to 82 over a season. Only six teams in the last five seasons have scored more (no team scored more in 2010/11) and they all finished either first or second.

The biggest fear for Leicester has to be what if they go through a dry spell scoring-wise? Only three players have scored more than once in the league for them so far. United, City, Arsenal and Spurs all have strong defences. If they do struggle to score (like United all season) they know their defence is good enough that they won’t concede too many and so one goal will probably be enough to win them the game.

Vardy is on form this season and it’ll be interesting to see if he can get to 11 in a row, and possibly break the English record. But it bares repeating: forwards win you games, defences win you titles. That could be Leicester’s downfall.
Jerry, MUFC

 

No glass ceiling, only reality
I read Alexis Wolfe’s email with interest but I feel there is a bit the author got wrong. In order to win the Premier League a team needs five things (not necessarily in this order)

1. quality

2. quantity of quality

3. mental strength

4. luck

5. consistency

Liverpool’s run in the 13/14 season is a perfect example of teams bucking the ‘glass ceiling’ trend. If you were watching during that season and more importantly following F365 during that period, you would have witnessed the exact kind of cynicism to what you are seeing now with Leicester and Tottenham. As we all know Liverpool did not over come the trend because they didn’t have the quality (of manager) or the mental strength. (of players and manager)

The odds are stacked against Tottenham and Leicester because they are missing vital components in which their opponents posses. While all teams mentioned have quality City, Arsenal, and Manchester have the quantity of quality. Liverpool also have depth but to a lesser extent. Tottenham and Leicester have both been extremely lucky in injury department up until this point.

It is only November so we don’t know if Tottenham and Leicester have the mental strength. We know Mourinho, Klopp, Van Gaal, Pellegrini, and Wenger posses the mental strength to achieve because their CV shows that they have what it takes to be champions in the toughest leagues in the world. It is probably why those managers’ names were in the BBC poll.

If Leicester and Tottenham are still near the top at the beginning of March then we can revisit this topic. Looking at the quality and quantity of quality of the ‘elite’ teams and the quality of manager who lead them I would say Leicester and Tottenham will fall away.
Brian (While I appreciate Alexis assertion that ‘top/big four’ is no longer applicable because of Liverpool, I feel that only pertains to boost your argument as the rest of the football world no longer sees the Merseyside outfit as a significant threat. Before Klopp’s appointment that is) LFC

 

We don’t like those getting ideas above their station
The responses to Alexis Wolfe’s email
so far sum up perfectly the point s/he was making. The whole situation is reminiscent to the Class Sketch from the Frost Report – John Cleese represents the perennial top seven; Ronnie Barker represents the midtablers, the likes of Leicester, Southampton, Stoke, Swansea, West Ham and Crystal Palace; Ronnie Corbett represents everyone in the relegation battle, plus all the lower divisions.

The top seven look down on everyone else; the midtablers look up to the top seven, but down on the lower teams; the lower teams get a pain in the back of their neck.

While the original sketch was mainly a bit of height-based silliness, it did satirise the attitudes from each social class from one to another, and never are these prejudices stronger than when someone moves up the social ladder, or ‘gets ideas above their station’. It happened with Stoke, whose unreconstructed roughhousery was not supposed to help them to mid-table, but it did and they are better for it; Crystal Palace were too lightweight to stay up at first; Leicester top the table currently, but fans of the big sides are keen to slap them down. Conversely, Liverpool are still considered one of the big teams, even though their recent seasons (two years ago excepted) have had them firmly in mid-table.

Leicester may not have faced many Champions League sides yet, but they have played and beaten teams who have posed problems for, or given a bloody nose to, those sides. I know this sounds a bit like conkers, but my point is they have beaten some tricky opposition, so facing a (fellow) title challenger will not be the foregone conclusion some people think.

Finally, thanks Alexis, for provoking an interesting discussion. Makes a nice change from Arsenal’s lack of defensive midfield, Manchester United’s underperforming captain, and someone going on and on about Crystal Palace.

Regards,
The literary Ed Quoththeraven

 

It’s all about the result
Jo – for the football media the adage ‘you’re only as good as your last result’ is the beginning, middle and end of sports reporting. They (and much of the general public) are incapable of looking past the last game, or envisioning the change of any current trajectory, so reporting must follow this line of thought to be seen as credible.

So from every game new conclusions must be drawn, new things (five, specifically) must be learned and above all new narratives must be constructed. Five weeks ago Arsenal beat Bayern; it’s back on! Then they lose badly; no wait, it’s off again! Then another good win and you guessed it, back on. Despite the fact that if you assumed three points from the two home games v Olympiakos and Bayern their prospects are unchanged since the loss to Zagreb.

It’s this short-termist perspective which sees ‘unbeaten in four’ change to ‘one win in five’ overnight, and incidentally also why much of the media are deeply suspicious of statistics, what with their long term trend analysis-y hocus pocus.

After last Saturday Liverpool and Klopp are very much on the UP side of the board so all the talk is of fine starts and sequences of wins. But fail to beat Swansea and watch it go straight to ‘still can’t manage an Anfield win’.
JG LFC (see also: premature writing off of new/young players)

 

Fanmail for Graham Simons…
‘We’re actually not in too bad shape at all so long as we get some players back from injury and are still in the mix following the Christmas round of games.’

‘You laud Everton’s youngsters and ask whether Spurs can win the title and yet both clubs sit below a side with seven players out that’s only two points off top spot.’

Potentially the two most typical Arsenal supporter quotes I have ever heard.

You won’t get them back from injury though will you?

Having an extended injury crisis at Arsenal is just standard practice now. It always has been and always will be. Wenger just keeps faith with too many players who spend large amounts of time injured. Wilshere, Rosicky, Diaby, Ramsey, Arteta Gibbs, Oxlade-Chamberlain, Walcott and they have even gone one step further now and actually purchased a perma-crock in Welbeck.

Arsenal will always be the nearly men unless Wenger finds a way to keep more than 15 players fit at a time or gets rid of people like Wilshere and Walcott who can’t play 20 games a year. They play great football and are a very good side but they will always have their bad spells because their playing pool usually decreased with injuries. Those bad spells are what will cost them silverware.
Dan, Ireland MUFC

 

…Your rather pathetic mail complaining to the teacher that the big bad press were picking on your best mate Arsenal was very entertaining. However you may sway more people to your ‘Arsenal are doing alrite’ kinda thinking if you hadn’t qualified your remarks with this…

‘We’re actually not in too bad shape at all so long as we get some players back from injury and are still in the mix following the Christmas round of games.’

So Arsenal won’t be completely sh*t as long as the injury crisis stops being a crisis and you win the same points as your rivals. Sounds like the press are spot on.

Also, Jo, the only logical conclusion to draw from your mail is that you’re only able to draw one logical conclusion at a time and it’s wrong.
Dave, Manchester

 

Newsflash
I don’t know if you’ve heard, but Arsenal have a few injuries. I’m surprised no Arsenal fans have written in to tell us all about them…
Jim (not injured) London

 

Actually, Grealish deserves stick
I have to say I think F365 & Mediawatch are being a bit too lenient on Jack Grealish. You excuse his behaviour on the grounds that he is a young guy, which is only true to an extent. He’s not just a young guy, he is a professional athlete who gets paid an absolute fortune. He has an obligation to conduct himself in a certain manner. He is not a non-league player on £60 a week. The money he gets paid is deemed to make up for the lack of privacy and restrictions placed on his lifestyle.

Six days is not that far from another game, especially when you have just been tanked four nil. Going out for a meal and a quiet drink is fine, as you said he doesn’t have to be housebound but being plastered all over the papers is not the actions of a professional who takes his job seriously, you don’t see many other young players doing it. Before you say it’s not his fault that he ended up in the papers, it is. He chooses who keeps company with and he chooses where goes and what he does.

He is a high-profile representative of the club. He has a responsibility to his club and the fans to act professionally/respectfully. If he doesn’t play well then no doubt this will be dredged up again and again, and he has nobody to blame but himself.

If I was a Villa fan I would be seriously annoyed.
Dan, Ireland MUFC

 

George on his feet
On the anniversary of his untimely death, it is worth revisiting George Best’s talent on YouTube, where there are many video montages. One thing to look out for is the number of times he dived, or fell over at the merest of touches, rather than going on to try and score. It is never. Not once. Watch him fight to stay on his feet to complete a run. This was at a time when referees did not blow to protect players. A time when Ron Chopper Harris, Jack Charlton, Norman Hunter, Peter Storey and many others were employed as stoppers. George loved taking the p*** out of them, and he did that best by beating them and scoring. Would that modern players were as brave and committed. Go and have a look.
Tim McKane

 

Why Cannavaro won the Ballon
The main reason Cannavaro won the Ballon D’Or was very obviously his immense effort in a Italy’s winning World Cup tournament. It’s not something he would likely have won if they’d gone out in the semis, or perhaps even if he’d lost the final. He was particularly eye-catching, seeming to challenge pretty much every ball that came into the defensive area.

I reckon that he took a decision to challenge every single ball himself after Nesta got injured, because the alternative was leaving one up to Materazzi.

It happened to work out alright, and he didn’t end up exposing himself while doing the work of two. But I don’t think he’d have been half as eye-catching – or earned the Ballon D’Or- if Nesta had stayed fit.
Andrew, Ireland

 

Icon suggestions
I absolutely love your profile of an icon articles, but for some reason your piece on Cannavaro left me somewhat disappointed. As good as he was, your article on him didn’t really strike a chord like your previous ones on Baggio, Bobby Robson and Batistuta (the one on Bobby Robson was a sublime piece of writing). Perhaps it was because he’s such a recent memory for me and I’ve watched him play a fair bit. I don’t know.

If you are taking requests, please could you go a little further back in time? I’m not requesting necessarily Pele and Maradona, because they would be the obvious choices that perhaps you want to avoid. How about players like Socrates or Eusebio or a manager like Brian Clough?
Benji