Harry Kane is valued at nothing for the purposes of narrative while two defeats in 25 means it’s all going wrong for Thomas Tuchel.
Kane and unable
Usually Monday’s Mediawatch doesn’t bother itself with the Sunday newspapers but sometimes, an example comes along which we simply cannot ignore. On this occasion, it’s the Mail on Sunday blithely valuing Harry Kane at zero pounds and zero pence because, well, narrative. We know he has been shite this season but…
Now Mediawatch does not subscribe to the notion that the media is anti-Arsenal but we do know that the media is anti-massive-gaps-in-their-c0verage-because-they-had-allocated-several-pages-to-the-north-London-derby. It’s the sort of thinking that leads to 16 Conclusions on a postponement, after all.
The Mail on Sunday were not the only newspaper to lose their sh*t about yet another postponement this weekend but they were the only newspaper to claim that Arsenal could have still played a team ‘worth’ more than an almost-full-strength Tottenham. This takes some pretty impressive contortion.
A closer look at the starting XI the Mail on Sunday think Arsenal should have played against Spurs pic.twitter.com/8L9YJSbl34
— Daily Cannon (@DailyCannon) January 16, 2022
Yes, that’s Kane said to be ‘worth’ exactly the same as Arsenal’s Charlie Patino. Had they made it clear they were talking about transfer fees then that would have been factually accurate – though ludicrous – so instead they talked about ‘worth’ and just hoped that nobody would notice that they have valued every Academy graduate at zero.
Some may question playing Pablo Mari at right-back and Patino as a winger but those are mere details; the real fun is in the ridiculousness of those valuations. Daily Cannon did the research and actually, that Spurs side is worth around £100m more, and that’s according to transfermarkt‘s mysteriously low valuations which list Kane at £90m. That’s certainly not what Manchester City were told last summer.
You can think that there has been a ‘gaming of the rules’ in this postponement and others – largely thanks to the Premier League’s opaque rules – but pretending that you can get Kane for the square root of f*** all is a complete and utter nonsense.
Anybody get the impression that The Sun‘s Graeme Bryce may have got just a tad carried away?
‘IF RALF RANGNICK did not realise it before, he sure as hell knows it now.
‘A state of Martial law exists at Manchester United.
‘That is when civil law and appointed leaders are replaced by the military meant to serve them.
‘It is usually invoked in times of war, rebellion or natural disaster – take your pick which best applies to United.’
Alternatively, United are an underperforming football team who have nevertheless lost only one of their last 12 games so remain in the Champions League, the FA Cup and five points adrift of a top-four place with two games in hand.
Pass the buck
Odd how on Thursday the Mirror website told us that ‘Ralf Rangnick risks further Man Utd unrest with stubborn transfer decision’ as they pretended that any (negative) transfer decisions were down to the German.
By Monday, ‘John Murtough’s top three transfer targets emerge as Man Utd plan for new regime’.
It’s curious how it’s now Murtough in charge of transfers when supposedly positive plans are being made. Will responsibility be passed back to Rangnick if they all fall through?
Tuchel = Lampard now
But move over Manchester United because we have a new crisis club in town – Champions League holders and Carabao Cup finalists Chelsea.
Cynics might suggest that long-time Frank Lampard supporter Matt Law of the Daily Telegraph was waiting for a Chelsea defeat to start raising red flags about Thomas Tuchel’s reign. If that’s the case, he has been waiting impatiently for about six weeks as the Blues were struggling through a disastrous 11-match unbeaten run before travelling away to the champions-elect.
Indeed, Chelsea have now lost twice in 25 games so it’s definitely time to start wondering if much has really changed for the European champions in the 12 months since Bambi was so cruelly shot.
‘Problems with a big signing, a slump in form and results, and cut adrift of the Premier League leaders. Sound familiar, Chelsea fans? That’s because it is.’
Yes, because being third with 43 points from 22 games is eerily similar to being ninth with 29 points from 19 games. And being one point behind second-placed Liverpool is the same as being five points behind fourth-placed Liverpool.
History is definitely repeating itself.
‘When Chelsea were soundly beaten by Leicester City almost a year ago to the day, in what proved to be Frank Lampard’s final game in charge, the west London side had dropped 19 points over the course of 12 games. Fast forward 12 months and Saturday’s defeat to Manchester City meant Tuchel’s Chelsea have now dropped 18 points over their past 12 games in the Premier League.’
All factually correct and there is clearly something not quite right at Chelsea, but there’s take another entirely accurate timeframe and re-write that paragraph:
When Chelsea were soundly beaten by Leicester City almost a year ago to the day, in what proved to be Frank Lampard’s final game in charge, the west London side had lost five of their last eight Premier League games. Fast forward 12 months and Saturday’s defeat to Manchester City meant Tuchel’s Chelsea have now lost two of their last eight games in the Premier League.
Doesn’t sound quite so much like deja vu now, right? Factor in a Carabao Cup final and it’s hard to argue that Chelsea are in a similar position a year later.
It has been undoubtedly disappointing that Premier League title challenge has not materialised and ‘they have now fallen 13 points behind leaders City as the German’s first anniversary at the club approaches’ but Chelsea are still clearly strides ahead of where they were a year ago.
But Law is not only highlighting a slump in results…
‘Any Chelsea manager will find himself in trouble if his side are mid-table, no matter how temporarily, but there were other factors at play in Lampard’s sacking. The two big signings of the previous summer, Kai Havertz and Timo Werner, were struggling while there had been fall-outs with big characters such as Antonio Rudiger and Marcos Alonso.
‘A year later, Chelsea seem to be stuck in a familiar pattern. This time, Romelu Lukaku is the big-money signing who cannot seem to show his best form in a blue shirt and it is the Belgian with whom the latest head coach does not appear to see eye-to-eye.’
So now we are to believe that problems with four players under Lampard is equal to Tuchel’s obvious issue with one player?
Spooky? Or just a big old lump of bias?