Taken for Granted: Weekend Observations 14th - 15th January 2011: Part One

Saturday saw Manchester City beat Wolves 4-3 and finally hit the dizzy heights of the top of the Premier League (albeit for a mere 24 hours) ahead of their crosstown rivals. However, what at one point what looked like an emphatic ascension to the summit turned out to be quite a nervy stumble over the finish line as the blues took their foot off the proverbial pedal whilst cruising at 4-1, almost allowing Mick McCarthy's side to come away from Eastlands with an unlikely draw.

The usually resolute City defence had VERY bad day at the office in a very unMancini-like performance. I've always said that winning the league, for any team, will require defensive solidity and stability. It would be going too far to suggest that the City backline is looking questionable but let's not ignore the fact that in their last league game at Arsenal, they looked far from secure in the opening exchanges and were it not for the home side's innate profligacy, Kolo and the boys would have been dead and burried before half time. In fact, this weekend's match was not dissimilar in style to the kind of matches overlooked by Mark Hughes last season. The epic draw against Burnley being a prime example.

It's hard not to be patronising or to resort to tedious 'never say die' cliches when talking about Wolves but what else can be said about their performance? A great first half display wasn't justly rewarded and as the home side almost found to their cost, Wolves also finished the game strong. Few would have begrudged them an equaliser had it come. They fully contributed to the most entertaining game of the weekend.

The highlight of an eventful game was the mazy run and finish by Carlos Tevez for his pant-wettingly brilliant first goal. With all the recent talk of unhappiness, homesickness and general moaning about life, other players would have wilted and you imagine many failing to maintain anything close to high standards on the pitch. Carlitos has been as effective for his team when smiling (a horrible sight!) as he is when doing his best Mr. Grumpy impression. If only his teammates "cough" Emmanuel Adebayor "cough, cough!" would adopt anything like the same sort of attitude.

The rest of the Man City attack also performed brilliantly despite the absense of messes Silva and Balotelli – a good response after all the criticism they faced for a percieved lack of ambition after the Arsenal game. The highlights gave the impression that 27 million pound man Edin Dzeko looked lively enough to suggest that he won't be out of place in the Premier League and that I might just find myself eating my words once more.


In what many are desperately trying to convince themselves is the most exciting title race for years and years and and years, third placed, no-title-for-seven-years Arsenal are keeping pace and enhanced their credentials with a rather convincing 3-0 hammering of... er, the hammers of West Ham. The ruthlessness and ease with which they dispatched of the East Londeners provided something of a fine response to the previous week's cup humiliations.

Any football fan watching could surely not help but be impressed by the fluidity of the passing and movement in midfield but what will please gooners most was the impact of part-time striker, part-time first aid dummy Robin Van Persie. The Dutchman continues delight with his ability as much as he frustrates with his constant injuries. Can he stay fit? Imagine the impact he could have on Arsenal's title challenge if he does. But as is always the same old story with Arsenal, the question is: IF?! Next week, they will probably drop points at home to Wigan and find themselves in 'crisis' again.

One team certainly in a genuine state of something resembling a crisis is the side Arsenal the put to the sword without breaking any sort of sweat. Rumours were abound all weekend that the West Ham board were about ready to get shot of the world's happiest man, Avram Grant and replace him with a man who already has claret and blue paraphernalia in abundance, former Aston Villa boss Martin O'Neill. There has been a subsequent denial/show of support/vote of confidence from the club.

In truth, is it really fair to use a defeat against a side with title aspirations as an excuse to dump Avram? Recent results (the Newcastle massacre aside) would suggest something of an improvement in their fortunes. Bringing in a new manager at this point will surely just cause chaos in the changing room as a bunch of, let's face it, limited players try to adapt to a new way of thinking.

Besides, while admittedly achieving relative success at Wycombe and then Leicester, O'Neill's 'big' jobs at Celtic and Villa have involved something of a dependancy of being able to spend money. Something you cannot imagine he will be able to do at cash strapped West Ham. Is he a better manager that Grant? Almost certainly but you have to wonder if he could do any better with this current squad than the diminutive Israeli. You could argue that O'Neill would only damage his reputation by taking the Irons job. Keeping them up would be his minimum requirement and if he failed to do that he would be crucified.



However, if Grant had anything to do with the signing of Wayne Bridge, then that in itself is a sackable offence. What a shocker of a debut! The (thankfully) former England International was at some fault for all three Arsenal goals before putting the cherry on the cake by limping off injured before full time. People have suggested that he hasn't played much football recently and was rusty but whose fault is that? Bridge has been happy to sit on the bench at not one but TWO clubs for a number of years collecting a massive pay cheque and contributing the sum total of diddly squat. Bridge was SO bad that on Match of the Day, Alan Hansen who usually loves ridiculing poor defenders couldn't even be bothered to stick the boot in and so left him to Alan Shearer. When you have a striker and someone as dull as Shearer taking the piss out of your defending, maybe it's time to seek out a new career.

It wasn't a disastrous weekend for West Ham as almost all the teams in close proximity to them at the foot of the table failed to win their respective matches. The exception being West Brom who picked up a much needed and hard fought 3-2 win against a Blackpool side that continue to look at home in Premier League. Despite the loss, David Vaughan's opening goal for the tangerines was up there with some of the best at this level. Charlie Adam also displayed the kind of form that suggests there should be little surprise about the interest shown by other Premier League teams. If the likes of Steve Sidwell, Denilson, Keith Andrews, Lee Cattermole and Lucas can hold down careers at this level, then why not Adam?

Also down bottom, Fulham drew 1-1 at Wigan in a match where I was genuinely surprised to find out that Whites' goalscorer (in the loosest sense of the word) Andrew Johnson still existed.

For weeks I suggested Chelsea were going through a minor blip and would bounce back. The second I flip this and say that they might struggle to make the top four and their manager is in the firing line they decide to pick up the most routine of 2-0 victories over Blackburn. It is, how you say? Law of the sod. Branislav Ivanović, who opened the scoring showed footballers the world over the importance of shooting because the opposition defence may end up being just as abject as Rovers. Honestly, his shot seemed to have crept past the entire population of Blackburn as it trickled over the line! Speaking of whom, the Lancs club continued to make headlines for moments of sheer comedy by hiring former Arsenal barn door protector John Jensen as a coach. Given his almost tragic goalscoring record at Highbury, Rovers fans the world over will be hoping he isn't coaching their strikers.

Mind you his Only Arsenal goal wasn't that bad


Part Two to Follow...

TEAM IBYSS - Weekend Observations 27th-28th February 2010 pt.1

Lots to talk about this week...

Not that type of player? - They never are.

I'm certain you've read the countless articles and opinions on the shocking incident at the Britannia on Saturday. Indeed, more learned people than myself have eulogised and dedicated countless column inches to 'the tackle' but I feel it would be remiss of me to ignore it without providing some kind of comment so bare with me.

For the record, I genuinely believe that Ryan Shawcross didn't mean to break Aaron Ramsay's leg. It was a heavy touch followed by a reckless swing. Ramsay's touch was too quick and the Stoke man got his timing all wrong. However, Shawcross knew exactly where Ramsey was and knew all the risks of flying in like the proverbial steam train. He may not have deliberately broken his leg but in no way was the challenge an 'accident'. There may not have been intent but there was certainly excessive force.



Whether you mean it of not, if you're making tackles that result in an opposition player's leg hanging in obtuse angles then you cannot deny the dangers involved in your actions and should be punished accordingly. If you break someone's leg with a reckless tackle that fails to win the ball, whether you meant to or not, you deserve a red card. I wont use the example of the careful driver who jumps a red light once and kills someone 'not being that sort of driver' because I'm sure you've read it elsewhere. Wait a second...

Naturally, Arsene Wenger was displeased post-match and his comments have somehow come under more scrutiny that Ramsey's injury. It's a shame that people cant put their petty football rivalries, racism and bias to one side and would rather slate Wenger than focus on the issue at hand. Are Arsenal targeted? You'd be a fool to argue otherwise. There are countless examples of managers and players publicly stating that being over-physical and 'bullying' the frail Gunners is the best way to beat them.



He also has about the countless compound injuries suffered by his players not being a coincidence. Opposition players don't set out to break legs but they are certainly less mindful when they come up against Wenger's team.

This makes a sham of the ridiculous 'he's not that sort of player' rubbish spouted out immediately following incidents such as these. I don't doubt Ryan 'The Angel' Shawcross loves his mum, gave half his earnings to the fund for this weekend's earthquake in Chile and volunteers at the homeless shelter every Tuesday but when he crossed that white line on Saturday and made sure poor Ramsey wont be walking without assistance for the coming year, he became that sort of player. Even if it was just for 30 seconds. Why? Because of the aforementioned belief that he needs to 'get in the faces' of the admittedly more timid Arsenal players. (incidentally, I'll leave to you to judge whether he is that sort of player or not)

Surely if someone who 'isn't that sort of player' causes such horrific damage then that backs up Wenger's point that his team are singled out for 'special treatment'. I don't agree that they play the so-called 'best football' but they are undoubtedly blessed with a number of technically gifted footballers who also happen to be smaller and lacking 'muscle'. As such, a player's psyche is undoubtedly conditioned to go in harder against Arsenal's tricky softies and bully them into submission.

Deliberate or not, I don't believe for a second that Shawcross is making that sort of tackle against other 'good footballing' sides like Man Utd, Chelsea, Spurs or City is he?

Don't get me wrong, I love a good physical game as much as the next man but when these sort of injuries become a regular occurrence, it's not 'part and partial of the game' like some would like you believe, but a major problem. There's a difference between being hard and being downright violent. If we continue to foster this aggressive 'man and ball' mentality to football challenges then more of these injuries will occur and 'The Best League in the World' will see some of it's best stars fleeing these shores for fear of being crippled.

All the best to Ramsey and here's to a swift recovery by the way.


Shake Rattle and Roll (I think all the Bridge related puns have been exhausted haven't they?)

The other main talking point from the weekend that cannot be ignored was the on-going soap opera in West London. I was thinking we could call it 'The Bridge' (Ok, one more).

For those of you who were living under a rock with your eyes shut and fingers in your ears, John Terry did naughty things with the baby-mother of his former team mate and good friend Wayne Bridge. This all came out in the press and Terry was stripped of the England captaincy as a result. Bridge, having moved to Man City before the scandal broke, recently made himself unavailable for future England selection. Quite understandable that he doesn't want to be anywhere around Terry but as luck would have it, Man City were scheduled to face Terry's Chelsea this weekend. The world went crazy, not over how they would fare against each other during the game, but rather whether they would conduct the customary handshake before kick off.



They did not.

Or rather, Bridge refused. Well done lad.

For the record, I think the pre-match handshake is a contrived and pointless ritual.


Team Tevez? Team Bellamy???

One of the most embarrassing facets of the whole saga was the way people felt the need to declare the support for either of the two protagonists in question with the cringe worthy TEAM BRIDGE vs TEAM TERRY t-shirts, banners, facebook groups and whatever else.

For anyone keeping score, or those that actually care about football rather than handshakes, the most exciting game (well, second half) of the season took place as the battle of the chav lottery winners went the way of City thanks to a brace each from Craig Bellamy and Carlos Tevez (I'm firmly in Team Tevez by the way). Lampard also bagged a couple for Chelsea as the score finished 4-2 to the away team. In keeping with the freaky nature of everything coming in 2's, 'the bloos' also had 2 men sent off. As for the two men at the centre of it all, Bridge put in an professional but unspectacular performance while Terry's recent poor form continued as he was partly at fault for at least one of the City goals. Some would say he was guilty of some TERRYble defending. Others might blame the HILARIOus goalkeeping.

After the game, Craig Bellamy hilariously stuck the boot in on Terry.



MEEEOW!

Yes, the irony was not lost on me either.... nor apparently John Terry.

A word on Chelsea fans, following 'handshake-snub-gate', some of the Stamford Bridge faithful decided to boo Wayne Bridge for the simple crime of having his best mate sleep with his ex-girlfriend. The nerve of the man. One would think he hadn't provided them with one of the greatest moments in the limited history of the club.




Part Two to follow...

Trials and Terry-bulations

Only one thing to talk about really. It turns out that England Captain and self proclaimed natural born leader John Terry has been alleged to have been playing away from home in more than just the football sense. I'm sure you've read in countless other places exactly what I'm talking about. Ordinarily, a footballer cheating on his wife is about as surprising as an Aston Villa long ball and if anyone was ever looking at 'Jay Tee' as a beacon of moral guidance they need their head examined. But for a number of reasons this particular incident is just that little bit more juicy and seems to transcend beyond the usual tabloid hysteria to a point where it raises a number vaguely interesting discussion points.

John Terry has never been whiter than white. An odious human being with a rap sheet as long as my arm. Allegations about pissing in public, parking in disabled bays and most recently his special guided tours are just the norm for the man. It wouldn't be fair to attribute the alleged misdemeanours of both his mum AND dad to him but let's be honest, a bad apple never really falls far from the tree does it? Many wonder why he is entrusted with the responsibility of leading the England team. Regardless of his football ability (something itself that divides the opinion of the the football watching public) there is a belief in some quarters that he is the only person with the required footballing 'leadership qualities' to do the job. But when stories like this and the above-mentioned break, the debate then becomes about whether he is morally equipped or rather if he even needs to be.

Footballers are under no obligation to be role models. I think that should be made clear. They are professionals like anyone else who are doing a job. They aren't teachers nor are they social workers. They are not in some mentoring programme and they have never claimed that they are setting an example that others should follow. However, They cannot deny that as footballers, they cannot escape the public eye and there are people out there (wont someone pleeeeease think of the children?!?!?!) that will look up to them and therefore they should be aware of their responsibilities. Their public personas are open to such intense scrutiny thanks to the privileged position they find themselves so I don't think it's too much to expect that they would at least attempt to act with some kind of decorum.

Many have said that what Mr. Terry gets up to in his private life should be kept private. After all, there was no crime committed by his actions. But like Tiger Woods before him, John Terry is less an individual and more a 'brand' or representative of his sponsors, his football club and as he is captain, his country too! His questionable moral choices therefore become the interest of those he is said to represent. This is the reason why his 'superinjuction' was overturned faster than a dirty bed sheet in the Bridges' Bedroo...

Anyway, the main fallout of this whole messy situation is whether Mr. Terry should remain England captain. I believe that regardless of public opinion and what the media say, it is all dependent on whether his actions have his actions affected him as a leader or his team mates around him. If it was the case that any of them were to take the moral high ground and there was friction within the camp, for example, If the likes of Rio Ferdinand and Wayne Rooney were to turn around and suggest they wouldn't listen to nor can they respect John Terry then there's no possible way he can continue as captain. If players started refusing call ups out of respect for Bridge then Terry's position is untenable. However, I feel sympathy for Bridge because of the fickle nature of his colleagues. As I said above, in terms of players WITHOUT indiscretions in that team, you could probably fit their names on the back of a used condom wrapper. Don Fabio's decision (or Terry's if he is to take responsibility) will be based primarily on the other players and I personally don't think they are either smart or concerned enough to stand up and speak out about the fact the man that leads them out onto the pitch cheated on his wife and mother of his children by having an ongoing affair and unprotected sex with the mother of one of his so-called friend's - and teammate's - child. Allegedly!

For the players, England's World Cup dream is far more important than Bridge's feelings (The 'Bro Code' has never been treated with so much disdain...) and no two-bit scrubber who cant keep her legs shut is not going to change that.



Naturally, at CSKA Fulham fans have come out in support of Terry showing once and for all the ignorant and irrational behaviour that comes with supporting a football team. When the direction of the pin in your moral compass is dictated by the football team you support then you really need to take a good long hard look at yourself. I guess wrecking the lives of others is not enough for some people to have a conscience as long as 'tha bloos' are winning, right?