Euro 2008 is coming up, and predictably, with England not in it, the spotlight has once again come down on the perceived lack of English players in the Premiership. In an article which shows just how statistics can be warped, the BBC claims a ‘dramatic slide’ in those available to Capello.

They begin the article with a graph, showing how the number of English starters has changed over the last eight years. Here it is:

Looks pretty dramatic, doesn’t it? Except when you look closely, you’ll notice that there only appears to be a big drop because of the scale used, with the number of players only ranging from 160 to 208 on the axis. I distinctly remember being taught at school that graphs should not be exaggerated in this way.

But let’s look at the numbers. Five years ago, the number of English starters was 179. This season, 170. Hardly a dramatic drop, nine players in five years. In fact, this year’s drop comes off the back of four years of climbing, despite what the Daily Mail would tell you about ‘forriners taking ah jobs’.

All this completely misses the point. 170 English players is plenty, Capello needs a small fraction of those. It doesn’t matter if there used to be 500 (there never were, incidentally), it isn’t the best players that are missing out, it is those that were never good enough to get near the national side anyway. Those that remain should benefit from playing with quality rather than substandard leftovers.

For England to be successful, the top twenty or so need to be of a high quality, and performing as a team. The former is aptly demonstrated by the fact that there were ten English players in the Champions League final, and the latter is Capello’s job.

There are no excuses. If England fail, it is not the fault of the clubs, it is the fault of the players (who are good enough), and the management team. No-one else.

 

Liverpool 4 (Hyypia 30, Torres 69, Gerrard pen 86, Babel 90) Arsenal 2 (Diaby 13, Adebayor 84)

Twenty four hours on, the feeling of complete injustice hasn’t gone away, after a tie that swung both ways in an enthralling match, and was ultimately decided by the softest of soft penalties. Last week Hleb was clearly tugged down, this week Babel went down with Toure trying to get out of the way behind him, and after minimal contact. One was a stonewall penalty, one was absolutely not. And the wrong one was given.

It had all started so well – the first twenty minutes saw Arsenal at their irresistable best, and for once, there was even a goal to show for the dominance, Diaby smashing home after a wonderful passing move. Even Eboue was looking neat and tidy on the right. The control lasted for half an hour, and then for the third time in as many games, Liverpool scored a simple goal against the run of play.

It was a cheap corner to give away, but floated in fairly harmlessly, before Senderos completely lost Hyypia who powered an excellent header into the top corner. Credit to Hyypia, it was a clever run and superb finish, but Senderos should’ve done much better.

Confidence seeped out of Arsenal, and before half time Flamini was forced off with what looked like an Achilles injury. Gilberto came on, and the midfield lost some fluency.

The second half was frenetic, but very few chances were being created until a moment of magic from Torres swung the balance towards Liverpool, turning Senderos and firing past a helpless Almunia. Much as people want to criticise Phil for the goal, it isn’t one that blame can easily be attached to – Torres’ movement was just too quick. Not that hard facts will stop the anti-Senderos bandwagon that has been rumbling on some time.

Van Persie and Walcott came on, and suddenly Liverpool were looking nervous. Adebayor sliced wide when through, and then with seven minutes to go, the moment arrived that should’ve been all over the morning papers today – Walcott picked up the ball on the edge of his own penalty area, stormed up the field on his own, beating five Liverpool players in the process, before squaring for Adebayor to tap home. Such was the panic his run had caused in the defence, we had three players lining up to tuck away his cross.

That would’ve been a glorious way to finish the tie – an Englishman (the press missed that particular point) coming of age on the biggest stage, and finally putting Liverpool out. It was not to be. A minute later, Babel ran into the box before inexplicably going down in a heap, there was minimal contact and certainly no foul from Toure, but this was Anfield and this was the Kop. There was a certain inevitability about the awarding of the spot kick, especially after such a blatant one had been ignored in the first leg. Gerrard tucked it away comfortably.

Babel scored a breakaway fourth in injury time, as the ITV commentators once again lost grip of reality, claiming that it ‘made the penalty not matter anymore’. Really? I somehow doubt that at 2-2, leading on away goals, and exhausted Cesc would’ve been the only Arsenal player in his own half in injury time. Honestly, these ‘experts’ don’t half talk rubbish.

To make matters worse, they were criticising Arbeloa after the game for not accepting a booking by deliberately hauling Walcott down on the half way line during his stunning run. What advocates they are – witnessing one of the finest games of the season, played in an excellent spirit by both teams, and they’re promoting deliberate and cynical fouling to the nation. Take a bow, you idiots.

When the final whistle went, there was a disbelief in Wenger’s eyes, mirrored on the faces of the Arsenal fans who had made the trip. Much the better side in the first leg, they got the away goal in a dominant opening spell in the return, then the second away goal when it mattered, and yet somehow Liverpool snatched it away again.

The papers are all trying to claim that Wenger solely blamed the ref for the defeat, which is ridiculous because he was specifically not doing that, saying that although the penalty was a gift these things have to be accepted. He’s right, but it doesn’t make it any less galling that the goal that won the tie should never have been scored. Had the correct calls been made in both legs, Liverpool would almost certainly be out now.

But what mustn’t be forgotten is that Liverpool scored five times in the tie. The referee may have gifted them goal number four, and indirectly the fifth that came at the end, but the first three goals were legitimate, and they had something else in common – they were all avoidable, especially Hyypia’s last night and Kuyt’s in the first leg.

Without those defensive lapses, the poor standard of officiating wouldn’t have mattered. Does that make it any less infuriating that we feel so robbed today? Of course not, but it does point towards the action that needs to be taken in the summer. This isn’t a call for drastic squad changes, as we’ve seen so much good stuff this season, but the depth isn’t there. Small tweaks, Arsene.

I’m usually one for optimism, but even I’m not going to claim that we’re still in the title race, no matter what Wenger wants his players to believe. United will have their stars rested for Sunday, as they left some big names out tonight, so it seems like a good time to give the fringe players a game – are exhausted and deflated first teamers likely to get a better result that hungry fresher reserves?

It’s time to build for next season now. But for all the disappointments of the past couple of months, this one has been much more like it. Don’t forget that.

 

One thing that infuriates me when watching a match is when the commentator or analyst starts to spout complete garbage that it so blatantly wrong that you wonder how no-one is shutting them up.

Repeating these idiocies over and over often makes me reach for the mute button.

Take Tuesday night’s game. Throughout the second half, we heard repeatedly, ‘If Sevilla win this game, Arsenal can only win the group if Sevilla lose their final match’.

No.

If Sevilla draw, and Arsenal win, Arsenal win the group. It’s not that hard to work out, given that in that circumstance, both teams would’ve achieved exactly the same results in their games, Arsenal winning the head to head battle on goal difference. But over and over again they insisted that a draw would be good enough for Sevilla, which it quite blatantly wouldn’t.

It got even worse elsewhere. Rangers began the night one point ahead of Lyon, but having won 3-0 in France the Scots held the head to head advantage.

Throughout the night, Lyon kept falling behind and equalising. Rangers also kept falling behind and equalising. The upshot of this was that Rangers were sometimes level with Lyon, sometimes still one point ahead, and sometimes two points ahead.

The commentators went on and on about how each goal was either fantastic news or a complete disaster. In truth, they mattered not one jot.

Lyon and Rangers square off in the final match. If Rangers win or draw, they go through. If Lyon win, they go through. The scorelines on Tuesday never changed that. I couldn’t care less whether Rangers were one or two points ahead by the end of the night, and frankly, neither could they – they lose, and they’re still out.

This inability to see the bigger picture is not an affliction that only affects ITV. In last night’s Liverpool game, they kept on insisting, after the match, that Liverpool’s win gives them a much better chance of qualifying than if they’d drawn.

Really?

When both Liverpool and Marseille were level, Marseille were holding a three point lead, meaning Liverpool had to win the final game against them to go through.

Liverpool then took the lead, cutting the gap to one point, leaving them…..still needing to beat Marseille. A ‘crucial goal’, the commentators claimed.

And then the final bit of ‘good news’ – Marseille conceded a late goal, so both sides ended the night level of points. With Marseille leading the head to head battle, this series of events left Liverpool, erm, still needing a win.

So none of those ‘wonderful news’ goals made the slightest difference.

Sometimes I wonder what these clowns are paid for.

 

I’ve officially had enough of the offside debate. Week after week we hear complaints from various managers, including our own, about goals being given when the striker was millimetres offside. We have analysts examining the footage frame by frame to conclude that the linesman (sorry, referee’s assistant) should’ve flagged.

Nine times out of ten, they shouldn’t have.

Law 11 covers the offside rule quite clearly, and the additional guideline is given that if the linesman is unsure, the benefit of the doubt must be given to the attacking team. To put it another way, as it seems certain ‘experts’ miss this crucial point, if there is any doubt in the linesman’s mind that the striker is offside, then he must keep his flag down.

Barcelona scored a fractionally offside goal in the Champions League final. Chelsea scored a fractionally offside goal in the Carling Cup final. You’ll never hear me complain about either goal. Both were crucial decisions, and the match analysts said the linesmen made mistakes on both occasions. Those analysts are wrong.

Often, an offside call is made when a striker is bending his run towards goal, while the defender quickly steps out in the opposite direction. In a split second, the striker will be metres offside, and the linesman has the impossible task of judging where the two were in relation to each other at the exact moment the ball was played. To make matters worse, if the pass was from distance, chances are he’ll spend that split second turning his head towards the pair, to see the striker running away and the defender’s arm in the air.

Now let’s remind ourselves of that rule. If the linesman isn’t sure, he must not flag offside. Now common sense dictates that a judgement call has to be made here. If the striker is, in the mind of the linesman, too far ahead to have not been offside, he’ll flag, and rightly so. But it’s the close calls that irritate me. I am fed up of seeing Jamie Redknapp on Sky using frame by frame technology to tell us that the striker was 27cm offside (about 0.05 seconds of play if the defender is stepping out), and therefore that the flag should’ve gone up.

Jamie Redknapp. Andy Gray. You are part of the problem. Read the rules.

In those circumstances, there is no way that a linesman can know whether the player was offside. So they should keep the flag down.

Offside goals are hard to accept for any fan or manager. But when analysts are examining these minute details and concluding that the officials got it wrong, they are not helping anyone. I am convinced that these analyses are causing the flag to go up too often, because there ‘might be an offside’. Unwittingly, the benefit of the doubt is going back to the defender, even though the rules state the opposite.

I don’t want to see any measurements of a player being centimetres offside. It is even worse when they can’t agree on whether the offside should’ve been given (“I think his left leg might be offside”). Let’s take a reality check. Unless the linesman is sure, the flag should stay down, the so-called experts at Sky should accept that he wasn’t sure, so made the correct call, and we can all move on.

I won’t be holding my breath.

© 2010 The Beautiful Groan Advertise on this site Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha