The view from the bench isn't at all great, and it's something Shay Given has rarely experienced in his time as a professional goalkeeper. When you've been a top Premier League keeper for nigh on a decade, oozing class on an impressively consistent basis, first team football is surely something you should be expecting, especially as a 34 year old. A worrying age, maybe, for a right winger, but certainly not a goalkeeper.
Yet, when Given should be starting a new season in goal with Manchester City, with the club's best chance for proper glory in years, he finds himself sitting on the bench, while a young upstart in the shape of Joe Hart is preferred to him.
Let's make no bones about it. At White Hart Lane last Saturday, Hart single-handedly prevented Tottenham from annihilating and humiliating his team mates, the most expensive collection of players in the Premier League. On the day, Mancini's selection of Hart ahead of Given seemed totally justified, as he heroically prevented 3 or 4 certain goals. Given's expression said it all - after his younger comrade tipped over a deflected, dipping volley from Tottenham left-back Assou-Ekotto, a slight shake of the head and wry smirk from the Donegalman displayed his feelings for all to see; how the hell is Given going to get back into this Manchester City side?
Well the most obvious answer there is if Hart loses form; but if he performs at even 50% capacity for the rest of the season, the kid should be fine. He is a very talented goalkeeper and has a massive future ahead of him if he gets his head down and works.
But this brings me to the crux of my article; what exactly WILL happen if Hart loses form, in terms of the media?
I theorize that the only reason Hart was picked instead of Given in the first place is because of the intense pressure from both the English media and fans, with regard to their new buzz word; 'youth'. After a disastrous World Cup campaign, the media and fans alike clambered over themselves to find a solution, and came up with a complete overhaul of the international team; deadwood, underperforming superstars out, young, promising players in. Simple, right?
Rob Green's howler and David James's age put the goalkeeping position under particular scrutiny, and the one goalkeeper who didn't play a minute at the World Cup was hailed as the next big thing. Yes, Joe Hart.
By pure process of elimination, Hart is now England's best keeper, because one is being put out to pasture in League One, and the other's career on the international stage is effectively ruined because of one mistake. So naturally, England fans want their new darling playing regular club football. So now, it's a toss up between an established international goalkeeper with a decade or so of experience in the Premier League, versus a player unproven on the international stage, with three seasons at most in the PL. And obviously we've all seen who came out on top.
But what happens when Hart makes the inevitable howler, or string of howlers, for either City or England? Will the media stick to their guns (like they should when they're zealously calling for the heads of the likes of Lampard and Gerrard, in lieu of 'youth' like it's some form of religion)
or will they dish out the exact same harsh, ridiculous treatment that they subjected Rob Green to? If it's the latter, will we see the pro-Hart City fans do a U-turn and question why they ever dropped Given in the first place, in true fickle English football fan nature?
This is all highly speculative of course but it paints a picture whereby the media hold the real power in English football; they build players up on pedestals and then tear them asunder viciously when expectations aren't met. They never explicitly came out and said that Hart should be preferred to Given, but by their general message they may have pressurised Roberto Mancini in some way to make the selection he did on Saturday.
Had Robert Green played a blinder at the World Cup, would Hart have been glorified by fans and media alike without due proof of his international credentials? I have a strong feeling that Given would have been in goal for Saturday had this been the case.
Showing posts with label sport. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sport. Show all posts
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Goal Line Technology: Necessity or threat?
Lo and behold, the Three Lions let out a feeble roar once again as they were put to the sword by a far superior outfit, in a tournament that most people at home expected them to fare far better in. It's simultaneously painful and boring to yet again see the British media's attitude go from that of glorifying Fabio Capello and the team, to baying for their blood after 90 minutes of football. A dodgy 1-0 win over a pathetic Slovenia side was widely praised in England, where elsewhere in the world of football, an early exit once again was predicted on the back of the same result.
And so it came to pass. But it irks me that not everyone will remember that game for how well the Germans counterattacked and took their goals; the most blindly passionate of English fans will gloss over John Terry's and Matthew Upson's startling inability to form a cohesive and effective defensive unit. What will be talked about until the cows come home is "the goal that wasn't". That unbelievable error by both the linesman and the referee that disallowed a perfectly good goal by the otherwise ineffective Frank Lampard. It would have been England's second in as many minutes, and, admittedly, may have changed the shape of the game, at least for a considerable period of time. However, I am confident the Germans would still have heavily outclassed their opponents.
Yet this is not the centre of the discussion at hand. Naturally, as the English media does, they hopped on the injustice and are now making very loud noises in the direction of Sepp Blatter and co. at FIFA headquarters to introduce some form of goal line or appeal technology, to avoid a repeat of this situation. And with good reason too.
We know ourselves. The now infamous "Hand Of Gaul" incident fecked us over for all our efforts, and the pain and injustice was, and is, still hard to swallow. And yet the dinosaurs at FIFA insist it would riun the flow of the game. Well, do they have a point?
Firstly, the very basic thing that could be done; a 5th official sitting at a monitor would be able to decide in seconds whether a goal should be allowed or not. If a contentious goal is initially allowed, surely that isn't breaking up the flow of play, when play is stopped anyway and the players and referee are awaiting the decision?
However, matters become complicated with something like the very goal Lampard had disallowed. Play continued down to the England end after the German keeper Neuer fished it out of his goal feigning innocence. What would have happened if, during the time a hypothetical 5th official was scrambling to watch replays, Germany had have scored at the other end? Would both goals have stood, or just the English one?
Then the obvious answer to this is goal line technology; place a microchip in the football and have sensors on the goal line. Simple eh? Well, not particularly. FIFA have a point, I think when they say the same rules should apply across the board. Obviously, I'm not talking in terms of grassroots football, but within professional leagues themselves. I've heard £300k quoted for kitting out a stadium with this technology; easily affordable by the likes of Premier League clubs and even some Championship outfits, but how about the lower leagues? The fact is, in a lot of cases, clubs simply would not be able to afford this. But why should their budgets reflect how fair the playing environment in their league is? Clearly, it would be incumbent on football associations across the globe to at least foot some of the bill for this technology, in the interest of the sport.
And yet more problems persist.
Where does the line get drawn with this technology? I think it needs to stop at contentious goal decisions, including offsides; only if a ball is put in the net and the play is stopped should the offside be looked at. There's no point stopping play for a suspected offside only to discover that play could have continued, which could lead to even more aggrevation towards match officials. But for the likes of free kicks and throw ins, the concept of appealing these decisions is ridiculous. This is what could possibly happen, with even the most minute decisions coming under scrutiny, because managers know they have the power and the means to challenge them. The solution to this is a no-brainer; much like tennis, introduce a system of a set number of appeals. That way, teams and managers get to challenge the really contentious decisions, without disrupting the overall flow of the game.
Of course, this is a very broad argument, and I'm sure this will be debated by more qualified and experience men than me once this World Cup is over. But it'll be interesting to see how Sepp Blatter copes if another refereeing blunder leaves a black mark on the festivities in South Africa.
OH, AND ANOTHER THING.....:
I was over the moon to see Portgual exit the World Cup this evening; not because I dislike them as a team, but simply because of the antics of one Cristiano Ronaldo over the tournament. He is seflishness and egotism incarnate, and if I was one of his Portugeuse teammates tonight, I'd be infuriated with his self serving shots that only troubled people in the upper tiers of the stadium.
And so it came to pass. But it irks me that not everyone will remember that game for how well the Germans counterattacked and took their goals; the most blindly passionate of English fans will gloss over John Terry's and Matthew Upson's startling inability to form a cohesive and effective defensive unit. What will be talked about until the cows come home is "the goal that wasn't". That unbelievable error by both the linesman and the referee that disallowed a perfectly good goal by the otherwise ineffective Frank Lampard. It would have been England's second in as many minutes, and, admittedly, may have changed the shape of the game, at least for a considerable period of time. However, I am confident the Germans would still have heavily outclassed their opponents.
Yet this is not the centre of the discussion at hand. Naturally, as the English media does, they hopped on the injustice and are now making very loud noises in the direction of Sepp Blatter and co. at FIFA headquarters to introduce some form of goal line or appeal technology, to avoid a repeat of this situation. And with good reason too.
We know ourselves. The now infamous "Hand Of Gaul" incident fecked us over for all our efforts, and the pain and injustice was, and is, still hard to swallow. And yet the dinosaurs at FIFA insist it would riun the flow of the game. Well, do they have a point?
Firstly, the very basic thing that could be done; a 5th official sitting at a monitor would be able to decide in seconds whether a goal should be allowed or not. If a contentious goal is initially allowed, surely that isn't breaking up the flow of play, when play is stopped anyway and the players and referee are awaiting the decision?
However, matters become complicated with something like the very goal Lampard had disallowed. Play continued down to the England end after the German keeper Neuer fished it out of his goal feigning innocence. What would have happened if, during the time a hypothetical 5th official was scrambling to watch replays, Germany had have scored at the other end? Would both goals have stood, or just the English one?
Then the obvious answer to this is goal line technology; place a microchip in the football and have sensors on the goal line. Simple eh? Well, not particularly. FIFA have a point, I think when they say the same rules should apply across the board. Obviously, I'm not talking in terms of grassroots football, but within professional leagues themselves. I've heard £300k quoted for kitting out a stadium with this technology; easily affordable by the likes of Premier League clubs and even some Championship outfits, but how about the lower leagues? The fact is, in a lot of cases, clubs simply would not be able to afford this. But why should their budgets reflect how fair the playing environment in their league is? Clearly, it would be incumbent on football associations across the globe to at least foot some of the bill for this technology, in the interest of the sport.
And yet more problems persist.
Where does the line get drawn with this technology? I think it needs to stop at contentious goal decisions, including offsides; only if a ball is put in the net and the play is stopped should the offside be looked at. There's no point stopping play for a suspected offside only to discover that play could have continued, which could lead to even more aggrevation towards match officials. But for the likes of free kicks and throw ins, the concept of appealing these decisions is ridiculous. This is what could possibly happen, with even the most minute decisions coming under scrutiny, because managers know they have the power and the means to challenge them. The solution to this is a no-brainer; much like tennis, introduce a system of a set number of appeals. That way, teams and managers get to challenge the really contentious decisions, without disrupting the overall flow of the game.
Of course, this is a very broad argument, and I'm sure this will be debated by more qualified and experience men than me once this World Cup is over. But it'll be interesting to see how Sepp Blatter copes if another refereeing blunder leaves a black mark on the festivities in South Africa.
OH, AND ANOTHER THING.....:
I was over the moon to see Portgual exit the World Cup this evening; not because I dislike them as a team, but simply because of the antics of one Cristiano Ronaldo over the tournament. He is seflishness and egotism incarnate, and if I was one of his Portugeuse teammates tonight, I'd be infuriated with his self serving shots that only troubled people in the upper tiers of the stadium.
Monday, May 3, 2010
Congratulations Liverpool, after a season of mediocrity, you finally celebrate it...
There comes a point in every football season where some aspect of the goings-on disgusts me. Whether that's due to blatant diving or inexplicable refereeing decisions, there's always one that sticks in my mind (Pedro Mendes' overhead kick against Man Utd years ago, anyone?) but this season something quite different has taken the biscuit.
Rivalries between clubs, and in particular clubs' fans, tend to run quite deep no matter what footballing climate you look at, and this is perfectly acceptable as long as it doesn't deteriorate into physical violence or serious abuse of players or other fans. But when this rivalry begins to tamper with the dignity of the game, it is going far over the line.
When Liverpool fans began to celebrate their 2-0 loss to Chelsea on Saturday, that's when I feel the line was crossed. The Kop were celebrating what should be an almost inevitable Premier League crown for Carlo Ancelloti's men, at the expense of their arch-rivals Manchester United.
But celebrating when their own team has lost? When there was still some hope of clinching 4th spot from under the noses of Manchester City and Tottenham? When there was still a chance to gain some modest achievement in a season defined by humiliating and humbling failure?
I think the behaviour of the fans is absolutely disgraceful. I did not see the game, but imagine the climate within that stadium had Liverpool been in the lead? What then? Would the Kop begin to boo their own players if they got on the front foot, with only one thing in mind; anything but United?
John Aldridge even admitted in a column the morning before the game that, if he had a 90th minute penalty to draw level with Chelsea in this particular fixture, he'd blast it over the bar on purpose.
Barely understandable from fans, but from a player? It really is shocking stuff.
Again, I did not see the game, but Gerrard's awful backpass to set up Drogba has even been called into question, as to whether there was intent to set up a goal or not. If this is the case, then this match was truly a blight on the game of football. Even more shocking, again, considering that 4th place was still a possibility. Why would a player of Gerrard's calibre and professionalism put petty rivalry over possible success? It beggars belief.
The Kop truly showed themselves to be an absolutely despicable set of fans.
Oh, and another thing:
Why, John Higgins, why? Don't profess your innocence and fear when you're in full swing suggesting getting another mortgage on your Spanish villa to cover up the payments...
Rivalries between clubs, and in particular clubs' fans, tend to run quite deep no matter what footballing climate you look at, and this is perfectly acceptable as long as it doesn't deteriorate into physical violence or serious abuse of players or other fans. But when this rivalry begins to tamper with the dignity of the game, it is going far over the line.
When Liverpool fans began to celebrate their 2-0 loss to Chelsea on Saturday, that's when I feel the line was crossed. The Kop were celebrating what should be an almost inevitable Premier League crown for Carlo Ancelloti's men, at the expense of their arch-rivals Manchester United.
But celebrating when their own team has lost? When there was still some hope of clinching 4th spot from under the noses of Manchester City and Tottenham? When there was still a chance to gain some modest achievement in a season defined by humiliating and humbling failure?
I think the behaviour of the fans is absolutely disgraceful. I did not see the game, but imagine the climate within that stadium had Liverpool been in the lead? What then? Would the Kop begin to boo their own players if they got on the front foot, with only one thing in mind; anything but United?
John Aldridge even admitted in a column the morning before the game that, if he had a 90th minute penalty to draw level with Chelsea in this particular fixture, he'd blast it over the bar on purpose.
Barely understandable from fans, but from a player? It really is shocking stuff.
Again, I did not see the game, but Gerrard's awful backpass to set up Drogba has even been called into question, as to whether there was intent to set up a goal or not. If this is the case, then this match was truly a blight on the game of football. Even more shocking, again, considering that 4th place was still a possibility. Why would a player of Gerrard's calibre and professionalism put petty rivalry over possible success? It beggars belief.
The Kop truly showed themselves to be an absolutely despicable set of fans.
Oh, and another thing:
Why, John Higgins, why? Don't profess your innocence and fear when you're in full swing suggesting getting another mortgage on your Spanish villa to cover up the payments...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
