The good, the bad, and the average

In football we love a superlative; great players are described as world-class, good goals are described as fantastic, and a routine save becomes unbelievable! It seems that when it comes to the game remaining objective is much easier said than done.

As a fan it is difficult keeping things in perspective, you naturally lean towards speaking favourably about the team you support and its players and this ultimately leads to overpraise. A fan favourite will often be overhyped when in reality he is little more than a good footballer; everything he does will be deemed incredible when in fact he has done little more than keep the ball. Now consider an opposing fan's opinion on the very same player; useless, overrated and profanities will often be used. When offering an opinion it seems that rationality is excluded.

There are different ways you can measure the quality of a player/situation: you can compare player against player, you can assess the impact a player has on games, you can consider a single situation and the effect it had on the outcome of the game. However in every case it is all relative, no single moment should be definitive. A save can only be as good as the shot, a tackle can only be as important as what happens next, and a goal can only be as good as the difficulty of its execution.

To be considered world class surely a player needs to be widely accepted as one of the best three in his position? It does not discredit a player to call him very good, but does calling a very good player world class not devalue the greats?

Goalkeepers are subjected to the overhyped praise and unfair criticism more than most. A relatively simple save is wonderful, but a conceeding a goal can be described as poor goalkeeping. Goalkeepers make saves because they have trained to do so, goalkeepers conceed goals because outfield players practice scoring - something has to give.

In our minds football is a game of intricate passes, world-beating dribbles and wonder goals; but in reality it is more keeping it simple, over hit passes and tap-ins.

Here's to another weekend of mediocre football with an abundance of average, a sprinkle of good, and hopefully a moment of class.

The Death of the tackle?

"Get stuck in son, let him know you're there" advice you hear from the grassroots pitch all the way through to the terraces of your favourite team. A bone crunching tackle excites the crowd and reaffirms the player's passion and dedication to give all for his team. But with referees seemingly clamping down on tough challenges and dismissals being issues for "intent", it appears the FA are trying to make tackling a much smaller part of the game - and in my opinion rightly so.

Tackling is a part of defending, and it should continue to be so, but that is all it is - a part. Tackling is a last resort, it is something that complements a good defender. Young players need to be able to tackle, but they need to have so much more to their defensive game than simply being able to get stuck in.

Young players need to understand how to defend without taking the ball, that slowing an opponent down and forcing them away from danger until frustration leads to a mistake still constitutes good defending. That applying pressure and making opponents panic in possession can lead to winning the ball. That reading the game and understanding the oppositions style of play, waiting to pounce at the opportune moment to make an inceterception is extremely effective. To summarise, they need to be more intelligent and less brute.

Paolo Maldini is the epitome of the intelligent defender; in his 24 year career at AC Milan he played over 900 games, yet only averaged a tackle once every two games. This was down two his superb positioning and superior understanding of the game. Maldini did not need to make tackles because he outplayed opponents, he frustrated them until they gave him the ball, he pressured them into going away from his goal. He is the type of defender young players should try to emmulate.

With the pace of the modern game, getting close enough to tackle is becoming more difficult; meaning greater understanding and the ability to read the game will become paramount for defenders of the future - and the way to encourage this to develop in players is high tempo, technique based work in small and tight areas.

Lets hope that we learn to appreciate the intricasies of defending instead of thinking it is simply a matter of tackling. 

Two-Footedness - the ultimate fairytale

Ghosts, fairies, monsters - many people claim to have seen them, people write books about them, maybe they exist. People enjoy the idea of the supernatural, they like to get lost in imagination; and why not, its a break from the tediousness of reality. In football we have our very own special creature that people claim to have seen, that are accepted as commonplace in the game: the two-footed player! Countless times I have heard people talk about world-class players such as Cristiano Ronaldo being two-footed, but in my opinion you have nearly as much chance of spotting a ghost, fairy, or monster as you do a two-footed player.

Now I am expecting lots of people to disagree with me here, but I think two-footed players are extremely rare. Before outright disagreeing, or disregarding this blog as utter nonsense, here is the logic behind this: many players CAN use both feet, and some with little difference between the two, but practically every player has a stronger foot - if he was to take a penalty he would use this foot, if he was to take a freekick he would use this foot, if he was to take a corner he would use this foot. Now for a player to be considered truly two-footed he would not have a preference, you would see penalties and freekicks taken with both feet, but ultimately most players will rely on their stronger foot.

The ability to use both feet does not make you two-footed, it makes you a better footballer, but being able to do EXACTLY the same things with both feet makes you two-footed. There are countless players who nearly fall into the bracket of two-footedness, for example the aforementioned Cristiano Ronaldo. Ronaldo has exceptional ability, and has a left foot better than a lot of left footed players - but without doubt he is a right footed player! Ronaldo has taken countless penalties and freekicks, and every single one has been with his right foot, surely if he was truly two-footed we would have seen him take one with his left foot if the angle dictated.

This would be my definition of a two-footed player: a player who is able to perform actions of equal measure with both feet, without preference.

Using this definition to identifiy a two-footed player I can think of only one - Wesley Sneijder - and for proof of this check out his YouTube videos where you'll see left and right footed free kicks and corners. Now if you still disagree, give me a better definition/logic of a two footed player.

Bad coaches or just bad customs?

A lot of criticism is placed on grassroots football coaches; and in my opinion a lot of this is fair, often a tough tackle is favoured over good technique and a win is more desirable than playing attractive football, but maybe its not as simple as bad coaching. I believe that the UK as a whole is miles behind when it comes to moving forward. 

Consider the following:

The UK's goverment is run by the wealthy and upper-class who have little in common with the average British person. Rules are made to benefit a political party rather than the every day Britton.

CEOs and top bosses float from company to company, with a great knowledge of business but not neccessarily the ideals for a particular field.

Teachers are using the same techniques as they used 20-30 years ago - many of which are outdated.

The FA is run by an older generation who have outdated views on tactics and development.

There seems to be a recurring theme... We don't identify the best person/people for the job

As a nation we are very rigid and things have to be done in a formal and "British" way, and here in lies the problem. Children are not encouraged to think outside the box, to challenge the norm, to get creative. It is common for older people to work with youngsters that they cannot associate with. The lifestyle of a child now is vastly different to that of a child 20 years ago, let alone 30 or 40 years.

In the UK we prefer an industrious performance to a mesmorising and sublime match winning piece of genius. But the two do not have to be exclusive. Imagine if all coaches taught Spanish technique but with British intensity/workrate, if creativity was preferred to victory, if development was first and foremost.

Children should be encouraged to dribble and hog the ball - the decision making of when to pass can be taught later. They should be encouraged to take players on and to use new skills/tricks. The enjoyment of being in possession should outweigh the fear of losing it. Mistakes help players learn, they should not be punished but used as inspiration.

Not all the blame falls on the shoulders of the coach. Parents and even players add to the pressure of points over performance. The lure of a medal and a trophy is sometimes hard to resist. 

I think a massive overhaul and some radical thinking is needed, people need to be outspoken and breathe new life not only into football but also the country. We cannot be afraid to upset the apple cart.

If anyone disagrees please form an orderly queue, after all we are British.