And if you know you History! Do you? Do you know it?

 

I'm back again.

This time I'm not talking about how rubbish West Ham are. And that's not because we aren't rubbish by the way, it's more that there are more pressing matters.

So to get into it I need to talk about Everton. This one's also a bit close to my heart, anyone who read my posts from the beginning (probs not many of you, even my wife stopped years ago) will know that I have a bit of a soft spot for the Toffees.

Is Toffee's like "Hammers" in that we don't actually call ourselves that. Well I don't. I find it a bit cringe. We sing (and Hashtag, I'm down with the kids) "Come on you Irons", not "Hammers". Apologies if I've cringed you out Toffees.

Anyway back to my point, Many moons ago, genuinely a long time ago, I was married to and dated for 7 years beforehand, my Ex-Wife; Who's dad was from the Wirral and was most certainly a "Bluenose" (that's cooler than Toffee right).

When I started going out with my Ex-Wife I vividly remember having the, "What football team do you support...?" conversation. That was going to be pivotal in the success of the relationship, although ultimately it could be argued it wasn't successful; and I recall her saying to me, "Well my Dad's an Everton fan but I don't really watch football..."

Seven years, Two cat's and a New Build Flat later, and we were both Members of the Everton Supporters Club, would go to any games down south, if West Ham were playing away that weekend of course, although she did once go to Fulham without me; and would go up to Goodison a couple of times a year.

And make no mistake, I was "IN".

I LOVE FOOTBALL.

I think that sometimes I don't let on how much I love football to others so that they don't think I'm a weirdo. The World Cup Geeky thing extends to the Football League. I mean I'm going to Charlton vs Port Vale TOMORROW, with a pal from work who's from Stoke and is a Vale fan. I've got a former colleague who's a Bolton fan, who I've been to games with! I will watch anything! And that's kinda where I'm going with this post...

Back to my point (again) though, I was "IN".

I could sing about Phil Neville having more medals than Steve Gerrard, Hanging Kopites on the banks of the Royal Blue Mersey (in jest obviously, I DO NOT CONDONE ANY SORT OF FOOTBALL RELATED VIOLENCE), or singing the Blues when Everton win and Liverpool loose... 

Everton were perfect, starved of success like my beloved West Ham, but with a really rich history that many fans aren't aware of. For those of you that don't know, they've won the League Title nine times, fourth most behind Man United, Liverpool and Arsenal; and the FA Cup Five times; along with the European Cup Winners Cup.

They were. They are! A proper football team. And a proper big football team.

And like West Ham they've been woefully mismanaged from above. They've finally gotten around to getting their stadium move off the ground and are now worrying about whether they'll be able to afford pay for it if they go down. And it makes you think to yourself, what will happen if they go down?

Will they become a Leeds, Sheffield Wednesday or a Sunderland i.e. a former multiple league tile winner (hence no mention of Forest, I have issues with their "History"), albeit by far the biggest and most illustrious of that group, who end up plying their trade in League One for a few seasons at some point in the future?

Will they go to the wall prompting more conversations about whether the FA does enough to ensure that owners are "fit and proper" before they acquire football clubs.

It's certainly worrying times if you are a Bluenose (I should have just gone with "Bluenose" off the bat and skipped all the mundane Hammer chat right?). And they way I see it if they go down this is a watershed moment in English Football. Everton have the second longest run in the top flight behind only Arsenal; ahead of the likes of Manchester United and their bitter rivals Liverpool; and streets ahead of "New Money" like Chelsea (I can remember them being in the 2nd division for f*cks sake!), Manchester City and Newcastle.

Here's a stat that puts the significance of their potential relegation into perspective. They're the only remaining team in the Premier League to have not made the Champions League proper (I remember the playoff with Villareal circa 2005), who are still yet to be relegated from the division.

Everton are still, in my eyes, fighting the good fight. Incompetently yes, but they're fighting.

I know they have a billionaire owner, you have to nowadays to compete at that level. But we're not talking a state funded enterprise. They are trying to do this the old school meritocratic way.

They're like Athletic Club, another club close to my heart, in my eyes.

Swimming against the tide as a huge club with an illustrious history (8 League Tiles and they've never been relegated), but ultimately being swallowed up by the modern game and having their best players picked off by the behemoths. For Wayne Rooney and Anthony Gordon see Aymeric Laporte, Kepa, Javi Martinez, Fernando Llorente and Ander Herrera.

They're us regular fan's, beacons of hope!

If Everton can't survive in the Premier League and potentially go bust, in spite of years of European Football, what hope do we have?

Do we all have to pray for some barbarous regime, intent on Sportwashing their tarnished image, to buy our club? And promise Mbappe and Champions League football?

Is that the only way your club can be immune to the, very real, perils of modern day football?

It's bleak man!

So I for one, do not want them to go down (provided we're OK, of course).

I hear tons of fans, who claim to be against the modern scourges of the game, wishing they were gotten rid of. Largely based on the peril of dropping 3 points up at Goodison on a Monday night.

They're always on on a Monday night, getting booed off and Half Time or Full Time!

F*ck it! Take 3 points off us! They often take more. I've called it the "Newton Curse", ever since I split from my wife in 2011.

The Premier League needs Everton in it, and after them Tottenham; and I'll be damned if I'm rooting for them to stay up in a few years!

Sneaking in there at the last minute like Aguero and Salt Bae - World Cup Vlogs (2022)

As always, I've been quiet here over the last few weeks, despite vowing to be more vocal. But I have some content to give you. 

I did a series of Vlogs during the World Cup with a friend I've made over the last few years.

Carlos aka World Cup Fever is probably one of the few people on this planet who is more obsessed with the World Cup than me; he also knows so much more than I do, makes my "Geekdom" look like I'm just a casual fan who only watches when England are playing.

Carlos and I sat down four times during the tournament and chewed the fat over what we saw.

Watch this space as the plan (if I have anything to do with it) is for us to catch up every few months and discuss major international tournaments. Obviously I'll be better at flagging up the content when  it's fresher.

For now you can find four videos over on Instagram

Discussing England at the World Cup (1990 to 2018)

Discussing the end of the Group Phase in 2022

Discussing the Knock-out Phase in 2022

and last night's video discussing the Final, best XI's, best goals and how the tournament ranks when compared with others.

Also someone needs to explain how anb why "Salt Bae" managed to get onto the pitch and harass all the players?!? Game's gone! 

Less Than A Week To Go

I am a hypocrite.

I really don't want to be. I want to not have anything to do with the World Cup in Qatar, starting next week. It goes against everything I stand against politically.

But I know I'll be watching.

Granted I'm no where near as "hyped" as the kids say (or used to say, I'm not sure they actually say that anymore) as I have been at previous tournaments.

My peak of "hypedness" has to be the run up to the 2006 tournament where from 50 days out I can up with a fact related to the number of days until the World Cup started and emailed it to my Girlfriend at the time. Yes I am that sad/obsessed.

And that's my problem. I'm genuinely addicted to the World Cup.

The lack of enthusiasm from other quarters has definitely had an effect though.

Barring a chat I had re England's previous performances at major tournaments and the Quiz I do with my 8 year old on the walk to school. I don't think I've thought much about this year's tournament.

I keep wondering whether the timing of the tournament in general has played a part in my partial apathy? Slap bang in the middle of a season, a season in which my own team is currently preforming so badly domestically.

Maybe. That's probably played a part too.

For me, I always say this. Generally when people say to me during a tournament, "Why are you staying in to watch that? England aren't even playing..." The World Cup doesn't come around that often, it's every four years.

For context, my kids were a 3 year old/toddler and twins that were a week old, at the beginning of the last tournament. I was doing a different job (in fact I've only ever had one job that has spanned two tournaments) and the World was genuinely a different place.

I had a stroke (actually two) at the beginning of this year. While they actually turned out to be relatively minor in terms of side effects, with hindsight I sometimes think, I genuinely could have died.

And not to trivialise a very serious matter, Russia 2018 could have been my "last tournament", as it was for the likes of Maradona and Paolo Rossi.

In the same way that this could be the one and only tournament for the some players called up to their national teams. I do wonder how they must feel about this all? In your prime and called up to represent your country in the pinnacle of the sport that you love (I'm not having any of that Champions League rubbish), and it's sullied due to the fact that FIFA sold out and decided to host it in a murderous regime, in the desert, in the middle of Winter.

What if you were say, Ricky Lambert or Daniel Sturridge, and this was 2014?

Anyway I'm not making any more excuses. I shall be watching and I perfectly understand, in fact respect those with a genuine love for the World Cup, who are more principled than me, and have come out and said they won't be consuming any of this year's tournament.

I just know I can't.

We Should Have Been Watching A World Cup

I'm a World Cup addict.

I've probably mentioned it on here before.

I can identify most World Cups, barring say 1930-38 when it's all a bit grainy, from either still or video footage.

I've done every quiz going and can identify when the likes of Haiti, Zaire, Israel, Cuba and Iraq made their sole appearances.

I have a social blackout during the World Cup (this is genuinely true, ask my Wife if you know her), where I will almost certainly refuse to attend social event during a tournament, no matter how seemingly important. See the title of my blog...

I've taught my eldest Son, who appears to be pretty interested the story of the World Cup from 1930 up to 1974 at present, on our walk to school in the morning. He can explain the significance of the Maracanazo, to the point that he knows THE GAME WAS NOT A FINAL (it irks me when people call it that), and he knows that Pele watched his dad crying that day and vowed to win him the tournament when he grew up. 

I've even tried to explain the likes of Garrincha and Maradona in the most PG way possible, although his learning hasn't reached the 1980's so we've only briefly touched on Maradona.

I'm f**king obsessed! And as a result will almost certainly be watching this year's tournament, in spite of the glaringly bad human rights abuses happening in Qatar to make it happen. I'm sorry. I fully understand that it makes me an absolute hypocrite, cos if you follow me on Twitter you'll see that I'm all fairness and equality,  but even heroes have flaws... OK I'm not a hero, unless you need someone to explain the Adidas' role in enabling the West German side to win the 1954 final against the much fancied Hungarians in a downpour i.e. "Fritz Walter weather". Then I'm a hero!

In all seriousness though, I genuinely totally get it. But it's my one vice in life. I genuinely think I could give up watching West Ham, and yes it would be a struggle, but I couldn't the World Cup or it's little brother/sister the European Championship. I can't even bring myself to say the phrase "The Euros" *insert vomit emoji*.

Long and short is I will be watching this year, as I've done every summer from 1990 up until 2018. But that's the problem; or another, granted way more trivial, problem. It should be on now!

We should be at the back end of the tournament now. Somewhere around the Semi-Finals or Quarter-Finals depending on the edition. I'm thinking it'd be Semi-Finals, potentially even finished if we're talking Mexico 86 or Korea/Japan 02 which both started around the end of May. But Quarter-Finals if we're looking at something like USA 94, which started deeper into the latter part of June!

That's how much of a f**king geek (loser) I am. And that's how much I'm missing this year's tournament.

We should be watching Brazil abjectly crash out at the hands of a more organised European foe at this point, posing the question as to whether anyone outside of Europe will ever challenge our giants again.

Speaking of outside of Europe, statistically this would be where you see the last remaining African side knocked out of the competition. Full of patronising praise from the commentary teams and with stars destined for big money moves to Bolton, or whoever are mid noughties Bolton now, which invariably won't work out.

We should be watching the Germans steadily making their way towards the Semis, last tournament aside.

And the English, either out early or alongside their European neighbours, surrounded by a lack of self awareness and hubris from within the nation that doesn't see how bad we've been in any case (and I include 1990 and 2018 in that by the way, happy to debate anyone).

We should be watching a World Cup!

But we're not thanks to FIFA's greed so I'm going to watch the Women's Euros 🤮from tomorrow onwards. And you should too!

"Game's Gone!" The Penaltification of Football

 

Guess who's back! Back again...!

It's taken another death for me to put metaphorical pen to metaphorical paper. Although this one isn't an actual living being, thank goodness; I don't want my blog to become a glorified obituaries column.

This post has been on the cards for some time now to be honest. I once did a 10 things I like about Football, back in the early days of this blog, and I may have even done a 10 things I hate... back then too (ahh the days when I was childless and would post multiple times in a month, occasionally a week, good times)? If I did this thing would have made it.

The last decade or so has seen the game slowly and steadily move away from its purest form, FA cup finals have been moved to the late afternoon to accommodate TV audiences in far flung parts of the World; League championships in major European football nations have become predictable (see Juventus, Bayern, PSG, Olympiakos, Celtic etc) due to the widening financial gap between those at the top and their rivals; We've implemented a system that see's large pauses in top level games with referees, fans and television pundits pouring over endless slow-motion replays and punishes players for being 10 centimetres "offside" in the pursuit of achieving flawless officiating; And we've recently seen 12 of the richest teams in the World lobbying for a closed competition, where they face no jeopardy for a bad run of performances and get given a sh*t ton of money for the privilege, leaving behind the rest of the football pyramid within each of their respective domestic setups. Marvellous!

It feels like barely a few weeks pass before we hear fans and pundits clutching their pearls and pointing to the latest outrage. The death of Football. "The Game's gone!" Has become such a familiar cry. So much so that it's become a football cliché, and subsequently a topic of conversation on one of my favourite contemporary football podcasts at the moment; the aptly named, Football Cliché's Podcast.

There was recently (well a few weeks or even months ago) an episode dedicated to this trope in, which discussion focused on the many factors that cause those that love the game to utter the above words. And an attempt was made to pinpoint the exact moment at which the game Went. And that got me thinking.

Many people will point to the early 1990's and seismic events such as the formation of the Premier League or Champions League, or the introduction of the concept of football being broadcast via Satellite Pay TV. Or later on when clubs started spending tens of millions of pounds, or Euros depending on where you live, on single signings. Or that time when Man United dropped out of the FA Cup only to get their a**es handed to them by Romario and Edmundo (with Barry Davies on the comms [Insert cool/sunglasses emoji]).

For me though, football died, or went. Long before that. A couple of decades before. When something was introduced that completely changed what we attempting to get out of the beautiful game. The first of the nails in the game's coffin was in my eyes, this introduction of the Penalty Shoot-out.

Now hear me out. I understand the logistical argument that can be made to counter the point I'm about to make. But in response to that I question how we managed to cope without penalties in the 90 to 100 years before they became a part of the game (barring the 1968 European Championship semi final). I also question why it has to be so expensive for fans of the two teams who have to do it all again in a week/a fortnight/a few days time. Surely there are some other issues that should have been addressed.

So here's my argument.

Picture this: It's the 1860's. Rules have been drawn up to codify this exciting new game all the cool kids are playing called Association Football (latterly abbreviated to "Soccer"). Teams start to form in pockets of the UK and begin to play matches of the new game against each other and it's a roaring success. But how do you make things interesting? How do you systematically determine who the best, and worst, teams who play Association Football are?

Well back then those guys come up with another idea. A competition. The Football Association Challenge Cup. The premise is simple. A set of teams enter and are drawn randomly against each other. The winner of each tie/match advances to play again and the loser is eliminated. Culminating in the best two teams (or best two that have avoided being drawn against each other) playing in a grand showdown at the end. Like reaching the final boss on a Computer Game 115+ years later.

The tournament is a success, each game draws attention from large crowds all wanting to catch a glimpse of the spectacle that is playing out. But there's one issue. Are the Winners or "Cup Finalists" actually the best teams to have entered that year's competition? Or are they just the most fortuitous? Have the best two teams already been drawn to play each other at an earlier stage? Or did the best team have an off day or suffer the misfortune of injuries to players at key times in the competition? The only way to settle this is by staging a "Round Robin" style tournament where all the teams play each other, home and away, with points being awarded to the victor in each match...

You see where I'm going with this right? That blossoms into tournaments in other countries, then between nations, then between the champions within each nation etc etc.

But in each case the brief is clear. The spectacle is well defined. We are witnessing a game of Association Football between two teams. Much like a game of Poker where money is laid at stake, the jeopardy makes that contest even more interesting. As does often the preconceived notion of how the contest may play out, which often comes from memories of previous competitive encounters between the two sides. But we are here to watch a game of Association Football, just like we were in 1872, and 1888, and 1930.

Or are we?

This is where the "Penaltification" begins. In knockout matches, i.e. those where the loser stands to be eliminated from the competition, there are instances where the two competitors are so evenly matched that after 90 minutes of Association Football both teams have scored the same number of games. The solution at first was simple. Extend the match by 30 minutes. Surely a winner will be determined as fatigue set in? The spectators would also love to see an extra half an hour of drama. But what if a winner still can't be determined after a 120 minutes?

The answer is simple to me, and was to the rule makers for some 80 or 90 years. Play again. We want to see the contest between the two sides, especially two so evenly matched, and we want to determine a victor. It's a no brainer for me. I love football, so let me watch some more.

Then something changed. Somewhere along the lines the desire to award a victor overcame that to watch the contest. We, or the rule makers, decided to take one aspect of the game a situation usually used to penalise infringements close to One's own goal. A situation that statistically only occurs once in every five games. And decided that the outcome of the contest would be decided purely based on each team's ability to convert an uncontested shot 12 yards from goal.

Now I understand the premise. I understand why this would appear to some as a perfect way to settle a deadlocked contest. It's a test of One's nerve and provides additional drama/jeopardy for all involved.  But is it Association Football though? Not in my eyes. It's a very small aspect of the game. Why not ask the teams to take turns at taking or defending against other Set Pieces? Like direct free kicks just outside the box or corners? Why not have one on one situations, like those trialled in the early days of MLS, where a player is passed through on goal and has to beat the keeper?

I also understand that there was or is a desire to settle the contest. As mentioned earlier, I get that there are logistical and financial challenges behind replaying the contest a few days or weeks later. But are there? We coped before, at a time when the game had less investment, when domestic and international travel was more arduous and time consuming, and when squads were much smaller, to the point that the concept of a "squad" wasn't even a thing.

So we now have a situation where, as mentioned earlier, the desire to settle the contest between the two teams and move on to the next phase actually outweighs that of the audience's will to watch a game of Associated Football between two contestants. Now if you think I'm being dramatic in saying that, ask yourself why in some competitions we no longer even have the extended 30 minute period to determine a winner?

We've gotten to a place now where we just want to get the football match over with; and subsequently we value finishing 4th in the Premier League (or in some cases any place from 17th upwards) over winning these individual contests and potentially being crowned the overall Victor in the Football Association Challenge Cup. Where fans and pundits seem to get more excited and expend more energy talking about potential signings, even when we know that signing the best players in the World at that time guarantees nothing, see Eden Hazard at Real Madrid and Di Maria at Man United as two examples.

We'd rather the suits hand the cheque out so we can speculate about who our team may be able to sign. We'd rather muse over potential takeovers by Billionaires with no previous connection to the club they are looking to purchase or the surrounding communities, KNOWING how bad that has panned out for some clubs. We'd rather our teams qualified for European competitions that we have next to no chance of actually competing in, or making it to the "Promised Land" of the Premier League, even if it is for a 12 month stint where a place in the bottom 3 is almost a nailed on certainty.

The next stage is for us to scrap the match and just play the Penalty Shoot-out, or even scrap the Shoot-out determine the winner (and hand out the resulting multi-million pound novelty cheques) based on transfer activity or social media presence. Or maybe "History" that seems to be something that everyone is hung up on? Why watch an actual game of Association Football when you can just revel your team's achievements in them 40 years ago?

I just want to watch a football match, preferably at 3pm on a Saturday!! Bring back FA Cup Replays! Actually I JUST WANT TO WATCH A MATCH OF ASSOCIATION FOOTBALL like they did in 1872!

Anyone got the highlights of The Wanderers vs The Old Etonians?

PS I'd also like to point out that it is very rare that two teams will draw multiple ties against each-other, except for that time Arsenal played Leeds in the FA Cup back when I was a kid and they ended up like a round behind everyone else! AND I'd like to point out that we'd never had a 0-0 FA Cup Final until they scrapped the replay in favour of Penalties; then we had that awful Arsenal (Invincibles on the decline) v Man United Final.

Feed the GOAT (just don't feed him drugs)

 506 days.

That's how long it's been since I last felt compelled to write anything here.

It's probably down to the Pandemic and the absence of a Euro 2020 tournament. But nothing has inspired me to take to the keyboard in anger (or jest, love, sadness), nothing in the last topsy turvy 506 days. Nothing until now.

I recently stated on Twitter that Diego Maradona was my favourite footballer of all time, joint with Ronaldo, the real (Brazilian) one for you youngsters. But in my opinion he stands alone when ability is to be considered.

In this YouTube, FIFA Ultimate Team, Champions League, Premier League age so many are tempted into writing off what they has come before the present. That is largely because we have been blessed with two of the best footballers to have graced the modern game, with careers that have run in parallel and various cheerleaders from either side of the manufactured hyperbole that accompanies modern day football.

Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo are, were, great but Maradona was something else.

To understand Diego's powers you first need to take yourself back and unlearn all of the last 40 or so years of football. For a start Napoli and Argentina were not the powerhouses they are now considered by many of the game's fans. The former have won Serie A only twice, under Diego's stewardship, and only really come close once since then a few years back powered by Maurizio Sarri and another Argentinian Gonzalo Higuian (King of the Bottlers).

Argentina, in spite of their record breaking success in the Copa America, had failed to amount to anything on the World stage at the point at which Maradona came to prominence. A berth in the very first World Cup final was followed by 48 years of abject failures, peaking with them watching the often lauded, technicolour, 1970 tournament at home, while their rivals from across the continent Brazil swept all before them.

Yes Diego didn't actually make the squad in 1978, much to the disgust of many, but it could be argued that the 17 year old, who had been playing in the domestic championship for the last two and a half years, had already started to have a positive influence on the nation in the grip of a military dictatorship.

Many Argentine detractors will probably point to the 78 tournament, held on their home patch, a question the Victor's legitimacy. A defeat in the first round, dodgy Peruvian performances with the hosts knowing how many goals were needed to make the final and sh*thosuery in the final against a Cruyffless Netherlands side help to make their case.

Enter Diego.

In 79 he tore the World Youth Cup a "new one" as Argentina swept all before them. In 82 he was supposed to carry them to glory but the then 21 year old Maradona was probably slightly too young to be able to influence a decent but hardly spectacular side that much (plus there was a lot going on off the field, the Faulklands and all that).

And then we have 1986. Mexico 86 will always be heralded as the peak of his career. Despite that what is often forgotten is how influential Diego was. We look at Champions, especially World Champions through the window, of hindsight. Almost assuming that their eventual victory was a given or a that they were "shoe-in" for the title. I feel like people are guilty of doing this with the 2002 Brazil side that lost embarrassingly to Honduras 12 months before the World Cup in Korea/Japan and the  Italian side emerging from the Calciopoli scandal.

The same is done with Maradona's Argentina in 1986, we forget that they struggled in qualification, that there were questions over whether he should have been captain, that the press at home had been so scathing of the national team in the build-up to the tournament that the players made up insulting songs about them that they sung after victories in the later stages of the tournament.

We forget that Maradona, who was not a forward by any means, top scored for his country with 5 goals at least 3 of them being solo efforts most professionals would dream of scoring. That he eventually would go on to assist the winner in the final, despite being closely man-marked by West German great Lothar Matthaus for the entire game. We as English fans forget that we actually spent 90 minutes kicking lumps out of the guy, committing fouls that would probably nowadays see us ending the game with about 8 players. But of course, "(he) was the cheat".

And around that  goal we often forget the baiting done by our press over the Faulklands war, the Faulklands being another legacy of out imperialist past that we don't want to properly acknowledge (I'm not going to get into that here, that's for Twitter! ;-)); and how that probably would have made it even less likely for the average Argentinian to feel too bad about The Hand of God (what the hell was Shilton doing though?!? How did he get out-jumped?).

I know one of the things we don't forget, that's his second goal. Dubbed "Goal of The Century", it may well have been the finest demonstration of power, speed, close control and composure, although you could argue that it was one of the best seen as he did it again against Belgium in the next game just to prove it was no fluke.

Mexico 86 is Diego Maradona, nobody has every before or since taken a major international tournament by the scruff of the neck like that, and nobody will.

Before this turns into a complete World Cup 1986 "love in", we should also go back and consider Diego's influence in club football. We often hear tired "Could he do it on a wet Wednesday night in Stoke/Burnley?", "Could [Insert World Class Foreign player] cope with the intensity of the Premier League clichés (one of these days I'll properly get into that); well Diego could.

He played on bogs, none of this Groundsman of the Year nonsense; against the best players and clubs in the World at the time; constantly being hacked like in the England game (just watch what my beloved Athletic do to him in 1983) with no protection from the referees; winning Serie A (twice) and the UEFA Cup, when it was a valued competition and there was no seeding to keep you away from the big boys until the later stages.

And all of this happened while he was off his head on cocaine (while the man definitely took drugs there was no evidence of them ever being the performance enhancing type, if anything they should have been performance reducing), being adored/harassed by fans of his club and country at a level many have never experienced (and that those who have have often struggled to cope with) and mixing with the Camorra.

So now there's his legacy. Diego is the sole reason the Argentine Number 10s are so revered. I'd go as far as saying he pioneered that role and inspired others to emulate him. The likes of Ortega, Aimar, Riquelme and Messi all have had a touch of Maradona in them. The Argentine national team is yet to win a major Men's international tournament since Diego's retirement and have only made the last four of the World Cup once (2014) in this time (they achieved this in 3 of the 5 tournaments during his career).

And Napoli have never quite hit the heights of those heady days in the later half of the 1980's. As previously stated there was one serious title challenge, were they managed to get 93 points yet still come second to Juventus; but barring a couple of Copa Italia's it's been a testing 30 or so years since the little man left Italy (under a cloud of unpaid taxes and a failed drug test, of course!).

All in all you have to say what a guy! To coin a phrase used by Barry Davies during the commentary on the Goal of The Century, "There is no debate about" the fact he should be considered the greatest to have played our beautiful game! Leo Messi isn't fit to lace his boots!*

PS he also played Italia 90 with a not fully healed, formerly broken ankle, taking painkillers before each match, the guy had some balls.

*Leo Messi is a wonderful footballer, one of the true greats of the game, this disrespect is purely for effect (but he will never be as good in my eyes).

Sisters are doing it for themselves

A month of Women’s football having the centre stage is over, and I’m back writing about it again. The FIFA Women’s World Cup ended yesterday with the reigning champions the United States clinching a comfortable 2-0 victory over a spirited yet lacking Dutch side in front of nearly 60,000 people in Lyon.

I was one of the nearly 60,000, it was my first World Cup game, I’ve been to both the European Championships and the Olympics, the set is now complete. Or is it? Many of you will be screaming, “WOMEN’S FOOTBALL IS NOT THE SAME!” Well here are my thoughts on the state of the game.

1. The Standard
I get a lot of people (men) saying to me (mocking the sport), “I can’t watch it. The standard is awful. They’d get battered by a non-league men’s side…” You guys are completely, often intentionally, missing the point. The standard has improved vastly since the last World Cup in Canada (that I also watched religiously); the game has got quicker and more physical with the increased investment that has gone into creating professional leagues across Europe.

Now I wholeheartedly agree, it’s not as fast as the men’s game; and yes any half decent men’s team would wipe the floor with the back to back World Champions. But is that why we like football? “We” (those who follow men’s football) constantly berate other fans for not supporting their local team, and the minority are lucky enough to follow/support clubs who are consistently challenging in the upper echelons of the football pyramid. So why is the quality of the game all of a sudden it selling point? I’d argue that the quality of the game dramatically decreases once you drop down from the sides that contest European places in every major European league. Drop to the second tier and it deminishes further. Why do non-league clubs exist (and get regular airplay on BT Sport in the UK), why is the third round of the FA Cup so “Magical”? Why are we watching anything other than El Classico and Liverpool v Man City if the standard of the game is so key to its enjoyment?

The answer is simple, the argument that the standard isn’t good enough isn’t true. It’s is lazy one peddled by those not willing to give the Women’s game their time. Now let me caveat that comment with, we (you) are free to watch, and not watch whatever we want. And we (you) don’t have to justify your football preferences to anyone. But I do feel we need to understand what we’re watching and why.

Football’s (sport in general’s) attraction comes from the contest and the context in which it is set. Hence nobody cares about The International Champions Cup or whatever those tournaments are called when Bayern Munich, Man United and Co. go off to China or the US in July and play each other. The standard is top notch there right? Granted there may be a few youth players fielded but we’re talking the very top of the game. Yet I couldn’t tell you one thing that’s happened in any of those “competitions” in the past. We are drawn to football (sport, as above) because of its narrative. The narrative of the contest. The teams we like, the teams we dislike, the effect that the result of a game that may not necessarily feature your team will have on your team’s fortunes. Your pre-conceived ideas around the relative strengths of each of the combatants; and the impression that the subsequent result of each game will leave with you. THIS is why we (you) are attracted, it’s like a perpetual Netflix series that has the possibility to throw up the wildest and most unbelievable storylines.

Women’s football can do this just as much as the men’s game can. You’ve just got to give it a chance to teach you the narrative.

2. Equality
I’m not asking for equality. Certainly not. I acknowledged above that the standard of the women’s game is somewhat off that of the men’s equivalent. It may never achieve parity in terms of the standard.

All of this being said I’m also not arguing against equality either. Yesterday afternoon Gianni Infantino came out to present the trophy to the triumphant Americans and was roundly booed. I genuinely was one of the first to start booing (by the way I’m not for one second suggesting that I led 60,000 people in the condemnation of the incumbent FIFA president), but I did so because I feel that Infantino is ruining our game in the interests of his own financial gain. Yes I acknowledge that the same accusation can be levelled at his predecessor and maybe even his predecessor’s predecessor; but Infantino is so much worse. The very fact that he’s changed the rules around re-election so much that he’ll either die or retire in the position tells you everything you need to know about the budding despot. This is all for a different post anyway.

When the booing died down, a chant rose from the predominantly female American crowd. “Equal Pay! Equal Pay…!” And I stopped and thought about what they were saying. As I said I have no problem with a woman footballer (or any other female professional) earning as much as their male counterpart, but it must be earned. This Women’s World Cup has largely been a success, but let’s temper our emotions. I often hear non-football fans moaning about how much professional footballers earn, especially in comparison with other, more useful jobs in society.

My response is always the same, professional footballers earn what they’re worth. All of the money that goes into their pay packets is earned through television deals, sponsorships and prize money, which they’ve generated themselves. Football is a business, no football club, with sensible owners in place (Leeds and Portsmouth fans know what I mean by this), pays footballers money they don’t already have or have the potential to earn. Players are paid as much as they are because market forces dictate their salaries. Nobody is forced to pay Messi millions of pounds a year. Barcelona know that in doing so they are making an investment that will make them millions more; and that if they don’t pay those millions someone else will, and they’ll overtake them and grab their share of the television/prize money.

The same goes for female players. If a club stands to make a significant profit they’ll pay Premier League footballer wages to one of their players one day. Unfortunately at this moment in time the financial rewards for winning the top competitions aren’t in the same bracket as the ones in the men’s game. And unfortunately it’s not as easy as just saying, “Make the prize money equal”. Television rights and sponsorship make up so much of the sport’s funding, when that starts to look like it does in the men’s game then maybe we’ll start to see some sort parity.

3. Comparisons
A lot of this post is all about parity. I’m aware that a lot of female players and fans of the game don’t want to compare the two forms of the game, but unfortunately we’re all guilty of doing it. It’s impossible. You have an absolute juggernaut in terms of entertainment and revenue generation, being played out in a mirror-like fashion, people are going to draw comparisons for both negative and positive reasons.

In terms of the games standing it may or may not ever achieve parity but I feel like it’s developing rapidly. I’ve seen complaints that yesterday’s final was held on the same day as that of the Copa America and African Nations round of 16 games. Unfortunately those established competitions (the Copa America has been going longer than any other International competition) aren’t going to be moved, and I don’t think that the Copa America final being held on the same day was a slight on the Women’s game, especially with it being hours after. It’s more a reflection of how jam packed the football calendar is becoming, especially with Women’s football being given a bigger stage.

If anyone wants a sign of how the parity of coverage is changing, they need to look at the fact that the last World Cup final in Canada was held at 12am UK time (1am CET) and not a single eyebrow was raised in this part of the world. That will not, and should not, ever happen again.

The second thing that needs to be considered when comparing the two sports is their relative stages of development. Men’s football has been developing in a professional capacity for the last 60 to 100 years, depending on when you determine the advent of professionalism is. Women’s on the other hand has only been doing so for the last decade, if that, although rapidly due to the technology available to us and the fact that the men’s game can be used as a template.

If you want a clear sign of this then look to the fact that the US have just won back to back World Cups. A feat not achieved in the men’s game since 1962. Why? Because the men’s game is so developed and global that in four years a squad of “World Beaters”, deemed to have reached the pinnacle of the sport can be reduced to a bunch of “Has-beens” living off of old usurped tactical systems that even the most mediocre of international sides can handle.

The same goes for drubbings. The US put thirteen past Thailand in the group stage of this year’s competition, this just wouldn’t happen in a men’s World Cup (I am aware of the Brazil v Germany semi in 2014, but that result was a culmination of pressure and an emotional response to Neymar’s injury, as opposed to the sides being so far apart in ability, and it wasn't 13-0). Men’s football is so global nowadays that even nations with no real historical pedigree either have players who play in the top leagues and the later rounds of European competitions; or coaches with similar experience.

By that token I don’t think Marta’s, exceptional, World Cup goalscoring record can be compared with Ronaldo (I’m not just saying this because he’s my second favourite player ever) or Miroslav Klose as I seen on social media. The fact is goals are easier (note I said easier, not easy) to score in the Women’s game because of the gap between those at the top and the lesser teams. That being said in the context of being able to go to a quadrennial professional sporting competition and perform consistently enough to score as many goals as Marta has; it’s an amazing feat.

4. America
God! We’ve had years of football being “Our thing”, and the Americans (those who cared) being glad to be a part of it. I am well aware that the Americans have always been good at the Women’s version of the game; but this double win, coupled with the increased coverage of this year’s competition seems to have magnified their success and the exuberant patriotism that comes with it. They already dominate the support and the medal boards during the Olympics and now it’s transitioned to women’s football.

Listen I’m up for a bit of national pride, and the coming together to celebrate a sporting victory, and I appreciate that international football (sport) is intertwined with nationalism, we parade flags and sing national anthems before each contest. But there’s something about the Hacksaw Jim Duggan-esque whooping and chanting of “You! Ess! Ayy!” that irks me, even if I am delighted that Rapinoe and Co. have basically stuck it to President Trump and his administration.

I feel like that’s enough of me rambling, I’m out now! Give women’s football a chance (West Ham got to a cup final, for crying out loud)! See you all at Euro 2021… x