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

The Curious Case of Cameroon's Women

It's been too long. Nearly eleven months actually. Since I came on here. I've been watching football, loads of it. But I've just not had the time, nor strong enough inclination, to jot down my thoughts here. A part of that will be down to having twin babies to look after and work commitments. Anyway let's stop with the excuses, I'm here now!

And what has dragged me from my slumber? West Ham? All English European Finals, one of them in middle of Asia, with players absent for political reasons? The (successful) UEFA Nations League? Nope! It's the Women's World Cup.

I, like many others, tuned in yesterday to watch England convincingly beat Cameroon. Unlike many others I also sat up until almost 11pm watching France edge out the Brazilians (I should probably say "Braaaaaasiwians"). I'm fully on board with Women's Football and really enjoy it, my next blog post was actually going to be at the end of the tournament on that subject, this may still come...

What's brought me here is the above mentioned England game, and the reaction to it that doesn't quite sit well with me.

I'm going to make the assumption that if you're reading this, you saw the game. I have loads to get through, so haven't got time to run through extended highlights, not even in the slack way that they do it on Match of The Day.

So at the end of the game the England Manager Phil Neville ("superstar with more medals than Steve Gerrard" my Evetonian sympathies there) came out and slammed his opponents for their conduct throughout the game; and there's been plenty of condemnation directed to the Cameroon ladies, as well as ridicule, within the press and on social media.

Now here comes the first of many caveats, I watched the game. Cameroon were no Saints. Before anything controversial had happened they'd spat at and elbowed some of the England players. And the challenge in front of the dugout on full-time was extremely dangerous and petulant. And deserved a straight red card. I sense that by this point the referee just wanted to end the game.

Here's the thing though (2nd caveat, it doesn't excuse any of the above, in my eyes all of those misdemeanours should be retrospectively punished) let's give the reaction throughout by the Cameroon players and subsequent reaction in the media some context.

Flip the game on its head for a second. I'm going to forget that I'm English for a second. And would ask Phil Neville and anyone reading this who is English to forget that they are. Imagine you are one of the Cameroon players playing for their nation in a World Cup.

Now let's think firstly about how Women's Football is treated in the UK (and much of the Western World), it has been long derided, under-invested in and is only really beginning to bear the fruits of a smattering of interest that's it's been shown in the past few years. I've watched the last 3 Women's World Cups, the game is developing rapidly, it's almost unrecognisably faster than it was four years ago. But it still faces many hurdles. And that's in the UK! I can't imagine that Cameroon is a more progressive nation in terms of gender equality etc, so I'd imagine the struggle to be a professional or semi-professional footballer in Cameroon is a difficult one.

Once you've gotten past all of that, imagine being good and lucky enough to represent your national team at a World Cup. Bear in mind the many great players that have never played in a World Cup, or only played in one, due to injury, loss of form or just playing for a nation that isn't strong enough to be guaranteed a spot every four years. For example Alan Shearer, the Premier League's all-time record goalscorer and allround 90s "Goal Machine" only ever graced one, scoring just two goals if memory serves me correctly. That's right, a lot can happen in four years.

So you've battled against the odds to become a professional/semi-professional woman's footballer. You're good enough to play for your national team, and your national team are good enough to make the World Cup. Then you have to negotiate the group stage. Unless you play for one of the top few nations, that in itself is going to be a struggle to get through, in the case of Cameroon it was. Your odessy has taken you into a Last 16 showdown with England, "Inventors of the game", "The Home of Football", quite possibly one of the biggest games of your career.

Now you know you aren't as good as England, you're going to have to be defensively disciplined and you're probably a bit nervous. First ten minutes pass without incident then you, or one of your teammates, miscontrol a ball into the box. Not to worry, the keeper will sweep that up...

Oh the referee has given that as a deliberate backpass! On the edge of your six yard box. It was so obviously not intentional, hence the keeper picked it up, but now you've been punished with an almost certain goal. I can hear loads of you saying that was a backpass, but I'm sorry it wasn't. No way. And I would have been fuming had Cameroon been given that. It just wasn't deliberate.

Needless to say England take the lead, and all of the plans you've been working on for the last few days are out of the window. 

You compose yourself and try and get to Half Time just one down, threatening on the break occasionally. Then the second England goes in.

Now let me make it clear. The second goal was legitimate, it wasn't offside and Cameroon should have defended a lot better in thar situation. But what baffles me about the whole thing was the decision to show a replay (without the lines that the audience at home saw) on the big screen in the stadium. I've been going to watch professional football matches for 30 years now (29 and a half actually, QPR v Coventry 26/12/89) and have had a season ticket a West Ham for the last 15. One thing I can confirm for a fact is that no contraversial decisions are ever shown on the big screen in the stadium, largely for fear of inciting a riot. Why are we doing this at the Women's World Cup? The call was marginal enough to spend a few minutes watching it over and over, WITH LINES ON THE SCREEN, on TV before the VAR crew could make a decision. So FIFA then decided to show it to the emotionally charged players on the field?!?

Like I said it was a legitimate goal and I can't defend some of the conduct of the Cameroon players, but I can see why they might have been a bit miffed, especially considering the nature of the first goal they conceded on top of the magnitude of the game and the journey they will have been on to get there.

There was talk of the Cameroon players calling racism at half time. I doubt very much that any of the decisions made by the referee, right or wrong, were racially motivated. I could sit here and ridicule the Cameroon players as I've seen others do, but I'm not a young black woman from Cameroon, who's made it as a professional footballer against all the odds. I'm a black man from the United Kingdom, I have some experience of racism, probably more experience than say the average person in the UK. But I still can't put myself in their shoes. I haven't seen, and heard, and felt what they have. So it doesn't sit right with me when others who have probably been fortunate enough not to experience what I have, let alone what some of those ladies may have ridicule their response. Sorry, it just doesn't.

Let's move on from that, I feel like what is normally quite a jovial blog has taken a more darker, more serious turn. So the second half kicks off and right at beginning Cameroon appear to pull it back to 2-1... Nope! Our friend VAR is back, once again after a minute or so of replays the Cameroon strike is (correctly) chalked off. Unfortunately the nature of VAR and football means that we are going to see plenty more of these moments if we are to continue with the farce that is video refereeing. And the feeling of having the elation of pulling a goal back in the most important game of your career snatched away, will almost certainly come with negative reprocussions. But you know what makes the situation even worse...? SHOWING IT ON THE BIG SCREEN AGAIN! Because we haven't learned from the incident twenty or so minutes ago.

Again, the decision was legitimate, it wasn't a goal. England were deservedly 2-0 up. But bearing in mind all that had gone before, all that I've talked about, the fact that some of the crowd, who I doubt were predominantly from Abidjan, began to boo and whilstle at the officials; I can see why the Cameroon players may have reacted the way they did.

The rest of the game was a bit of a damp squib, with England scoring a well worked, and deserved, third. And that inexcusable horror tackle in an English player in the last minute which could have done some serious damage.

And then comes the condemnation, "They're a disgrace to Women's Football", "They didn't even understand the rules" etc etc. The sort of holier than thou condemnation that as alighned to calling diving, "A thing foreigners do", villifying Diego Maradona's handball while at the same time ignoring the 45+ minutes worth of merciless hacking that he'd endured.

Two wrongs don't make a right in any instance so I don't think the Cameroon players were justified in their actions. But I refuse to look at them out of context and certainly won't act as if my own countrymen (and women) would never be capable of any skullduggerous behavior. And I'm definitely left feeling a little 'uncomfortable' when it is implied some of their actions were born from a lack of understanding a game that they will have fought hard to reach the pinnacle of.

Ready to go...

I came up with the name because it reminds me of that naff 90s song, "Yeah I'm standing on the rooftop shouting out ...!"

Am I actually ready to go? It's been 4 weeks since the World Cup finished. I'm kinda still grieving, and I'm enjoying the test cricket (even if the Indian batsmen aren't).

Pretty certain neither of them had heard of Alan Pardew until 5 minutes before this picture 

I suppose I am a little excited. I watched a bit of Sheffield United v Swansea the other day, that's surely an indication of New Season Excitement. West Ham have signed some players, it looks like we're actually attempting to strengthen our squad and the Porn Barons are putting their hands in their pockets. All good right...? Hmmmm For me the jury is still out, I've been burnt too many times to let myself believe that West Ham are actually turning themselves into a decent outfit. I mean we're probably the only team in the World who could pull off a deadline day coup of signing a young Carlos Tevez and Javier Mascherano, only to end up fighting a relegation battle, almost getting a points deduction and scraping safety on the last day of the season.

As for the rest of the football, Arsenal look interesting because I have no idea whether they're still going to be a joke or whether Emery is actually going to give them a some backbone. Liverpool might be decent, which doesn't scare me as much as it should; a sign of how little a threat they've posed to trophy engravers over the last few years. City will probably just run away with it again.

In the real leagues, which don't start until next week, Cristiano Ronaldo is at Juve! This is exciting, but also scary. The rest of the league is already scared of Juve and has massive inferiority complex. I suppose we can just call this 8 in a row already...

I say all the real leagues (aka the ones I'm interested in) start next week  but France actually kick off this weekend too. How will Buffon get on on Sunday evening? I think they're playing Caen, so he'll probably have time to spark up a cigarette, grab coffee & panatone and read a copy of Gazetta della Sport, James Richardson style, and still keep a clean sheet.

So we're back to me trying to sneak football matches in as we're getting the kids read for bed, and cooking with the tablet next to me. Following games on LiveScore because we've got some sort of Sunday lunch arranged which means I miss the Derby d'Italia. Football is back, AND IT'S LIVE (God I f*cking hate it when Martin Tyler does that, mate the Premier League isn't that amazing)!

Game 64

Game 64 of 64 is upon us. It's been an odd World Cup full of shocks; I for one never envisaged the Final being contested by these two sides. By 7pm UK time we will have new World Champions.

We've seen rampant hosts routing inept looking Saudis, while the leaders of the two nations sat straddled either side of Gianni Infantino fist bumping over every goal.

The Cristiano Ronaldo Show, in one of the most epic group stage clashes in recent memory.

VAR! Penalties awarded because of VAR. Penalties not awarded because of VAR. Plenty of penalties, well in the beginning anyway.

The holders rocked and sent home early for the 3rd tournament in a row. Surely an indication of the difference 4 years make in the football world, both tactically and physically.

Brazil doing a Brazil. Barring that little blip at the turn of the century  they have a habit of turning up at World Cups, looking like one of the front runners then somehow heading home before the Semi Finals come around. Ahhhhh Braaaaaasiw!

England reborn! Or were they? Panama may well be one of the worst sides I remember seeing at the World Cup and Tunisia weren't much cop either. Sweden made the Quarter Finals playing some pretty uninspiring stuff. And we basically came a cropper upon sight of the first half decent opponent. An improved side, or improved PR mixed with some good fortune?

Argentina showing that Messi can't do it on a wet Wednesday night in Sochi. Or at least he can't with absolutely no balance to the side that he plays in. Maradona enjoyed himself though!

Peru, Colombia and Mexico all dazzling playing high tempo football. But for all of the excitement and aesthetics none of them reached the Quarter Finals.

Africa's showing was disappointing. Salah was injured, rushed back and then unable to halt the tide of Russians sweeping over the Egyptians. Was it a case of, like Messi, one man can't polish a turd or drag a side with a number of clear deficiencies through to the later stages of a tournament? Not in 2018 anyway. In our global game where there are no mugs or easy games, except Panama. Senegal and Nigeria impressed at times. Musa won the most impressive foot race I've ever seen against an Icelandic, but they both went home early. Tunisia didn't provide much either, not the best tournament for Africa.

The knockout stages typical of every tournament I've seen with the exception of 1994. Too many penalty shoot outs, not many games that swung both ways, and not many goals in Extra Time. Kasper Schmeichel performed last minute heroics in vein; Akinfeev actually did something positive of note for once, enabling Russia to significantly exceed expectations; and we finally got that penalty shoot out monkey of our backs (only just) thanks to a piece of brilliance from Jordan Pickford.

Belgium and France provided us with two games where momentum swung in the knockout stages. Mbappe was too quick for Argentina and Japan fell apart upon the introduction of Felliani and Chadli.

The two Francophones were probably the best two teams at the this year's tournament. Hazard came to the party, Lukaku bullied on the "flat tracks" of the 1st round and De Bruyne had his moments, including one that sent Brazil home. Pogba actually looked like the Pogba that Juventus sold to Man United, causing everyone to lose a little more faith in Mourinho; and Mbappe stirred memories of a young Ronaldo (that's the real Ronaldo by the way).

Finally we have Croatia. Making the most of what quite possibly will be the last tournament where both Rakatic and Modric will be able to play together as a force. Rebic and Peresic have terrorised full backs (and Willy Caballero, what a howler); Lovren has looked OK at times, the 1st half against England not being one of those times; and Vida has looked like some kind of Sci-Fi villain who can shoot laser beams from his eyes.

Farewell Russia 2018! It's been a breathtaking month of rushing home from work (I almost said "Russian" as a poor joke), watching games while putting the kids to bed and "Football Coming Home". God knows what Qatar 2022 will be like with it scheduled to start the day before my 42nd birthday, and I'm still not convinced that the 48 team format in 2026 will work. It may well be the case that this is the last proper World Cup as we know it.

PS Bit disappointed with ITVs intro this year, massive step down from "Braaaaaasiw Braaaaaasiw!" and "Sing Sing Africa", but in my opinion ITV have trumped BBC and will be getting my attention for the Final!

Good Start!

We're underway!

The day I dreamt of for the last 23 months has come and gone, and we're 3 days into a World Cup!

There's been drama. And goals, quite a few late ones too (no 0-0s so far). We've seen half of this year's qualifiers and I've already seen enough to have formed, or even solidified, some prejudices.

The opening game was a big surprise, World Cup openers tend to be fairly lean on goals. I think the scoreline was more of an indication of how terrible the Saudis are than the Russians are good. The ITV commentator was doing my head in a bit when he kept referring to the game as "Opening Night". Give it a rest, you're not adding to the drama, you don't need to!

Also ITV's (and BBC's too) opening credits were a bit of a disappointment. Yes even little things like that are important to me! After Sing Sing Africa and Braaaaaasiw Braaaaaasiw I had high hopes. For ITV that is, despite having the best commentary team and overall presentation, I'm always disappointed with BBC's opening credits (other than the Euro 2004 Basement Jaxx ones).

Spain and Portugal served up the best World Cup match I've seen in literally decades. You have to go back to the summer of 94 and clashes between Brazil & Holland, Argentina & Romania and Italy & Spain to find as entertaining spectacles in my eyes.

France and Argentina have both put in performances that reinforced my opinion that they are massively overhyped, in terms of the output that each team produces. A lot of people, who obviously haven't seen them in qualifying, look at the squads and assume that they'll both sweep all before them. This is not going to happen, mark my words! Argentina are woefully imbalanced and have been for about a decade; and France lack the cohesion to beat anyone half decent or even beat dross like Australia convincingly.

Don't even get me started on Nigeria. I didn't see their friendly with England, I was busy with my wife who was in the middle of giving birth to our twins (yeah they're making the football watching challenging); but the post match word was that Nigeria looked decent in the second half. Before tonight's game with Croatia there was talk of them being on the up. This is a lie! For a start they've got John Obi Mikel playing with the number 10 on his back. Forget whether he's actually playing as their creative player, surely they somebody else half decent who would've wanted that number? What about Moses? For me it's nearly as bad as Asamoah Gyan wearing number 3 and not playing anywhere near Leftback.

Finally there's Peru! Ahhhhh Peru I love you! Forget the red sash, I mean their's is a great kit, but look at the football. They remind me of Colombia and Chile from the last World Cup. Energetic, open and slightly naive. I'm afraid today's defeat to Denmark may have put them in an impossible position in terms of qualification from the group. Saying that they do have to play the same France side I've just rubbished!

Bring on Father's Day, which is essentially Brazil and Germany! I can't wait!

Diego Armando Maradona and the World Cup - 10 Things

He's my second favourite player of all time just ahead of Alessandro Del Piero and behind the Ronaldo (not that Portuguese guy). It's pretty impossible not synonamise Diego Maradona with the World Cup and Argentina's performances in the competition; whether it be from the perspective of a prodigious youngster not taken to the tournament, an influential captain dragging them through, or a past it lunatic ranting at another failed campaign. In a World Cup context we've been aware of Maradona's presence for 40 years now.

"So what are the ten things you remember of Maradona from the World Cup Travis?" I hear you ask. Well...

1. Squaring up to the whole Belgian defence in 1982
It's since been debunked as a trick of the camera. If you've not seen it before, this is basically an image of Maradona, ball at his feet, with 6 Belgians (in that wonderful Belgium 1982 kit) in his way, poised to go on another one of those runs.

What's actually happened is that the ball has dropped to his feet from a free kick on the edge of the box, hence everyone is behind the ball. I'm not even sure anything came of that particular situation, but because of his heroics 4 years later we've created this fantasy of him running through the scared Belgians. The reality is that Maradona and Argentina were thoroughly disappointing both in that game and in Spain in 1982.

2. Kung-fu kicking that Brazilian dude
As said in memory number 1, Maradona and Argentina were disappointing in 1982, Messi-like if you will ("shots fired"). After creeping out of their first round group they found themselves in a second group with perennial World Cup powerhouses Brazil and Italy.

Needless to say an Argentina pre the mystique created in 1986 were no match for either and Maradona was singled out for some "Special" treatment by both sides. Once the defending champions were 3-0 down and already eliminated from the tournament Maradona decided to exact his revenge in the only way he knew how...

3. That ball for Caniggia against Brazil
By 1990 Maradona was a fully bona-fide World Cup legend but, unfortunately for him, Argentina were a spent force. They would go on to reach the final under his steam, with Maradona's highlight of the tournament being a move where he rolled back the years showing the strength to hold off two Brazilian defenders, while threading the most irresistible through ball for Cannigia to run on to and round Taffarel. Ouuff!!

4. The terrible penalty against Yugoslavia
By 1990 the sheen was starting to fade on our legend. Sure he was still capable of producing moments like that ball against Brazil, but Maradona was carrying a bit of weight and was most certainly not capable of performing the same heroics as he'd done 4 years earlier in the Mexican heat. If ever there was evidence of his mortality it would be his pitiful penalty in the shootout with Yugoslavia. It's almost as if he thought he'd score just because he was "Maradona". Luckily Goyacachea was on hand to bail him out with a string of saves that set up a semifinal showdown with the hosts Italy.

5. Trying to turn Naples against Italy
It was a bold move! But nothing was considered too bold by Diego.

"Neapolitans you shouldn’t forget that in Italy they do not consider you to be Italians. The country comes and asks for your support for just one day of the year, and for the other 364 they’ll call you Africans."

It almost worked, according to some sources there were pockets of the crowd who weren't as hostile to their Argentinian visitors. Ultimately the battle was won anyway, Italy conceded their first goal of the tournament and subsequently lost the penalty shootout at the end of the game, this time Maradona taking his spot kick a little more seriously.

6. That goal against Greece
I remember rushing home from school to see this one and I wasn't disappointed. Argentina put Greece to the sword with Batistuta scoring a hattrick. But Diego stole the show with a thunderous left foot drive into the top corner, followed by that celebration where he looked possessed. There was still life left in the old dog!

7. His performance against Nigeria
I feel like Maradona doesn't get much credit for this performance, maybe that's because he subsequently failed a drug test at the end of the game. But his influence on the team, now aged 33, should not be downplayed. Especially in the group match against Nigeria. Argentina found themselves a goal down against an exciting attacking side that would beat them 2 years later on the way to winning the Olympics.

Then up steps Diego. First he's involved in an inventive free kick that the Nigerian goalkeeper spills enabling the equaliser. Then he plays a perfectly weighted quick free kick into the path of his old pal Caniggia to set up the winner. While it was then discovered that he'd failed a drugs test, it can be argued no performance enhancing drug can help you have that awareness or deft of touch to be able to play that killer ball for Caniggia, so this is going down as another display of genius for me.

8. Sitting in the stands like a spectre hanging over the modern day team
In my opinion Argentina have never gotten over Maradona leaving the side. Its no coincidence that they haven't won a major international competition since 1993 i.e. In the post-Maradona era. There's the whole "New Maradona" thing but I also think that the very fact that he can often be found somewhere in the ground during modern day Argentina World Cup matches (even in the dugout for a brief unsuccessful spell) has a negative effect on the team.

While he is quick to praise and celebrate, I can never forget the camera panning to him as he did that weird thing with his hands after that goal against Serbia (and Montenegro?) in 2006, Diego always has to chuck in his two cents when things aren't going so well. I'm sure we'll see him again this year.

1986
Right I've purposely left this bit, the best bit, for the end. Mexico 86 is Diego Maradona! It's where the legend is born. Where he cemented his place as the best ever, in my opinion (and many others).

9. Mexico 86 outside of the England game
Before we get into that game I think a point needs to be made of his other performances on, and off, the field in this tournament. In the group phase Maradona shows glimpses of what is to come in the game against South Korea; as do the Koreans who kick lumps out of him at every opportunity.

Against Belgium, probably still on a high from the England Quarter Final, he scores two great goals, one another mazy solo dribble with an explosive finish.

It's always said that Maradona was quiet in the final, as the West Germans had deployed Matthäus to man mark him for the whole game. But he still gets enough time and space to play the perfectly weighted through ball that enables Burochaga to score the match winning goal. So not that quiet then.

Aside from all this though. One of my favourite clips of Maradona in 1986 isn't actually of him playing football. As I said earlier Mexico 86 was his tournament both on and off the field. And we get to see how much of a bond he has with his team mates, as their captain too, when Maradona leads the dressing rooms in a rendition of...

"Argentina's going to be Champions! 
We dedicate this to you all, even the f***ing whores who gave birth to you."

An adapted song from the terraces. Aimed at the journalists back home who had slammed the team after an indifferent qualification campaign.

Expletives aside, I've always pointed to this clip as one of the fundamental things that separates Diego from Lionel Messi, who is as technically gifted as Maradona, but is often described as aloof and out of touch with the people of Argentina. In my opinion as a captain you win with the team, lose with the team and sing with it!

10. England
This is probably the first thing that sprang to mind when you read the title of this blog post. Maradona is both famous and infamous for the role he played in the Quarter Final against England.

If you've been living under a rock, or aren't English (and have been living behind a rock) you may not have heard about Maradona's contraversial Hand Of God goal, which often leads us in England to dismiss him as a cheat and gloss over his achievements when considering him up against the other greats in the history of the game.

Here's the thing though we, well not you and I, Terry Fenwick (unless Terry Fenwick is reading this, in that case you) spent the whole game kicking Maradona up in the air every time he got a sniff of the ball. We were no angels.

Also even the move for the illegal goal was brilliant. There's a little one two between Maradona and a team mate and then the ball is ricocheted up into the box and even then Diego has no right to win the ball. Even with his hand. Or with his hand close to his head, thus giving the impression he'd actually headed the ball in. Where was Shilton?

OK so you're not buying that because you're too hurt to forgive him even after 32 years, but you have to accept that the second goal is testament to the man's genius. Maradona spins away from Hoddle deep in his own half and then 20 seconds later he's rolled the ball in after going round Shilton. The goal gives me goosebumps every time I see it. It's just outstanding!

For me Maradona will always be a devisive character, a true example of a flawed genius. Whether you remember him for being the size of a house until he got his stomach stapled, hosting bizarre chat shows, ball juggling warm-ups, being led away to that infamous drugs test holding the nurse's hand (?!?) or being that kid in the grainy black and white footage scoring goals for Argentinos Junios against fully grown adults, it cannot be denied that he has made a lasting (and generally positive) impression on the World Cup.

Thanks Diego, I understand you!

ANNOUNCE! Part II - "It was better in my day" - The changing face of the FIFA World Cup

I'd kind of thought about doing something like this for a while, then came yesterday's announcement of the England squad.

Quite often I hark back to a simpler time, either on here or on twitter (*cough* @ntrav99), when football was less commercially savy. When games kicked off at 3pm on a Saturday. When drawn matches went to replays and managers tried to win every competition that they were in; and the main prize wasn't qualifying for a competition that you have no hope of winning, just because of what it did to your bank balance. A time when we rarely knew who owned clubs let alone, who was heading up their "Commercial Strategy"; when the only sponsor that could be seen was the one across the team's chest (who the f*ck sponsors a training kit?!) and Barcelona didn't even have one!

I'm not the only person who has these nostalgic views (I think all the above is bad by the way), in my quest for World Cup related material in the run up to this year's tournament, the irony being that most of this stuff wouldn't have been around back in the day when things were "better", I've heard many a well respected journalist refer to an age where we went into tournaments not knowing any of the players. Being surprised when that Hagi that you'd heard of, but never seen beyond a 20 second clip of him in qualifying, actually turned out to be the real deal.

For me it's kind of a phenomenon that is at odds with itself. I love the fact that nowadays there are so many media sources where I can read about a watch previous World Cup tournaments, but then I do think that life, or should I say the tournament, was probably more interesting and definitely more innocent when you had next to nothing going into it. In the past the World Cup created it's own interest, it didn't need to be slick or well presented to thrive. There was no goal music in the stadium or television cameras that spiral zoomed into the centre circle seconds before kick off.

I suppose there needs to be a balance in terms of the polish. There must be some. I definitely don't want completely to go back in the direction of the early tournaments in terms of presentation. You had 1950, which could have actually been held in 1949 (what?) and consisted of a number of lop sided groups, some with as few as two teams, others with a full compliment of four. You've also got 1954 where the teams didn't even all play eachother in the group phase? The 2 seeds played the 2 "Minows" and that was it.

We also have the 1974, 78 & 82 where FIFA decided to do away with a knock out phase and have a 2nd round of group games?! Although I suppose it meant no penalty shootouts (except for France v Germany in 82). It says a lot about how much FIFA have got their sh*t in order that the current format of the tournament is the longest used by a mile. That of course was until FIFA went too far again and, in the pursuit of more votes from the Football Associations and money from the sponsors that would both benefit from more teams being in the tournament, decided that we would see an expansion to 48 teams in 2026.

It's not just FIFA that are at it. What the hell was that England squad announcement video yesterday? At first I thought, "Hmmmm, this is quite cool and different..." but then it turned into, "What's wrong with a good old fashioned list submitted to the press, which can then be read out?" It just feels like everyone is trying to "out-market" eachother.

I think what I'm saying is that I'd like the World Cup to be on a loop of 1986 to 94; with that 24 team format that we're now using for the European Championship (see I resisted the urge to call it the "European World Cup")! Can we do that...?

You Come At The Kings, You Best Not Miss...

You'd think that this would be the case with the reigning World Champions, but in most cases World Title defences go out with a damp squib. In fact only two sides have successfully defended the World Cup and only one other has made the final.

So what has happened when people have Come At The Kings?

Well 1934 wasn't a great start! You've got to at least turn up if you want to defend the title. I can understand the South Americans not turning up in 38 when the tournament was held in Europe again but Uruguay should really have at least tried to go to Italy!

Their argument was that the Europeans had stayed away in 1930 so they were going to do the same, but the Belgians, Romanians, French and Yugoslavs had made that journey. The US travelled across the Atlantic to get pumped 7-1 by the hosts in a one off Knockout game! "Thanks for coming! Close the door on your way out...!" That's actually not 100% accurate. The Americans actually played Mexico in a one off qualifier in Rome  days before the tournament. So they at least played two games (unlike the poor Mexicans), even if they were sent home early in no uncertain terms. Poor form Uruguay!

1938 is one of the two occasions where the holders actually showed their supremacy. The Italians came through another straight knockout tournament in Europe. You can bet your life no Uruguayans went and got their passports renewed in preperation, same went for Argentina. They were outraged that the tournament hadn't gone back to South America. Of course Brazil were there, haplessly conspiring to ruin their chances of winning the things; resting the tournament's star player in the Semi Final at a time that there were no substitutes.

Any chance of the Italians coming out fighting in 1950 were hampered by two things. War (What's it good for? Absolutely nothing! Say it again...)*, which denied Argentina the right to host the tournament in 1942, not sure they'd have been up for the boat trip anyway considering general aversion to crossing the Atlantic back then. What's wrong with you guys?! Forget the 6 week journey, it's a World Cup! You can be a part of history! Think Barry Davies, Mexico 86, They think it's all over and all that...!

The second factor being the Superga Air Crash, which killed Il Grande Torino, the legendary Torino side who one back to back titles for 5 years straight; and made up the majority of the Italian national team. As a result of the tragedy, the reigning champs, who became the first to actually bother coming to the other side of the world to defend the World Cup, travelled by boat (Dennis Bergkamp style) while the rest of the competitors flew. And were knackered and relatively unfit by the time they arrived in Braaaaaasiw.

1954 saw the first proper attempt at a defence of the title from the Champs. I say this because by that point everybody had started to get the World Cup bug, I mean we were still a few years away from Barry Davies and BBC goal of the Tournament competitions set to naff (but nostalgically warming) soundtracks and graphics, but England were playing! And people were flying and resultantly prepared to cross the Atlantic.

Uruguay, the other half of the duopoly that dominated the World Cup when it came to actually winning the trophy (and not resting your best player in the Semi, declaring yourselves Champions prematurely or annexing your neighbours and trying to ride their coat tails or just not turning up because you think it's all beneath you), made it to the Quarter Finals dispatching of us along the way.

The only real thing to note from their title defence is their ill tempered defeat, later dubbed "The Battle of Bern" in which they were eliminated by the team considered the best in the World at the time, eventual losing finalists Hungary. Apparently tempers boiled over so much that a brawl kicked off in the tunnel and the changing rooms after the match, with the police having to step in.

I actually don't know much of what happened to the Germans in 1958. If memory serves me correctly they came 4th and Juste Fontaine scored 73 goals against them in the playoff (may have been 4). West Germany became the first team other than Uruguay and Italy to win the World Cup when they beat the Hungarians in the rain in Switzerland four years earlier. They couldn't repeat the feat in Sweden  probably partly down to the fact that they hadn't become the fearsome footballing nation that we are all familiar with nowadays (obviously there were no penalties back then either).

In Chile in 1962, one of the most seemingly mundane World Cups in my opinion (obviously after Italia 90, nothing was as drab as the penalty shoot out fest that was Italia 90), Braaaaaasiw unremarkably became the second, and last, team to successfully defend their title. And did it without Pele, one of the many reasons why I think Maradona was better (but that's for another day). Instead they had the goat sh*gging, mother in law killing, alcoholic, genius that was Garrincha to thank.

By 1966 Garrincha was on the decline and Pele had bottled it on the big stage again! I jest (again). As a result the Braaaaaasiwians (that's probably what Roy Hodgson actually calls them) were unceremoniously dumped out of the competition in the first round.

In the technicolor Mexican sun it was our turn to defend the trophy. And we did so without any hiccups, hence we now have two stars above our badge... If only!

What actually happened was our Captain got arrested for jewellery theft and our striker was carried off of an aeroplane on suspicion of being blind drunk on the eve of the tournament. Then our manager offended the locals, our best goalkeeper got food poisoning and his replacement had a howler a quarter final where we surrendered a 2 goal lead and were knocked out. Pretty successful campaign if you ask me!

If you think that was bad, Braaaaaasiw went from being that famous, "Here comes Carlos Alberto on the right...!" team in 1970 to a replica of Billy Bremner's Leeds side of the 70s, four years later in West Germany. I suppose they did still field a slightly overweight looking Rivelinho, but as you can imagine it wasn't the same. The mantle of "Entertainers" was passed on to Johan Cruyff's Dutch side.

In Argentina West Germany were apparently shockingly bad. Although they still made the second group stage, OBVIOUSLY. A bad German side is the equivalent of a good every other nation, while unspectacular it wasn't the worst title defence ever.

Argentina also disappointed four years later in Spain, despite having a young Diego Maradona in the side (the actual GOAT**). One thing that I hadn't appreciated, being 1 at the time of the tournament (don't worry I'm not going to start that again) was that the television station at the time refused to air the opening game of the tournament between the Champs Argentina and Belgium. Which the Argentinians failed to win (is it "Argentinians" or "Argentines"?).

Turns out Maradona's lot weren't so great away from South America, without President Vidiela paying opposing players a visit before key games. The Argentines/Argentinians had a stinker in 82 eventually limping out in the second group stage, with Maradona being sent off in a key game for retaliation to some of the "special attention" he'd been receiving from opposing defenders. This did at least set up the showdown of the tournament between the free scoring  free flowing Braaaaaasiw and the pragmatic slow starters (TM) Italy,  which the Italian's (or is it Italianians, kidding) eventually won. Probably the last we'd see of that young upstart Maradona...

From what I've seen we should always host the World Cup in North or Central America. 1970 looked great; 94 was/is my favourite tournament, bar the final; and 1986, the competition's second visit to Mexico, was an excellent colourful tournament full of exciting players and teams. Except for the holders the Italianians! So much so that I can barely remember what happened to them in the Mexican heat, it was that underwhelming!

From what I recall there was a game against South Korea? That might have been the tournament opener? And there was a game against the Argentine/Argentinians. Then they were eventually eliminated by the French (reigning European World Cup Champions of the Galaxy) in the second round. They'd have had to play Braaaaaasiw in the Quarter Finals anyway ...

Come 1990 the jig was well and truly up for Maradona and Argentina. Considering this was the first World Cup I watched, I can remember being thoroughly disappointed with them from the moment Benjamin Messing lost his boot trying to kick Caniggia into a pulp; through scraping past the USSR (they'd have gone out in the groups had it been the current 32 team format); Maradona's one moment of genius in the game against Braaaaaasiw, amid rumours that they drugged Branco; the penalties that saw off both the Yugoslavianians (I'm messing) and Italy; and that final! The worst World Cup final I've seen (and bear in mind all of the others that I didn't see live seemed to have been better).

But believe it or not, it would turn out that Argentina in 1990 aren't even the worst Champs I've seen in the 8 tournaments I've watched!

Germany weren't great in 1994. But then they're Germany, so that equated to a quarter final exit! Klinsmann did score a quality volley that he set up for himself against South Korea and they did take part in an entertaining 2nd round win over Belgium, which I missed because I was at Butlins (that's another story for another day). But Germany only put up slightly more of a fight than Argentina had 4 years earlier.

Braaaaaasiw in 1998 were probably the best ever reigning champions I've witnessed. For a start they had that Nike advert in the airport, that was worth a Semi Final place on its own. In all seriousness though  they were powered by the best player in the world at the time. Kids imagine Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo actually turned up at a big tournament and replicated what they do to Leganes and Sporting Hee Haw against decent teams... That's Ronaldo in 1998! The man was unstoppable! Except for the whole having a seizure hours before the final.

People talk about Zidane at France 98 but the reality was he only really stood out in the final. The French team is revered in hindsight, whereas Braaaaaasiw were feared, even Denilson!

We got to see the real France in Korea/Japan. Heavily reliant on an injured, and now probably the best in the world, Zidane. For me the best France team I've seen at the World Cup was the 06 lot, who basically tuned up for one last hurrah and came very close to winning the thing. The 02 iteration of the side didn't come near their level, despite being World and European World Cup of the Solar System & Galaxy Champions (I really need to stop with that joke  its been six years!).

Have you ever watched Every Which Way But Loose? Quick synopsis, if you never had ITV during the 1990s. Clint Eastwood is this Street Fighting Prize Fighter who gets his head turned by a pretty country singer he meets in a bar, while he's travelling the country in search of a fight with this legendary street fighter called "Tank Murdoch". At the end of the film he finally gets his fight with a very washed up and out of shape "Tank" but he loses to him, despite dominating the fight, either because the girl is in his head or because he sees that beating "Tank Murdoch" will send him down a similar path as the washed up folk legend that's he's pummelling... Brazil in 2006 were Tank Murdoch!

As much as I love Ronaldo (he's my joint favourite player of all time with Maradona), he just wasn't the electric forward that we saw in 98 or the the lethal finisher that bagged eight in 2002. He kind of walked around the pitch with his hands on his hips, looking like he was in the sort of shape I'd be in if chucked on to a field of Professional Footballers aged 28 (still managed to score this CLASSIC Ronaldo goal against Ghana in the last 16).

Then you had Ronaldinho, he'd graced 02 as part of the "3 R's" attack and was coming off the back of a monster season with Barcelona where he'd won the Champions League and been applauded at the Bernebau after taking Real Madrid apart. But 2006 looked a tournament too much for him despite the bucktoothed, Jerry Curled maestro only being 25/26 at the time.

Roberto Carlos lacked the agility to be as cavalier as he had been in the last two tournaments, and ended up looking like a lost fullback in a pub team (Especially in the defeat against France)! Even Adriano, who was given a shot power of 138,262,937 out of 99 on that year's Pro Evolution soccer disappointed.

It was a sad end to an era of Braaaaaasiwian dominance that had effectively lasted 12 years from the Romario/Bebeto team that was successful in the US.

If Braaaaaasiw were bad I'm not sure what adjective I'd use to describe the next two title defenses that were to come. Granted the Italians in 2010 were unlucky to lose Buffon to injury but they still should have qualified from a group containing Paraguay, New Zealand and Slovakia. The Italian's only achievement of note was a lovely chipped finish from Quagliarella in a frantic 3-2 defeat to the Slovakians. That and their reaffirmation of the "slow starting Italy" stereotype that is lazily rolled out by every pundit on UK television (at least we won't hear that one this year).

Finally we have Spain. Who'd have thought they would have continued trend that has seen 3 of the last 4 World Champions perish in the Group Stage of the following tournament. I blame their signing up of the Diego Costa, a man I recently (correctly) proclaimed to be the King of Shithousery, for a tournament which was to be held in his country of birth (I mean even that is trolling in my eyes)! Things rapidly went down hill for the Spanish (or is it Spaniards ...) and they found themselves dethroned after just two games, much to the delight of that old dude (who I'm assuming was Braaaaaasiwian) with the "Adios Spana" sign. Was that written on a tablet or did I imagine that? If it was, what a time to be alive!

I think what my ramblings will teach you is that one tournament's champion is so often another's laughing stock. Be it washed up has beens, cocky trolls or a bunch of Joga Bontians turned into Stoke! Four years is a long time, especially in a sport so heavily reliant on athleticism and current mental state. Look out Germany...!


*I jest, briefly. As someone with a history degree who has studied the first and second world wars, their causes and effects I'm conscious of trivialising them!

**See I'm down with the kids!