BBC Blog Network

User Profile

Joe_Green

Listed below are comments made by Joe_Green between Thursday, 11th June 2009 and Thursday, 26th November 2009.

«Newer
Older»

Will South Africa 2010 produce a new Pele? 12:23pm on 26 Nov 2009 The main hurdle to producing a 'new Pele' is a combination of the media, and us, namely people who comment on blogs and have regular debates on football.

If anyone shows potential along the lines of Messi or C.Ronaldo then it seems impossible for them to get to the age of 21 before every week another article asks some usually fatuous (with some respectable exceptions) question as to whether 'New Player X' is the best player in the world? Is so'n'so the next Maradonna/Pele/Cruyff/D'jemba D'jemba... all it does is put immense pressure on the player to provide performances fit for a montage week in week out. This combined with immense PR, marketing and physical demands of the modern player risks a genuine "next Pele" being drowned in hyperbole, absurd comparrisons and unrealistic expectations.

I'm not saying Pele moved through his early years as an unknown outside Brazil, but (to hark back to a regular issue in this blog) players are moved to big clubs so early nowadays it's borderline impossible to be a Messi or Zidane nowadays without the media spotlight hitting you before you're out of your teens.

If there is to be a "next Pele" in South Africa, I personally would like it to be an American. Whilst the idea of America one day becoming dominant in 'soccer' has some unnerving elements, I'm really fed up with people in England and Europe blindly saying America is rubbish at football and have no understanding of the game. I've been really impressed with them when I've seen them play in the past few years, mature, intelligent play with soem genuine flair. Maybe a truly World Class American player will stir up the game in the US and scare some of the traditionalists in Europe to be more outward looking in their take on the game.
Time to play England's 2018 trump card 11:59am on 26 Nov 2009 I don't really understand why there's so much emphasis on making sure every single region has some representation with a stadium in the tournament. In principle it would be lovely for Leicester (my home town & team) to host World cup matches (or Derby/Notts who seem to have equal merit) but it also seems like equality for the sake of not wishing to leave anyone out rather than providing the best tournament possible.

We are lucky to have a relatively diverse Premier League and if you need 10-15 stadiums at 40k+ capacity then picking the existing ones that fit the bill would seem to be widespread enough without more provincial clubs risking debt and half filled stadiums in the future just to expand theirs and grab a place.

Wembeley (London), Emirates (London), White Hart Lane (the new one, London), Millenium Stadium (Wales), Villa Park (B'ham), Old Trafford (Manc), City of Manchester Stadium (Manc), Anfield (Liv'pool), Stadium of Light (Sun'land), St James's Park (Newcastle) and Hillsbourough (Sheffield) seems plenty of geographical spread.

The only stadium that would need significant improvement would be Hillsborough, and that improvement would be aesthetic rather than it's capacity. The only area that would be relatively deprived would be The West Country but with respect that is the area of the country with the least representation of clubs in the upper levels of English football. And to be fair, no-one in Cornwall would be more then a couple of hours from Cardiff anyway.

If the 2018 bid puts all it's emphasis on making everyone happy and trying to avoid a backlash from a couple of region's tourist boards then all we'll end up with is a thinly spread package with some average stadiums in average locations. I include my home town of Leicester in that. Unless our footballing fortunes improve massively we would seriously struggle to fill a 40k+ stadium for 75%+ of our games and the same is true for Derby, Nottingham, Bristol, Plymouth, Portsmouth etc.

Make the bid as strong as possible, not as diplomatic.
Brazil's new breed of guard dog 01:04am on 10 Nov 2009 The problem with U-17 is that promise at that age is eons from actual real terms promise.

I was in The Gambia recently and being a football fan chatted to locals about the Gambian game. The entire nation's domestic league shares one stadium and their best national team players are playing at French 3rd/4th tier, Swedish 2nd/3rd tier and Belgian 2nd/3rd tier level. That's pretty low, I think it's fair to say their national side would struggle against a solid League Two side in England.

But their U-17 team have just won the African Championship... I somehow doubt that in five to seven years The Gambia will be challenging for The African Nations cup or World Cup qualification.

If the Brazil side is changing because they're struggling to produce new, quality players in certain positions or failing to bring on promising talent then it seems they've just got the same problems that all countries have to deal with and it's not that dramatic.

When you think about it, it's proposterous that England hasn't produced a top class left footed winger in nearly 20 years, but we haven't (excluding Steve Guppy of course!) so we've had to adapt. How many "the next Maradonna's" were there before Messi? When you think about it, with a well established infastructure, good training facilities etc, how has Scotland not produced a single World Class player since the 80's?

A Brazil that plays unimpressive, static football may seem an oddity, but it doesn't seem any less odd than how it would come accross if you could go back in time to the 80's and say to the Spanish FA "you won't manage to get within a country mile of a trophy until well into the 21st century". They'd laugh at you and say that's not possible.
Brazil's new breed of guard dog 10:51pm on 09 Nov 2009 It certainly isn't the best time to be trying to argue Arsenal's shortcomings at the moment, as they're not exactly struggling. But I think when you look at Arsenal's 1st choice XI there does seem to be one obvious gap, an out 'n' out defensive midfielder.

Results speak for themselves and therefore no-one can currently argue Arsenal desperately need anything. But Wenger has tried playing Denilson, Fabregas, Diaby and even Nasri in the defensive midfield role in the past two years. There are two interpretations of this, one, that he was interested in seeing if these players could fulfil the role out of curiosity regarding the player, or two that he felt the team didn't have a defensive midfielder and was tying to create one. I think most would admit the latter is the more likely.

It would be grossly simplistic to imply that Arsenal's lack of silverware recently is a direct result of letting Viera and then Gilberto go and not effectively replacing them, I think the PL is simply too strong for one man to make a team. But equally it would be surely naive to suggest that Arsenal have stopped winning silverware because nowadays English football is all swings and roundabouts and Arsenal had their time and must now wait for their next turn at the top?

I don't think Arsenal would have carried on winning things as they did had they kept hold of Gilberto, but equally I think they'd have won a trophy or two in the past four years if they've replaced him with one of Gattuso, Y.Toure, Barry, De Rossi etc... or held on to Diarra perhaps.
Brazil's new breed of guard dog 10:35pm on 09 Nov 2009 Excellent article Tim, I think this gets at the fascinating story of the evolution of formations in the face of the evolution of players throughout the European game. (I specify the European game because I've got to be man enough to admit my knowledge of domestic football outside Europe is shakey now, never mind when put in the context of generational differences!)

It is, I have always felt, one of the greatest folly's anyone can embark upon to attempt a comparison of era's in footballers, and especially specific players but there are marked differences between the kinds of players you have in the game nowadays and those back in the 70's and before. Formations and styles of play have emerged as a result of questions that are raised as to how you deal with specfic players?

Whilst it would be wrong to say modern players have invented new roles, they have certainly proflegated them and made them commonplace wheras before players had to adapt their game to fit their teams style. For example, Claude Makelele was not the first anchorman (Nobby Stiles must somewhat resent the position now being names after the Frenchman) but his immense ability in the role prepegated the belief in English football certainly that a solid defensive campaign was essentially reliant on a ball winning midfielder who can break up attacks and then offload to a more creative player. When you look at all Premiership teams now, there are very few who don't regularly employ a player in that position. Like I said, Makelele didn't invent the role, but I can see why commentators who reported on English footbal pre and post Makelele sometimes speak as if he did.

Equally C.Ronaldo at United was very much a player in the mould of George Best, but whereas Best was a maverick in his day, Ronaldo is now one of many immensely skilled midfielders who are not content, and too skilled to simply play down the wing and provide quality assists or such like. You have Ronaldo, Messi, Ribery, Modric, Ronaldinho... None of them are strikers like Ronaldo(Bra), nor are they wingers like Comoranesi or central attacking midfielders like Scholes. They can all play in those roles but they do so much more in each game.

As a result you could argue that in all of the above cases their teams have been forced to alter their formations to make allowances for these creative players. Barca's formation is sometimes uninteligible to the viewer, it works of course because the players train with each other and know how to work as a unit, but their line up is an existential layout that changes with each pass of the ball. It's certinly something Andy Gray would struggle with with his pre-match formation graphic.

To bring this back to the issue of Gilberto Silva and Brazil. Perhaps I'm a million miles off here, I am somwhat straying outside my comfort zone but I suspect that Brazil's style of play is significantly influenced by Argentina's (and vice versa of course.) Just as English football fans are always comparing their league and style to Spain and Italy's (the never ending and of course futile 'Which League is The Best' argument being a pub argument classic) I imagine Brazil always have one eye on their great rivals to make sure they never feel they're falling behind. I emphasise this because when I look at the Brazil team today it seems a team very much suited (on paper I should stress) to coping with the current Argentina team. Marcelo/Zanetti, Maicon/Sorin, Kaka/Mascherano, Messi/Gilberto, there is a striking similarity between the two teams and perhaps I'm being cynical but I wonder if any Brazil or Argentine coach always thinks that a key aspect to maintaining their job security is to make sure that whatever happens on the pitch against other teams, job number two after trying to win the WC is make sure the team doesn't fall behind the old enemy.

I wonder if Dunga would play Gilberto against Argenitna if Messi wasn't playing?
Trouble blights Huracan's renaissance 12:24pm on 29 Jun 2009 #24

Having experienced the terraces of the 80's and the grounds of today I can see the argument for anyone who says the atmosphere has 'suffered'... But I think what constitutes a good atmosphere is a subjective question.

My children may not know what a terrace is like with the old songs, the surge of the crowd with a goal and the intensity but the fact I would take chidren to a footbal game nowadays is another key difference. Sure grounds are more sterile now, there is less of a feeling of history and it's all very commerciialised but at the same time I think sometimes people can be guilty of rose tinted glasses syndrome.

The 'good old days' had plenty of positives, but also so many negatives. Today's football is the same, for every element lost I think there have been elements gained.

I can't agree with you about the clubs not being complicit in hooliganism though. Only within the past five years have Barcelona stopped giving away free tickets to the club's "Ultra's" in return for them not causing trouble... despite the fact they almost universally did anyway! Rangers and Celtic both have done great things to reduce sectarianism in football but at the same time, they continue to turn a blind eye to songs from their own terraces that are at times vile with no historical justification. In Spain, some clubs have rampant racism problems but do nothing because they know the Spanish FA and UEFA will, on the whole do nothing to seriuosly penalise them.

This is not to say all clubs are complicit, nor to say that the oens that are condone hooliganism, but it would be nive in the extreme to say that hoolignaism has with some clubs been allowed to run riot, unchecked when the clubs could have intervened more.
Trouble blights Huracan's renaissance 10:38am on 29 Jun 2009 Tim,

In regards the problems of violence at and around football matches in Argentina, and South America as a whole, how much do you think can be taken from the 'English Lesson' on football hooliganism and how to cope with it?

Part of the glory of South American football seems to be the passion the fans have for their clubs and their game but this seems a truly double edged sword. English football has plenty of negatives but the way it has transformed itself from a game being torn apart by hooliganism in the 80's into (arguably) THE model for World football to follow, there are few safer places to watch football nowadays than England, yet the passion and rivalry is relatively retained.

The key elements seem to be to take the devisive elements out of the clubs identity, such as sectarianism, class divides and politics. The fans are free to retain their sense of identity that define them, be that working class roots, a regional pride etc, but the clubs should back off from formaly identifying themselves with these dividling lines as it's sometimes akin to a red rag to a bull. In Europe, some of the bigger clubs have arguably been complicit in fueling continued hooliganism by glorifying the divisions that spark such passion in the fans that then erupts into violence.

Do you think there are any key lessons that Argentinian clubs could, and perhaps ultiately must learn off English clubs to help remove the cancer that is violence in football, or is the problem terminal? How much do you think the clubs are to blame, or is it a domestic FA problem?
Adopted Mason highlights question of allegiance 7:41pm on 23 Jun 2009 Suggestions that people like Greg Rusedski are not as eligible to play for England as others is silly because he has British family background. The problem people had with Rusedski was the accent. People are loathed to admit it but Xenophobia does play a part. It's not racist in the most abhorant form but rather a knee jerk reaction to people who don't seem quite as British as most of us.

People used to criticise Lennox Lewis as not being a legitimate 'Brit' despite the fact he was born in London and had British parents!! A teenage upbringing in Canada gave him the accent and he only opted to represent Canada at the Olympics because the UK Olympic powers that be turned him down for funding because at the time boxing wasn't an Olympic priority.

Owen Hargreaves is the closest we've come to an out and out foreigner representing England (or the UK.) He would have been much more 'at home' playing for Canada or Germany but England offered an international career first so he took his chance. The fact he'd never even lived in the UK but was playing for England was quite a step for the selectors to take so frankly what is the problem with Almunia?

Sure he's not British, not in any way but he's made the UK his home, he's married a British girl and once he's played for England it's not like he can change his mind. This should come down to who you want to represent. Just like a Gurkha fighting for the British Army or (back in the day) a German family being the Royal family.

If you don't want Alumina or someone who is not British in a traditional sense playing for England or the UK, fine, everyone is entitled to an opinion. But if you don't want Almunia then you MUST also want kevin Pieterson out of the England team, ditto for Owen Hargreaves and Grahame Hick (back in the 90's.) Equally it's hard to see how you can justify having Capello as England coach. I say if someone is willing to give their entire international career to one country and they have some link, even if it's only residence then let them.
Why Ronaldo is leaving Manchester for Madrid 5:12pm on 11 Jun 2009 Definate improvement in your blogs recently Mihr! The key focus between Madrid and United is how their income is structured.

The difference is not shirt sales, United almost certainly sell more.

It's not gate earnings, Madrid's stadium is larger but United's tickets are more costly and have a better corporate hospitality setup.

It's not success as United are certainly the stronger team between the two over the past five years.

It's TV revenue, plain and simple. The fact that Madrid can negotiate their own TV rights is a stupendous amount of autonomy and in the long run it will progressively create a gap between Madrid/Barca and Premier League clubs over the amount they have to spend on a level playing field. The only real defence English clubs have to this earnings gap is the fact that Billionaire owners with spare cash to lavish seem to prefer English clubs to continental.

Power in England essentially sits with the top four 'big clubs' more than any other single entity, including The FA, if they can speak as a single unit they overpower all. It seems hard to believe that sooner or later they won't demand to be able to negotiate their own broadcasting rights and when that happens the whole concept of national leagues is surely doomed.

Is the finale to this current financial expansion the inevitable formation of a European 'super league'? Surely it's hard to see this going any other way.
Milan to Madrid via Manchester 11:08am on 11 Jun 2009 £56m suddenly looks quite a reasonable price after this morning's happenings.

«Newer
Older»

^ Back to top

BBC MMVI

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

BBC.co.uk

BBC Blog Network

Find and talk to the BBC's bloggers.

User Profile

Joe_Green