Sunday 15th June 2025
Blog Page 2178

2009 Predictions

0
  • Manchester United to beat Liverpool to the title by three or four points.  The decision to drop Berbatov and re-unite Rooney and Tevez up front is seen as the catalyst.  Michael Carrick to win Writers’ Player of the Year.  PFA Player of the Year for a heart broken Steven Gerrard.  PFA Young Player to Ashley Young, who guides Aston Villa to fourth place.
  • Barcelona to sweep all before them.  Narrowly miss out on 100 La Liga points (96? 98?), but to breeze past 100 league goals.  Eto’o will score more than 30 of them, Henry and Messi roughly 20 each.  Will win the Champions League in Rome, and maybe the Copa del Rey as well.  Leo Messi to win the 2009 Ballon d’Or.
  • Mike Ashley sees that Barca’s great success is built on the appointment of a recently retired playing legend as manager.  He appoints Alan Shearer  in the summer, calling him ‘the Geordie Guardiola’.  Shearer is sacked before Christmas, with four points from his first fifteen games.  Big Al’s assisstant, Rob Lee, takes over as caretaker.  Who’d have thought that Ameobi and Rob Hulse wouldn’t work up front? 
  • The Republic, inspired by the return of Stevie Ireland to international football, to beat Bulgaria, Georgia and Montenegro to seal second place in Group 8 and go through to the play offs for World Cup qualification.  Scotland lose in Holland and in Norway and only finish third in Group 9.  England finish with 28 points from a possible 30. 
  • Man City buy Kaka, David Villa and Sergio Ramos in the summer, at a combined cost of over £120million.  New manager Frank Rijkaard still finds a way to fit Michael Ball and Darius Vassell into the side.

City cut down by Forest

0

Apparently it was worse than the 8-1 at the Riverside last season. 

The main problem with City this season is the short-term damage done by Hughes’ casting himself as the anti-Eriksson.  A revolution in attitude, approach and training methods followed, and with it a squad divided between those for and against the new management. 

On his side, Hughes has Kompany, Zabaleta, Ireland, Wright-Phillips and maybe Robinho.  Those who prospered under Eriksson though – Hamann, Elano, Dunne, Richards, Hart, Gelson and Vassell – apparently can’t stand him.

And so when we’re without Ireland, Robinho and SWP, as we were yesterday, we are left only with players of the Eriksson era and before.  Elano and Gelson (Sven buys) started in midfield, up front were Sturridge (just 19), Caicedo (Sven buy) and Vassell (Pearce buy). 

No wonder they didn’t perform.  Hughes has spent all season talking of clearing out dead wood, of turning over the tables of Eriksson’s lazy and complacent side.  Who could have thought that he would have to rely on the Eriksson squad in an FA Cup third round tie? After the game Hughes tore into the players, publicly and bitterly.  But next up is Pompey away, Ireland is suspended and SWP is injured.  We’ll play Vassell and Elano and lose.  And the cycle will repeat again.

Arsenal crying out for flair

0

A lack of flair. Not the sort of accusation usually levelled at Wenger’s men. Yet this season it’s one of many things lacking. No creativity, no invention, no spark.

Today’s FA cup tie against Plymouth however, gave a chance to see something different. With chief pedestrian culprit Denilson out with injury in stepped the rather less regulation Aaron Ramsey.

Ramsey possesses superb quick feet, and admirable range of passing and most importantly some genuine invention. He takes men on, shoots on sight and plays the sort of quick one touch passing that has made Arsenal so irresistible in the past.

Not to suggest of course that he is the current solution. Ramsey just turned 18 on Boxing Day and like many players quite so inexperienced gives the ball away rather a lot; but at least he gives it away trying something rather more regulation than a 5 yard pass backwards.

It’s no surprise that the difference between the two sides today was Robin van Persie, whose ability to make something out of nothing, especially the turn to help provide the second goal was a clear example of the sort of ingenuity needed at the highest level.

Admittedly Arsenal are currently robbed of much of their creativity and spark with Rosicky, Walcott and of course Fabregas absent. Yet with all of these out for a fair while Wenger must either bring in someone with such spark or put the faith in his young guns to avoid facing months of slow paced, tepid performances while the injuries subside.

Arsenal fail when their football hits snails pace and becomes predictable. Inventive, fast passing is what makes their football irresistible and so hard to stop and Wenger’s decision this month must reflect this reality if any silverware is to be chased.

 

 

Mumbai Terrorist Attacks

0

We interview students who were in the city during the Mumbai attacks a month on.

‘Arry’s new attack

0

…has started well for Tottenham. It was a bad last month of 2008 which ended with a worrying string of results and performances that reminded Tottenham fans of the chaos and lack of direction that was so prominent in the Ramos-era.

We looked one-dimensional against Fulham, with a forlorn and desperate Darrem Bent up-front on his own, unable to win anything in the air, or in the channels and Luka Modric trying his hardest floating behind. ‘Arry’s decision to base Tottenham’s whole attacking play through the undoubted talent of Modric was becoming stale and obvious. We lacked any penetration or subtlety, with Lennon the only player to really cause any problems.

Yet, in the funny way football works, it was the rather unlucky sending off of Bene Assou-Ekotto against West Brom which might change the future direction for ‘Arry and Tottenham. That dismissal forced his hand, and Modric began to play as a central midfielder in a four, rather than the free man of a five. He apparently showed enough then to convince ‘Arry to play him there permanently, allowing two traditional strikers to start upfront. Against Wigan, this worked much better, with Pavleychenko looking pacey, strong and clinical.

The prospect of Jermaine Defoe making a triumphant return and partnering the Russian looks mouth-watering. If Modric continues to prove his worth in the midfield battle that is Premiership Football, and ‘Arry gets a left footed winger (Downing – a real dynamic force in the Premiership who constantly gets abuse from fans who underrate him because of a few poor performances for England. His play on the left, the right and in the middle for Boro have been fantastic at times in the last few seasons) in January, the future will look very bright indeed.

As for Jack PB’s blog on Arry’s transfer business – perhaps we should applaud the east end genius for being honest. Spurs make an approach for Defoe, ‘Arry says he likes Defoe but doesn’t know if a deal will be done…seems fair enough to me. Perhaps City fans should worry a bit more about spending 12 million on a left back who obviously isn’t that keen on first team football, after spending several years happy to play the odd cup tie. Let this be the first of many gold-diggers city spend over the odds for…

Match report for Tottenham V Wigan

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/fa_cup/7803222.stm  

Review: Che (Part 1)

0

Here it is, the first chunk of Steven Soderbergh’s long awaited two-part portrayal of Che Guevara: the revolutionary (we already had Che Guevara, the compassionate student in the form of Walter Salles’ Motorcycle Diaries). Anybody looking for a comprehensive examination of the wider historical situation surrounding the Cuban Revolution should probably look elsewhere, however if you are willing to give it the time it deserves, what you’ll see is a surprisingly well-handled account of the Guerrilla warfare that provided a backbone to Castro’s revolution.

although almost certainly based on real events, one cannot help feeling disappointed that such a formulaic scene was allowed into what is otherwise a first-rate film

Nevertheless, Che: Part 1 is far from a glamorous war movie in the style of the now thankfully forgotten Che!, nor does it claim any exclusive insight into Guevara’s psychological mindset. Indeed one could happily watch large swathes of the film without needing to know anything about Guevara, or easily envisage this turning into a film trying to encapsulate everything Guevara stood for. But this would have been a mistake – and would have resulted in a film far less convincing than Che: Part 1 actually turns out to be. Its great success is that it refuses to be drawn into the impossible task of constructing a complete account of the myth of Che, instead director Steven Soderbergh focuses on the material reality of Guevara the revolutionary, not the idealised figure we all know from the t-shirts. Likewise Soderbergh (thankfully) refrains from making too many incursions into the particulars of Che’s revolutionary theory. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a Hollywood film attempt to handle Revolutionary Marxism, and the reasons for this are many and valid.

anybody looking for a comprehensive examination of the wider historical situation surrounding the Cuban Revolution should probably look elsewhere

Despite generally avoiding too many filmic clichés, it has to be said that there are a few hackneyed moments of directorial shorthand; for instance, the moment in which we are shown how noble Che could be when he executes two guerrillas who used their positions of power to steal from peasants and rape their daughters. Although almost certainly based on real events, one cannot help feeling disappointed that such a formulaic scene was allowed into what is otherwise a first-rate film.

For all its austerity and discipline, Soderbergh’s film is a sprawling epic that thoroughly deserves its lengthy run-time. Of course there will be some that come away frustrated by its general unwillingness to offer a simplistic biographical account of Guevara’s life, but those willing to accept its (infrequent) failures will find Che: Part 1 mesmerising.

Real sell ‘HUNTELAAR 19’ Champions League shirts

0

I wrote last week about Real’s problem: only one of their January buys can be registered for the Champions League.  Both Lassana Diarra and Klaas-Jan Huntelaar have played UEFA Cup already this season, and only one of them can have their registration switched. 

After some deliberation, Spanish football daily (and Real mouthpiece) Marca reported on Wednesday that they’ve gone for Huntelaar. 

What a poor decision! Never mind the fact that in Gonzalo Higuain and Raúl they have two decent centre forwards, with Javier Saviola on the fringes.  Higuain has confounded everyone this season, with 11 goals in 14 La Liga games thus far – behind only Eto’o and Villa in the race for the Pichichi.  Huntelaar’s a good player, but not desperately needed for the moment.

Things are different in midfield.  In the long term absence of Mahamadou Diarra, they are left with: Guti (nice passer, can’t hold), Fernando Gago (nice passer, can’t hold), Rafael van der Vaart (nice passer, can’t hold) and Wesley Sneijder (fantastic player, but only when free of responsibilities).  Their other front line cental midfielder, Ruben de la Red, had a suspected heart attack in October and won’t play again this season.

But who cares about solidity when you can sell shirts to kids that play Fifa?

 

 

"Yeah he’s a great player, I’d love to have him here"

0

I love the transfer window. I love the gossip, the intrigue, the ludicrously-spun out dramas and sagas. I’m really looking forward to City signing some more goalkeepers, defenders, midfielders and strikers. One thing, though, that I cannot stand, and that almost ruins the transfer season for me, is Harry Redknapp.

Every morning he’ll be there, on Sky Sports News, conducting his transfer policy in public. You know the drill. Some friendly hack mentions a player (let’s say, Peter Crouch) to ‘Arry.  He responds,

“Crouchie? Yeah I’m a big fan of Crouchie. I’d love him here. He’s a top player.  But that’s an issue between Daniel Levy and Peter Storrie – nothing to do with me.”

So far this window he’s done this with Jermain Defoe, Bobby Zamora and Craig Bellamy, having done it last summer with Peter Crouch, Shaun Wright-Phillips, Richard Dunne and many more. Next up will be Glen Johnson, then Crouch for real, then Joe Cole (former Redknapp protege), then whichever other players he wants to unsettle.

But with the London media (both press and television) full of Redknapp fans, there will be no criticism, no tough questions, nothing. But don’t expect them to keep quiet if Juventus keep sniffing around Luka Modric.

Interview with Alan Davies

0

Television does strange things to people. I don’t mean the experience of being in front of a camera does strange things to a person’s self-image, though it probably does. I just mean it makes people look different. David Starkey, for instance, is much shorter and fatter in real life. Alan Davis is much bigger, older, and somewhat more sombre than he appears on screen.

The impish star of Qi and Jonathan Creek began his career in stand-up comedy, with trademarks of zany silliness and extremely curly hair. Jonathan Creek was the show which brought him to national attention, zaniness and silliness reappearing in a larger role, in the show’s rather improbable plots. As the regular panellist on Qi in recent years, Davies has found his niche, brilliantly playing off Stephen Fry’s attempts to bring gravitas and edification to the Great British public.

Davies surrendered a few minutes to us when we spotted him in the Maths Faculty on St Giles – he was waiting to film in the lecture theatre we had just vacated. He was in Oxford on a slightly unexpected mission – making a documentary about maths with Marcus Du Sautoy, the don who recently took over Richard Dawkins’ chair in the Public Understanding of Science. ‘I’m the guinea pig who stopped learning maths after his times tables’, he explained, ‘Marcus is going to explain all these clever concepts to me in very simple language’.

I put it to him that Oxford’s quite a Qi-ish sort of place, and he agreed, pointing out the short-lived Qi Club on Turl Street, which still features the logo etched into its glass door. When I admit having heard of it but never visiting, he laughs. ‘That was the problem; everyone said ‘yeah, I heard about that place, what happened to it?’ The people of Oxford completely failed to support it.’ He suggests that the proliferation of coffee table books inspired by the show (currently up to five) was intended to make up for the club going bust. The Qi brand is certainly still strong, going into it’s sixth series and moving to BBC One, something Davies expressed some trepidation about.

A loyal follower of the show like many students here, I sometimes wonder if our faith in Stephen and chums is such that we’d believe them even if they told us gravity was a piece of General ignorance. ‘Funnily enough’, Davies began, ‘they did diligently go through all the mistakes that they made in the special features on the series’ DVD.’ The show has always had a team of researchers – the voices at the other end of the little headphone in Fry’s ear. Problem was, to begin with they weren’t always, well, listened to. ‘Stephen would ignore the researchers – he would decide that the research was a bit boring and tell and anecdote about John Gielgud instead. The problem was, Stephen was getting a few things wrong. What you really want on the DVD is the naughty stuff, but on Qi we had chastened producers reciting facts.’

Far too much of a gentleman to respond properly when asked if any of the less frequent panellists had to be carried by their more talented comrades, he speaks affectionately of the camaraderie. ‘A lot of panel games people are quite rude to one another’, but Qi works simply because the panellists are nice to each other. ‘It’s the same reason people like watching Jackass – you just sense they’re all enjoying it together.’ The original plan for Qi had been to mix comedians and academics, something taken up on Radio 4’s The Museum of Curiosity (which Davies has appeared on), though dropped from the TV show because the academics were apparently insufficiently funny.

Does Davies miss doing Jonathan Creek? No, because he hasn’t stopped – a new episode will air on New Years’ Day. Once again, the complex plot may confound us all: ‘I was in it and I didn’t work it out’, he said, refusing to divulge the mystery’s solution. He’s equally reluctant to be drawn on the possibility of a new series, though it seems unlikely. ‘It was a bit of a reunion’.

It’s probably been apparent, but I think Davies is a rather nice chap. That’s the impression you’d get from Qi or his stand-up, and it’s certainly the impression he gave in person. I lacked the rudeness to ask about it, but I’m pretty much prepared to believe any kind of extenuating circumstances he might give for the whole ‘biting a tramp’s ear’ incident last year. Blinkered perhaps, but I couldn’t think ill of the amiable pescetarian who tolerated two bumbling hacks one bleary-eyed morning. He even managed to express interest in student journalism, and he expressed his guilt at ‘taking the shilling’ by writing for The Times after feeling disgusted at Murdoch and Thatcher’s treatment of the unions so many years ago. In person, Davies was almost as spaced-out as he appears on screen (though less garrulous), which made me question the assumptions I’d made about his state of mind on the show. All in all, this was a relatively easy mystery to solve: older and bigger than he appears on screen, but just as spacey, and just as nice.

New York, New York

0

The question of who Gov. Paterson will pick to fill Hillary Clinton’s senate seat has, over the last two weeks or so, become progressively harder to answer.

Two weeks ago yesterday, Marc Ambinder at The Atlantic all but said it would be Caroline Kennedy, citing her support from New York’s other Senator, Chuck Schumer, and the Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. Next some prominent Clintonites voiced opposition to the idea, citing Kennedy’s lack of experience, whilst quietly promoting the cause of Andrew Cuomo, NY’s Attorney General (and a former member of President Clinton’s cabinet). Then came the New York Post’s story about Kennedy’s poor voting turnout record, and all started to get a bit bumpy.

Now, it seems, much of the mainstream New York press has got cold feet. These New York Times interviewers seemed irritated by her (and her by them). The New York Daily News has been fairly brutal (here and here in particular). Polls show the public unsure, divided.

There are twists left in this one yet, I think.

My thought is this: Paterson should pick neither Kennedy nor Cuomo, nor any of the other ‘big names’ in New York political circles who are angling for the job. Not because of who they are or what they believe, but because there is a better solution.

There are two problems to be dealt with here. The first is the obvious legitimacy problem. It is the job of a Senator to represent the people of his or her state. A Senator not elected by the people is not the legitimate representative of those people. The inevitable upshot: democratic election is preferable to appointment.

There is also a practical problem. Under New York election law, whoever is picked would have to be defend the seat in 2010 and again in 2012 (when Clinton’s term in the Senate was due to expire). This means that if the appointee is intending to run again in 2010, they would have to spend the next twenty months fundraising, contesting a primary campaign, and then contesting a general election. In other words, for twenty months they’d be a bad Senator; their time spent electioneering, not representing. And then, were the appointee to win in 2010 and wanted to hold the seat beyond 2012, the process would begin again. More fundraising, more campaigning. For the first four years of his or her tenure in the Senate, a Paterson appointee would not spend his or her time representing New York, but fighting elections.

What should happen: Paterson should do as some have suggested, and make an interim pick. H

e should choose someone who will not run for election to retain the seat, and let the people of New York decide who will be their Senator in 2010. The arrangement would be known publicly. Similar things have been done before, notably in 1960 when Benjamin Smith was chosen to take JFK’s seat in Massachusetts, acting as a ‘seat warmer’ until Ted Kennedy was old enough to run himself.

If Paterson were to make an interim choice, he or she would serve as the senator for two years unencumbered by the need or desire to win election in 2010. Meanwhile, Kennedy (et al) could run for the seat legitimately and democratically. And whoever won that election in 2010 would have a full six-year term before re-election, allowing them to give the people of New York the representation they deserve.

Democratically this solution is right; practically-speaking it is sensible. Likely it will not happen – Paterson will seek to use the pick to shore up some part of his political base. He himself wants to run for re-election to the office he took over upon the resignation of Eliot Spitzer, and he’ll need all the help he can get. The poll bounce he’d get from a headline-grabbing, popular pick would be just the ticket.