Dirty Leeds - Robert Endeacott - book review

 This book is a "novelized" account of the period when Don Revie was the team manager at Leeds United football club, with events mostly seen through eyes of a character called Jimmy O'Rourke.

The story is told by way of two parallel threads, in a sense, two paths which occasionally overlap. We have the events in the world of Leeds United, and Jimmy O'Rourke's own life, including his footballing aspirations and his interactions with those at the club.

The language is sometimes awkward and even ungainly, but this is the type of speech which one would have expected from the time. It adds to the realism, and to the feelings of authenticity and intimacy. This impressions is most marked during the earlier stages of the tale.

It seems to me that the effect is to introduce a distinctive "voice", through the character's standpoints, and not just one of the traditional "narratives" which pertain to the Revie era. This is not just a rose-tinted perspective. There is some insight into working-class culture and sentiment, but without it becoming romanticized.

The Jimmy character is quite intriguing. He is an assertive and inquisitive young person, quite independent of mind even in those early years. His relations with his "elders" are very well rendered, from my point of view. His observations on the football scene are rather nuanced, not stereotyped.

The novel is not a strict, exhaustively detailed chronology of each stage of Revie's stewardship. Maybe the intention was more to capture the atmosphere of the time and the essence of Jimmy's nature and environs.

My impression was that Jimmy's language becomes more advanced and expressive as the story unfolds, and as he grows older. His analysis of football matters is rather more "mature" and rational than we are sometimes led to expect from football supporters, even fictional ones. He doesn't always run with the herd, basing many of his opinions on quite sound reasoning and not easy conformity or "triteness". A lively grasp of critiquing things comes through.

For myself this work serves as a kind of time capsule, harking back to a more simple, organic way of life, although it seldom descends into rose-tinted territory. Did people live less contented, less stimulating, less genuinely creative lives because they lacked some of the material and technological "advantages" which came along later?

Once again, a favourable picture emerges of 1960s and 1970s football emerges, at least in terms of the competitiveness and openness of the scene at that stage. A good deal less predictable than what was to come, let's say, about five decades or so later. 

The subjective slant of the narrative is a strength, and it gradually encompasses an earthy and dry humour. An effort is made to convey the cultural and social tenor of the times, which ostensibly relates to football, but sometimes extends beyond the confines of the game itself.

We also gather some sense of how "gentrified" football has become since the 1960s. This process might be termed a symptom of progress, rather than progress per se (?)

The over-riding sensation one derives from the narrative is now "toilsome" the game was in the 60s, attritional even. We may gaze back longingly and fondly at that era, but there was also much negativity and cynicism. Areas where things have improved include the protection now afforded to creative performers and the laws now being applied to encourage enterprising and positive play.

It is noticeable to me how Jimmy's outlook becomes more analytical, less tribal even, as the years go by. He takes a critical and even detached stance at times, not always adhering to the practices of myth-making and public relations. 

So, we are engaged in a journey with both Jimmy O'Rourke and Don Revie's Leeds United, whilst occasionally being reminded of football's ultimate irrelevance, and also its value as a palliative in times of adversity, and its capacity to provide meaning and purpose in a sometimes meaningless and directionless life/world. It is a reassuring constant as we undergo life's changes and trials, but it doesn't necessarily have to make people totally desert their reason and their objectivity.

The "narrator" displays an impressive and credible grasp of football tactics and theory, an appreciation of the broader picture within a match, and the ebb and flow of the contest, the switches in momentum and initiative. This book does make a nod to the intricacies, the finer points, and is not just a romanticized look at football culture. "Insight" and "analysis" did not begin during the early 1990s.

What is noteworthy is that firm opinions are invariably backed up by cogent arguments.

The end of the story is handled deftly, not over-burdened with portentous or weighty passages, but projecting the distinct feeling that an era was ending, that a watershed was at hand..

In summary, an intriguing and entertaining read.

Superstars (TV series)

One of the staples of my childhood television viewing was the British/European version of the multi-sports competition "Superstars". Just recently I have been revisiting the history and the essence of this programme, and I was reminded what an entertaining, worthwhile and intriguing show it was.

I have vague and misty memories of watching the likes of David Hemery and John Conteh appear on "Superstars" when I was very young, and of course the Kevin Keegan cycling incident from 1976 is almost etched into the collective consciousness of the British nation.

The BBC's "Superstars" coverage was presented by David Vine and Ron Pickering, two of the most capable and likeable sports broadcasters of that era. Vine was authoritative, urbane even, and could paint great pictures with words. Ron Pickering, on the other hand, was enthusiasm personified, and his passion for sport and its benefits always shone through in his contributions.

For the uninitiated, "Superstars" pitted competitors from various different sports against each other in a succession of events, including sprinting, cycling, canoeing, weightlifting and the famous (or infamous) gym tests. Points were awarded according to the positions attained in each event. National series thrived in the USA, Britain and elsewhere, and European, International and World championships took place.

As a boy, the European superstars finals held a particular mystique and pull and, funny though it seems now, a taste of the exotic. Vine and Pickering were very adept at conveying the atmosphere in Rotterdam's Ahoy Stadium, where the European showpiece was stage. Special emphasis was placed on the banked cycling track there. Impressionable as I was, I almost gained the perception that "Superstars" was the most important and prestigious sporting event in the world, perhaps even surpassing the Olympics!

It has become a cliche, but a large part of the charm and appeal of "Superstars" was its propensity to propel comparatively little-known sportspeople into the spotlight, allowing them to exhibit their talents to a wider audience, way beyond the confines of their chosen speciality. Classic examples of this were Kjell Isaksson, the Swedish pole vaulter, Ties Kruize, the Dutch field hockey player, and the British judoka Brian Jacks. These men regularly outshone more famous and renowned athletes in this test of all-round sporting prowess.

I vividly remember the performances of Isaksson, the remarkable little pole vaulter. His feats in weightlifting were staggering from some one of his slight build. He was also formidable in the gym tests (parallel bar drips and squat thrusts).

Of course, Brian Jacks became a national celebrity in Britain in the late Seventies and early Eighties, and appeared to receive far more recognition for his "Superstars" achievements than he did for his accomplishments in the world of judo, which were themselves considerable. Jacks' counterpart on the other side of the Atlantic was the remarkable Canadian soccer player Brian Budd, who notched up three World Superstars titles, not to mention three Canadian titles! Budd was a formidable competitor in most of the events on the schedule, and he was also quite a character.

Another hallmark of the UK version of the show was in allowing older athletes such as Hemery, Lynn Davies and John Sherwood to prolong or extend their careers in the competitive arena. Many who grew up with "Superstars" possibly knew little of their respective careers and feats in track and field athletics.

It is interesting to analyze which sports appeared best suited to supplying successful "Superstars" participants. Pole vaulting provided Bob Seagren, Kjell Isaksson, as well as Brian Hooper, who shone at the tail end of the franchise's golden age in Britain.

What made pole vaulters so ideally suited to the challenge of "Superstars" and its format? I guess it had something to do with agility, "pound-for-pound" strength, speed, all-round athleticism and technical aptitude. This ensured that they were consistently good across most of the disciplines contained in the schedule.

Amongst football (soccer) players, the aforementioned Brian Budd was perhaps the exception which proved the rule. Generally, practitioners of "the beautiful game" seemed to lack the power and the strength to compete for outright honours, although they fared very well in areas such as sprinting - Malcolm McDonald famously broke the eleven-second barrier in the 100 metres in 1975. The extra power and muscle of rugby players (from both codes) appeared to make them more suited to the rigours and the nature of the "Superstars" test.

Were there any flaws in the make-up of the "Superstars" event? To me, the UK version seems to have placed undue emphasis on strength and brawn. More skill-orientated sports, such as racquet games or even something like ten-pin bowling or snooker, might have counter-balanced things in favour of those possessing finesse as well as muscle.

The rules barring or handicapping some competitors in their alleged "specialities" also seemed nonsensical and anomalously applied. Handicapping pole vaulters in sprints and 400-metre hurdlers in a steeplechase?  It made matters unnecessarily complicated and I think that a "swings and roundabouts" argument could be justifiably made here.

Allowing people to "opt out" of some events was also wrong in my opinion. I would have just required everyone to take part in every event. This was supposed to be a test of all-round proficiency, after all. Brian Jacks in the sprints and steeplechase would have been very interesting to watch!

But these are very minor gripes. To me "Superstars" in its prime was emblematic of its time, when the innocence of the era allowed such an enterprise to thrive. A great series!

The Beautiful Team - In Search of Pele & The 1970 Brazilians - Garry Jenkins

This book had been residing on my shelves for some time, but I had never read it properly, feeling that in some ways it outwardly appeared a little on the flimsy side. I am now more than happy to retract any such verdicts.

The Beautiful Team is essentially an examination of the celebrated Brazil team which triumphed so memorably in the 1970 World Cup in Mexico. As part of his project, author Garry Jenkins was able to interview most of the members of that famous footballing outfit, and also to take in the legacy and historical and cultural context of its achievements.

For some little time I have nurtured a feeling that the team of 1970 was a bit overrated, and increasingly became irritated at the "lazy", even corny, eulogies spouted by even seasoned and knowledgeable football pundits. However, this enjoyable effort has helped to partially negate some of those sentiments.

Although I think that the 1974 World Cup, and even the 1982 edition, were superior by many footballing parameters, my appreciation of the 1970 vintage Brazilians has been enriched and buttressed by learning some more about what made that team tick, and what made its collective heart beat.

There is much insight into the behind-the-scenes side of things, such as the meticulous preparation, the evolution of the team's tactical approach, and the personal dynamics within the squad. It is interesting to note, for example, the prominence of Gerson, both as a guiding influence on the pitch and as a prime mover in the cohesion of the ensemble overall.

Anyone wishing to learn a little something about Brazilian domestic football in the period prior to the Mexico tournament will also be rewarded. The cultural and social importance of the game is amply and capably illustrated.

It is worth mentioning that this work was first published in the late 1990s, so some of the observations and assertions about "modern football", and the game in Brazil itself  might not now hold as much currency or credibility, but still an intriguing read.

The Damned United (2009 film)

Some time ago I wrote a short blog post about the 2009 movie The Damned United. I recently watched the film again, and thought that I would put together a slightly more substantial and considered assessment.

The film chronicles the ill-fated forty-four day tenure of Brian Clough as manager of Leeds United football club in 1974, and is adapted from David Peace's book.

Michael Sheen delivers a superb performance in the Brian Clough role, although some may contend that the depiction of Clough's well known character traits and mannerisms is slightly exaggerated and lacking in nuance. However, as the film progresses the portrayal does become more rounded, showing frailties and insecurities.

The "aesthetic" of the picture to me brings across some of the gritty authenticity of English football, and indeed England in general, during the late 1960s and early 1970s. Images of terraced houses and so forth evoke feelings of "dark Satanic mills". There is not much sunshine and levity, but much honest toil and plain-speaking.  I find some modern films to be bland and clinical in their visual backcloth, but this doesn't fall into the trap as much as most.

A large portion of the movie is given over to "flashback" sequences which chronicle the relationship, and the animosity, between Clough and the long-time Leeds manager Don Revie. The football action sequences are deeply unconvincing, the actors being too old and not athletic enough, although these scenes do succeed in creating atmosphere and context for the overall story. The producers sensibly employed archive footage to help document the tale.

When I first viewed the film, I did not fully appreciate or take in the excellence of Timothy Spall's performance as Clough's assistant Peter Taylor.  In this depiction, Taylor was often the voice of reason and common sense amidst Clough's excesses and flights of fancy.  Assertive, pugnacious, but less egotistical.

Whether the characterization of Taylor presented here is an accurate representation of the true picture is another matter, but it makes for good drama, and occasionally even good comedy. The movie also acknowledges and emphasizes Taylor's input and contribution to the partnership - his eye for a player, his practicality, his contacts and his all-round knowledge of the game.

I won't ramble on about any technical or historical inaccuracies which spring up, because they always occur in films of this nature. Anyway, they are kept to a tolerable minimum, as far as I could ascertain.

As a supporter of Leeds United, I will try not to be overly paranoid concerning the film's portrayal of the club and of Don Revie. Overall, I would say there is relatively little to complain about on this score, and after all, some of the characteristics and tendencies which are highlighted are ones which we relish and glory in...

Michael Sheen has been lauded for his portrayal of Brian Clough's public persona, but for me the most impressive aspect of his performance was how he conveyed the sense of doom and helplessness, as the forty-four days unfolded, and as his position at Leeds gradually unraveled. Lonely, isolated and vulnerable, and missing the wise counsel and comradeship of Peter Taylor.

So, still a film very much worthy of  a watch, and praise also for the use of "Flight Of The Rat" by Deep Purple!

Fever Pitch (1997 film)

Fever Pitch the movie is a 1997 fictionalized adaptation of Nick Hornby's acclaimed autobiographical novel, with the screenplay courtesy of Hornby himself.

I first saw the film a few years ago now, and thought that it was alright, if nothing special. Recently I subjected it to another watch, to see whether my perceptions of it might have shifted at all.

The movie centres on the character Paul (played by Colin Firth), and his obsession with football, and more specifically his beloved Arsenal. His consuming passion does not always sit easily with his personal relationships and his interactions with the "real world". This is all set against the backdrop of Arsenal's challenge for the 1988-89 League championship title.

I haven't read Hornby's book, a serious oversight I admit, but at least this didn't mean that I was constantly comparing film to book, invidious though such comparisons would have been anyway.

For me the best thing about the picture is the performance of Colin Firth as Paul. I've generally not been a major fan of his, but here he is immensely likeable and endearing as an "everyman" figure, genial but, like all of us, flawed.

Paul's new girlfriend Sarah (played by Ruth Gemmell) might initially seem like something of a stereotype, but the character injects the "tension" which is essential to making the whole thing work. I am perhaps not qualified to comment on the performance of the actress, as I haven't known many people like her character! Holly Aird, who I have always been a fan of, provides some good moments as Sarah's friend Jo.

This movie is now a bit of a time capsule, largely set as it is at a time when football was still seen by many as an undesirable, murky sub-culture. The post-Italia 90 broadening of the game's appeal, and its attendant new-found respectability, make some of the dialogue seem quaint, and I'm not sure whether this would have worked as well if it was set in the 21st century football/cultural environment.

Like so many modern films, it is well-produced and comfortable in that bland fashion. The dialogue is relatively subtle, though, even oblique, and the "philosophizing" is well-pitched and quite credible, doubtless due to the involvement of Nick Hornby.  So many similar works overdo the "meaning of life" angle, but here it is done sparingly and adroitly.

There are some retro/flashback sequences, mostly set in the late 1960s and early 1970s, which help us to trace and comprehend the origins of Paul's obsession. These are quite sweet, and Luke Aikman does a good, convincing job as the young Paul, as does Neil Pearson as Paul's father.

I guess that the main themes of the film are those of "growing up", and the extent to which we need balance in our lives between the practical and the more "irrational" pursuits. Do we need both in order to be truly happy, content and fulfilled?  However much we kid ourselves, some of our impulses can never be truly suppressed. They endure, and perhaps what matters is how we manage them.

"Fever Pitch" does have very faint echoes of the romantic comedies which were so prevalent during the 1990s, but the vacuity and schmaltz are thankfully absent.  In its understated way, it is more like an art film, although elements of the ending border on the corny.

Not a masterpiece by any means, but entertaining and heart-warming.

The Rough Guide to Cult Football

Continuing a journey through the neglected recesses of my book collection, I recently remembered The Rough Guide to Cult Football.  The edition which I have was published in 2003, but I understand that updated versions have been released since.

This book really is a delight, being breezy and humorous, and brimful of anecdotes and information, but also occasionally serious, poignant and insightful. Above all, it celebrates the vitality and beauty of football, as well as its glorious absurdities and eccentricities.

Whilst unashamedly nostalgic, it also highlights instances where the true spirit of football is being preserved in today's ultra-competitive and "sanitized" environment. Some of the subjects and items placed under the spotlight seem almost random, but this is one of the strengths of the book.  It brackets legendary players alongside obscure cult figures and journeymen, and the cathedrals of the sport alongside the backwaters. The sublime is explored alongside the ridiculous, the mundane and the surreal.

The sections examining football-related culture, such as movies, music, television, video games and so forth, are especially funny and absorbing. The people who put this thing together deserve praise and credit for their infectious enthusiasm and their sense of humour. It is a real treat for football obsessives, as well as those more casual observers who just crave entertainment and enlightenment.

The Rough Guide To Cult Football is well worth a read, if nothing else as a reminder of the richness, diversity and occasional craziness of the beautiful game.

Don Revie - Portrait of a Footballing Enigma - Andrew Mourant

Whilst sifting through some of my books recently, I came across Don Revie - Portrait of a Footballing Enigma, a biography of the former Leeds United and England football manager.

This book's value to me lies primarily in its focus on the periods both before and after his tenure at Leeds United. The nature of his background and upbringing give clues as to the evolution of his character and temperament, and also the way that his footballing philosophy was to develop.  It also serves as a snapshot of professional football as it was between the end of the Second World War and the arrival of big money.

Some of the characteristics of that football scene seem mildly bizarre now.  The meagre, hand-to-mouth finances of many clubs, the spectacle of players from outside the top flight regularly featuring in the England national team, and the prevalence of injuries and fixture congestion.

The reminiscences of associates, acquaintances and colleagues form a large part of this telling of the Revie story, and they help to give the book its balance and flavour, and to explain the origins of the personality traits which became well-known;caution, superstition, thoroughness and insecurity.

Detractors might grumble, but Revie was on balance a progressive and innovative football thinker. I might be biased, but his Leeds teams played outstanding and compelling football, and had flair in abundance. Allied to their famed attributes of resilience and a fierce will to win, they were a formidable unit.  They did not win the number of trophies which they should have done, and the book seeks to explain why this was the case. The solution to the question is as complex and elusive as the subject of the book himself.

The concept or notion of blending brains with brawn has always appealed to me as a sporting world-view. Think, but work hard. This was what made football in the four decades after World War Two so compelling, absorbing and popular, and it was a hallmark of many of Revie's teams.

It is noteworthy that Revie in his pre-Leeds footballing endeavours seemed restless, until he arrived at Elland Road, where he finally found his niche, and a place where he could put what he had learned, or taught himself, to good and constructive use.

I found the chapters dealing with Revie's early days at Leeds quite illuminating, especially the methods employed to recruit and motivate young players. The "family atmosphere", and some of Revie's man-management methods, seem quaint and even bizarre from the vantage point of 2016, but they worked at the time, and still induce a smile and twinge of regret and nostalgia that those days are now gone forever.

The book also goes into Revie's turbulent and unhappy spell as the England team manager, and his controversial departure from the post, as well as his final years. I think that there is a balanced and realistic assessment of some of the contentious aspects of his career, and there are lots of good anecdotes and quotes.

The book might appear concise, but in the latter stages the analysis of Revie's character and motives becomes quite intensive and nuanced.

If hardly definitive, this is a good, satisfying read, and leaves one concluding that the man was indeed an enigma.

Books About Sports

Most of my non-fiction reading in recent times has focused on history and philosophy, but it is notable how good and absorbing the best sports-related writing can be. Here are some of the sports-orientated books which have made the greatest impact on me in recent times, or which I just found enjoyable, informative and enlightening.....

Bodyline Autopsy, by David Frith.  An absorbing, erudite and meticulously researched chronicling of England's contentious cricket tour of Australia in 1932-33...

Several works on cycling have left quite an indelible impression.....

Merckx: Half Man, Half Bike, by William Fotheringham...

Eddy Merckx : The Cannibal, by Daniel Friebe.  Another excellent portrait of the great Belgian cyclist....

Put Me Back on My Bike : In Search of Tom Simpson, by William Fotheringham.  A fascinating and candid biography of the tragic English cyclist...

The Lost Generation, by David Tremayne.  An intensely compelling, highly moving and beautifully illustrated telling of the story of three British racing drivers who died young during the 1970s....

Gilles Villeneueve: The Life Of The Legendary Racing Driver, by Gerald Donaldson.

Inverting The Pyramid : The History of Football Tactics, by Jonathan Wilson.

Back Home - England and the 1970 World Cup, by Jeff Dawson.  A highly entertaining and nostalgic look at the national football team's campaign in that fabled tournament in Mexico....

All of these books I would recommend.

We Are The Damned United-The Real Story Of Brian Clough At Leeds United-Phil Rostron

The 44-day tenure of Brian Clough as Leeds United manager in 1974 has probably commanded more column inches and popular cultural scrutiny than any other period in the club's turbulent history. An addition to the oeuvre is Phil Rostron's book "We Are The Damned United - The Real Story of Brian Clough at Leeds United", originally published in 2009.

This particular subject touches a raw nerve among Leeds supporters, and there is a tendency for people to become defensive and touchy about it, not always indulging in lucid and critical thinking. The whole affair, I suspect, is somewhat difficult for outsiders and insiders alike to comprehend, and its nebulous and nature still makes it intriguing and frustratingly elusive four decades later.

This book is not a strict chronicle of the 44 days. There is ample build-up and scene setting, and several tangents are pursued. Some readers may seek a little more coherency and focus, but overall I found it enjoyable, if not that comprehensive.

The backbone of the book is formed by the contributions of numerous individuals who were connected or associated in some way with either Leeds United or Brian Clough, or both. We do not just hear from the "usual suspects" either;we get observations and recollections from people whose view of events has perhaps not been widely heard previously. It often seems to me that most of the established Leeds players of the time closed ranks, and decided on a story from which they would not deviate.

A nice touch for me was the inclusion of  excerpts from contemporaneous newspaper reports from the time in 1974 when the drama was unfolding. The match reports do not paint a picture of unmitigated gloom or despair, although the real problems were of course manifesting themselves behind the scenes.

Whilst "We Are The Damned United" is in many ways evocative of the atmosphere and ethos of football in the Seventies, it also serves to remind us that egos and intransigence were just as prevalent in those days, no matter how different the financial ground rules have become. Human nature has not changed in the intervening period.

What shines through here also is Brian Clough's approach to the game and to coaching. The simplicity of his footballing philosophy is something which many could learn from. His laissez-faire style was perhaps one of the things which the Elland Road stalwarts had most trouble adjusting to. The stories here about the regime in training sessions are quite illuminating.  The assertions that Clough's methods would only work with youngsters and misfits, and not established stars, do have some merit, but may be an over-simplification.

Was either side disposed to make concessions and meet half-way, or as the author suggests, was this a case of an irresistible force meeting an immovable object?  It would be nice to think that the impasse could have been resolved, but my feeling is that this was an unusual set of circumstances which made the situation untenable. We do not live in an ideal world, and "ifs and buts" are merely academic in this case.

It is pointed out by several contributors that the absence of Peter Taylor from Clough's side deprived him of a potentially emollient influence when dealing with his new charges. This is often cited as an "excuse", often by those who do not wish to confront more uncomfortable aspects of the saga. At the same time, the Taylor factor is undoubtedly part of the complex state of affairs which together dictated how things would turn out.

There is a wealth of anecdotes here about Clough's idiosyncrasies, and his often unconventional style. and it is hard not to find the eccentricities endearing, even if they were not always appreciated by those on the receiving end. Even in the football landscape of the 1970s and 1980s, his achievements with Derby County and Nottingham Forest still inspire awe and respect. One or two nuggets here also paint an interesting portrait of the man - one story from Duncan McKenzie springs to mind, in which he touches on the loneliness and isolation which Clough may have felt during his sojourn at Leeds.

All in all, this was a pretty good, if rather disjointed read. It is probably true to say that the definitive tome on "Cloughie At Leeds" has still to be written.

2014 World Cup Final - Germany 1 Argentina 0

Well, in the end I think that Germany were deserving winners of the 2014 World Cup. They were comfortably the most impressive and consistent team in the tournament, and it was quite apt that one of their substitutes scored the winning goal, thus emphasising the strength in depth of their squad. This excellent generation of German players finally fulfilled its destiny on the global stage.

 

Credit has to go to Argentina for making a genuine game of the final. Their shrewd counter-attacking game plan could not quite carry them over the finishing line, and they had several very good chances to score.

 

Those anticipating a tight contest were to be slightly disappointed, as it was reasonably open, for a final, throughout, although tiredness naturally set in during extra-time. I felt that at times Germany played more fluently than they had during the entire tournament, although they were possibly made to look more impressive by the nature of the Argentine tactics. The pre-match loss of Sami Khedira had the potential to be very significant, but if any team was equipped to cope with this setback it was Joachim Loew's.

 

Early possession was dominated by Germany, but Argentina were far from overwhelmed, and threatened down their own right hand side. The match had a pleasing tempo to it at that stage. The glaring miss by Higuain, after being released by a misplaced German header, will rightly be seen as pivotal. It was almost as if he could not believe his luck. However, at the end of the first period, Argentina would have been quite happy, having kept a clean sheet. They were still very much in the game.

 

As ever, Thomas Mueller was a constant thorn in Argentina's side, posing a real threat down the right flank, and wherever else he popped up. I thought that the "early" arrival of Andre Schurrle might have been a blessing in disguise. Manuel Neuer was as commanding and decisive as always between the posts.

 

At the start of the second half, Argentina had one of their best spells of the match, with Lionel Messi missing another opportunity around the 47 minute mark. Germany's fluidity had diminished, and their play was not as confident and crisp as it had been. 50/50 challenges were going in favour of their opponents. Argentina were proving disciplined and resilient, and one has to praise Alejandro Sabella for the way he prepared and set up his team.

 

In the final analysis, though, Argentina failed to convert any of their chances, with Rodrigo Palacio failing to take another one later in the second half. Extra time proved a physical ordeal for weary players. It was often technically "end to end" stuff, but the flow and elan were much reduced.

 

When it came, Mario Goetze's goal was a marvel of technique and composure, and was worthy of winning any match.

 

This triumph can only strengthen German football. We can expect that attendances and general interest will increase, and that the careful programmes of development will continue to flourish. It is up to other nations to rise to the challenge.

 

 

.

2014 World Cup - Greatest Ever?

Readers of BBC Sport have voted the 2014 World Cup the greatest ever....

 

Greatest-ever World Cup

 

One does have to wonder what criteria people are employing in making their selection. On the surface, it would seem that patriotic considerations and immediacy in the memory are the prime factors involved in this particular process.

 

Don't misunderstand me, I have greatly enjoyed this year's tournament, but I would hardly describe it as the best ever. Not the worst, certainly, but not the greatest by an stretch of the imagination. Yes, the group stages got proceedings off to an interesting start, with surprises and goals aplenty. However, I would also contend that some of the "surprises" were due to overall mediocrity and the disinterestedness of some players. There have been spectacular and exciting moments, but not to excess.

 

Some of the other results in the poll are disappointing, but not surprising.  Italia 1990, widely perceived by experts as one of the drabbest, least entertaining World Cups ever, somehow gets voted second best, presumably on account of the Gazza/Pavarotti/England doing well combo. 1966 was another tournament characterised by much negativity and cynicism, but because England emerged triumphant, it must be absolutely great, right?

 

How the 1974 World Cup, technically and tactically one of the most fascinating and accomplished ever staged, only comes in 13th place is beyond me, even when taking account of the likely average age of the people who participated in the vote.  Switzerland 1954, which had similar delights and attributes to 1974, is similarly largely ignored, despite the brilliance of the Hungarians, the high goalscoring rate, and the earth-shaking surprise in the final.

 

Of course, this is only a poll, and it's not the end of the world, but people do need to think critically and dispassionately.  Either that, or they need to start studying the football history books...

 

2014 World Cup - Media Coverage and Myths

I'm not sure whether I am just becoming hyper-sensitive to such things, but some of the media coverage of the World Cup, at least in England, has been truly woeful.

 

One of my major gripes is the ease with which myths and clichés are ceaselessly perpetuated, often by pundits and commentators who should know better. Just to get things off my chest, I will detail one or two of my bugbears, in no particular order of preference...

 

Not least amongst the myths is the notion that Brazil have always played glitteringly skilful, intricate and carefree football. They just haven't.  In my lifetime, they have lived up to the inflated hype in 1970, 1982 and, very very occasionally, in 1998/2002.  Most of the rest of the time, they have been like all other football teams - pragmatic, cautious, functional and concentrating on winning, or at least avoiding defeat. This endless "romanticizing" of the Brazil team has become tired.

 

One of the roots of the delusions of media and public alike is the undue reliance placed on short video clips and "highlights" of old football in forming judgements. Live television coverage has clearly become much more widespread in the past couple of decades, and this has led many to indulge in inaccurate denigration by comparison. During a live game, the humdrum, scrappy and "uneventful" nature of most football of all ages is there for everyone to see. Old and brief clips of spectacular goals and feats of skill leave us with the impression that plodding mediocrity did not exist in "the good old days", as it is filtered out of the collective memory.

 

In addition to the skewed perception of past "glories", there is an automatic assumption that "entertaining" and "exciting" should be equated with "great", "good" and "accomplished".  Concomitant with this is a resort to "all or nothing" thinking if the fare on offer does not comply with the commentator or "journalist"'s distorted expectations. So, we are urged to welcome shoddy and comical defending, and end-to-end basketball-style freak shows are valued above cerebral, tactical duels.

 

Pointless comparisons are made, and pointless discussions about superlatives take place, about the "best this" and the "greatest that". It is little wonder that the level of discussion across social media is of such paucity when take their cues from the lazy nonsense served up by the mainstream media?  The term "lowest common denominator" springs to mind.

 

There are some pundits who are infuriatingly pompous, self-righteous and overbearing, but ironically they are often the ones who deviate most pleasingly from the dreary norm. It is therefore often a choice between a nondescript but comfortable listen and meaningful content.

 

I will rely more on "specialist" media next time.  Mind you, I said that after 2010...

Netherlands v Argentina - 2014 World Cup semi-final

Well, the second World Cup semi-final manifestly lacked the drama of the first, although I would contend that it constituted a more meaningful and genuine contest than Tuesday evening's surreal exhibition.

Although the opening minutes of the match saw a period of fluent and confident Dutch passing and possession, I thought that by and large Argentina had more penetration and energy for the bulk of the semi-final. They seemed much more capable of getting in behind the Dutch defence than Louis Van Gaal's men did with their backline. The tactic of targeting the Dutch left flank was particularly profitable, although ultimately it did not bear fruit in the form of a goal.

After the interval, it seemed that the Netherlands coach had remedied the problem by taking off Bruno Martins Indi. However, the overall pattern and tempo of play barely altered until the penalty shoot-out. Both teams were quite pedestrian, with only the very occasional moment of inspiration and/or incisiveness to relieve the general monotony and inertia.

I found the tense and tactical nature of the match quite interesting and absorbing, although I can appreciate how the billions of neutrals around the globe would have found it less than enthralling!  The Netherlands team defended capably, but their colleagues further forward seemed bereft of real ideas and panache. Were the rigours of the quarter-final against Costa Rica still afflicting Dutch limbs?  That said, the late chance spurned by Arjen Robben will haunt them.  He seemed to half-stumble, half-hesitate, and general weariness may have played its part.

Since the commencement of the 2014 World Cup, the "experts" have been bemoaning the apparent demise of the defensive arts in football. Well, last night they finally got some proper defending, from both teams, although the exponents were not over-taxed by the creative players on either side. Robin van Persie seemed listless and only half-interested, and it was little surprise when he was substituted, so ineffectual was he.

The Dutch again had a good spell in extra-time, but rarely did they look like achieving a breakthrough. Dirk Kuyt as ever was willing, honest and conscientious, and was one of the best players on the night. The Dutch again faded, and it was Argentina who had a couple of late chances to avert a penalty shoot-out, through Palacio and Maxi Rodriguez.

Argentina were emphatic and confident in the penalty competition, and we may eventually find out more about what went wrong with the Dutch in this regard.

On balance, I am glad that Argentina got through, both because of "the Messi factor", and because they were the better team overall during the match itself. Germany, though, must start favourites for Sunday's final. They are stronger on paper, and will be fresher. 

Brazil 1 Germany 7 - 2014 World Cup semi-final

In four decades of watching football, that was possibly the most extraordinary match I have ever seen. Although I expected Germany's all-round excellence and professionalism to ultimately prevail, I also anticipated a tight, nervy affair, with the Brazil team sustained and lifted by the fervent support of the crowd and the emotion of the moment.

In the event, we were confronted with a result which will echo down the ages. Perhaps the ease with which Thomas Mueller slotted home the opener, with Brazilian defensive marking almost non-existent, should have hinted at what was about to unfold. The German players themselves appeared to sense what might be afoot, and went about their task with evident relish.

Brazil had got this far in the tournament through a combination of emotion, patriotic zeal, guts and good fortune. However, they were found out when faced with a team with the single-mindedness, savvy and ability to fully exploit their underlying shortcomings. Those who predicted that the absence of Thiago Silva would be even more keenly felt than that of Neymar may have had a point, but in all honesty Brazil would probably have still lost heavily even if their captain had been available for selection. They were that shambolic, especially in the first forty-five minutes.

It goes without saying that this result will prompt much soul-searching within Brazilian football, but the response of Germany in the final will be interesting. With any other team one might query whether they will have an adverse reaction of some kind to this somewhat bizarre semi-final. However, from the quotes emanating from the German camp afterwards, and from what we know of the players, we can only assume that this will solidify their self-belief, and make them even more formidable come Sunday evening in Rio.

Argentina and the Netherlands will have to go some to match the drama and the momentous nature of the encounter in Belo Horizonte.....

2014 World Cup - semi-finals preview

Some have declared that this World Cup has gone into decline since we reached the quarter-final stage, citing the dip in the "entertainment" factor.  This of course assumes that one became caught up in the hype about this being a "great" World Cup in the first place, and whether one falls into the trap of automatically equating "entertainment" with "quality".

 

First of all, teams cannot afford to take as many risks, and make mistakes, because one error could mean instant elimination.  What do the football "hipsters" expect coaches to do, leave gaps everywhere and allow the opposition's creative players the freedom of the park?  Secondly, the quality of defending, so derided by the pundits earlier in the tournament, as become greater and more consistently solid. Hence the relative lack of space, and goals, in the recent games.

 

I find it a bit puzzling why most people are citing Brazil v Argentina as the "dream final". Yes, it would be a dream to see the hosts pitted against Lionel Messi and co. in a feverish atmosphere. However, Germany and the Netherlands has equal allure and potency, and would arguably be a more interesting footballing spectacle overall. As it happens, in recent days, my mind has been wandering gradually towards the likelihood of a final between those two European nations.

 

Germany, to me, still look overall the best team in the tournament, with more options in creative areas, greater cohesion as a unit, and more energy and vigour in reserve. The fact that they will be facing a weakened Brazil in the semi-final only strengthens their prospects, although the circumstances surrounding the Brazilian team, particularly the Neymar injury and the Thiago Silva suspension, can not be under-estimated in their potential to produce inspiration from the hosts.

 

People are saying that the absence of their most talented individual will in some ways benefit Brazil, because it will force them to play more as a unit, and to vary their approach. This theory, of course, involves a pretty big assumption - that is, that the remaining Brazil players are up to the task of making such a revised approach work, and delivering a victory against Joachim Loew's side. Several individuals will very much need to "step up to the plate".

 

The emasculation of Brazil's attacking options must surely make it easier for Germany to concentrate on playing their own game, and fully utilising their manifold strengths in midfield and forwards. If they so desire, they could well dictate the tempo of the match. If Loew gets the balance and tactics right, then I can see Germany progressing to the final.

It seems that the outcome of the Netherlands v Argentina semi-final will rest primarily on what more outlandish tricks Louis van Gaal has up his sleeve!  In all seriousness, I see this tie as more evenly balanced than the other one, and therefore more difficult to call. Argentina have Lionel Messi, of course, but may be deprived of Angel Di Maria for the semi-final. He is their second most talented player, and after that the options begin to look a little barren in truth.

The Dutch have stagnated a little since their dazzling displays in the group stages, but Arjen Robben still seemed buzzing with energy and positivity against Costa Rica. Although Robin van Persie looked a little out of sorts, I can't see the starting line-up at least being affected by the coach's imaginative "horses for courses" initiatives. Further back, plans may be hatched in an attempt to negate the influence of a certain Barcelona player.

Notwithstanding the fact that it is my preferred final line-up, on balance I can see the last two standing after Wednesday evening being Germany and Netherlands.

France 0 Germany 1 - 2014 World Cup quarter-final

The self-appointed armchair and keyboard arbiters of footballing morality will doubtless rage about the supposed lack of spectacle and free-flowing fare in today's World Cup quarter-final in the Maracana, but I thought that the German team provided an object lesson in how to get through a tricky game with an apparent minimum of fuss. They were clinical, professional, pragmatic and economical, and got their tactics exactly right.

 

The hot conditions may well have dictated the somewhat sluggish tempo, and once the Germans scored from a set-piece, it was always going to be an uphill struggle for France. The French, when they fashioned promising positions, displayed a lack of composure in front of goal, and Joachim Loew's men were happy to soak up what passed for French pressure in the last hour, relying on their pacy and talented forward players to search for a possible second goal on the counter.

 

Before the match, I thought that the French might be able to cause problems for the German defence. Mertesacker's was omitted, and although he lacks pace, the backline did look potentially a little thin without him. In the event, the German defence played solidly, although of course they were aided by the lacklustre French showing.

 

Did the buoyant French showing in the group stages flatter them?  Possibly. This could have just been a bad day at the office, and they chose to have it at a particularly inconvenient time, for there are no second chances in the knock-out phase.

 

It will be fascinating to see how the Germans line up in the semi-final. Miroslav Klose was a touch ineffectual today, although he had a plausible penalty shout in the first half when his shirt appeared to be tugged. Will Mertesacker return to the heart of the defence?  They are likely to be confronted with a much sterner test by either the Brazilians or the Colombians.

 

 

The Class of '82

Not surprisingly, the past couple of days have seen some media comment about how the Brazil team of 2014 compares with the dazzling outfit of the 1982 World Cup - Zico, Socrates, Eder et al, and how the current line-up will not be remembered as warmly, even if it lifts the famous trophy later this month.

 

Don't get me wrong, I was as enthralled as anybody by the samba-propelled 1982 generation, and they are probably the most entertaining football team which I have ever seen.  However, we need to draw a distinction between "entertaining" and "great".  When all is said and done, Junior, Falcao and company failed to even reach the semi-finals in Spain, and had key, ultimately decisive, weaknesses. They had a mediocre goalkeeper, a poor defence, and no top-quality centre forward, and these deficiencies were hinted at throughout their stay in the tournament, before finally being fully exploited by Paolo Rossi and the Italians in that never-to-be-forgotten contest in the second group stage.

 

The present Brazilian team is a thousand times better defensively, has a better goalkeeper, is much better organized and prepared, and is much more tactically aware and astute. No, they don't appeal to the emotions and to the football romantics like some of their illustrious predecessors, but they may well succeed where the '82 team failed. In any event, does anybody seriously think that if a team played like the 1982 team in 2014, they would get anywhere? The game has changed, and in many respects for the better.

 

This all brings me on to an aspect of World Cup TV and media coverage which continues to infuriate me. That is, the often simplistic and shallow analysis, apparently calculated to appeal entirely to people who have never watched football before, let alone the World Cup. Can we not have separate "feeds", one for the neophytes, and another catering for a more discerning, nuanced and cynical audience?

2014 World Cup - Down To The Last Eight

It might be argued that some of the freewheeling spirit on display during the group stages disappeared in the "round of sixteen" matches, but the matches have been dramatic and compelling.

 

The match last night between Belgium and the USA was a marvellous spectacle. I thought that the Belgians subtly moved up a gear, their play was more cohesive, direct and threatening than it had been in previous matches, and the players in midfield and attack looked as though they had begun to believe in themselves, although they were frustrated for long periods by a combination of their own finishing and Tim Howard's goalkeeping heroics. Belgium have the talent and the options to go very close to winning the whole thing, but they need to improve a little more to realise their full potential.

 

The Argentina-Switzerland was less immediately satisfying from an entertainment viewpoint, but the tension was palpable, as the Swiss frustrated Argentina's creative players, and the South Americans struggled for ideas to break through. I have heard criticisms of Switzerland's approach, in supposedly not entering into the prevailing spirit of the World Cup by going all out for the win, but surely they adopted the tactics which they thought would equip them with the best chance of progressing?  As I watched the match, I reflected that this Argentinian team is, in terms of overall strength, not in the same league as its counterparts of the recent past, most notably the exceptionally formidable generation of Zanetti/Veron/Ayala/Batistuta/Crespo etc. The squad is just not as uniformly talented. It was perhaps inevitable that Messi would provide the inspiration for the winning goal, and the onus would seem to be on the Barcelona man to keep doing that.

 

The Belgium-Argentina encounter in the quarter-finals promises much, as Belgium are likely to allow Argentina and Messi more space to play.

 

Germany are still doing enough to win each game, and still appear to have something in hand, with more gears in the box if needed. The frailties in their defensive system were much remarked upon following the victory over Algeria, and will doubtless have been fully noted in the French camp. Although France have impressed, some might contend that they have yet to be fully stretched and tested, and they can be sure that the Germans will oblige in these respects. Do the French go with two fully-fledged strikers, in order to exploit the perceived lack of pace in the German back-line?  It will be a very evenly-matched contest, but my hunch is that the greater experience and resilience in the German team will see them narrowly prevail.

 

The Netherlands had to dig deep to overcome the Mexicans, but I think that they should easily have enough to see off Costa Rica. It is unlikely that Louis van Gaal will need to undertake the tactical manoeuvrings and innovative substitutions which proved necessary in the second round. Costa Rica will probably run out of steam, and the Dutch momentum and all-round prowess should be just too much for them.

 

The Brazil-Colombia is hugely intriguing and mouth-watering. Much will depend on how the Colombians react to their surroundings. If they are inspired rather than inhibited by the occasion then they could well capitalise on the anxiety and pressure which is bound to afflict the Brazil team. Concerns about the fitness of Neymar will only add to the unease. On the other hand, the hosts may feel liberated a little by their "escape" against Chile in the previous game, and could play with slightly more freedom and panache. It should be an amazing occasion.

 

If I was pressed, I would predict that Brazil, Germany, Argentina and the Netherlands will emerge as the four semi-finalists.

 

 

The Next England Captain

There is much speculation about who might replace Steven Gerrard as the England captain, assuming that the Liverpool man either retires from international football or relinquishes the title of captain.

 

When surveying the current England squad, there is not exactly an abundance of players with the requisite combination of leadership qualities, experience and diplomatic skills. There are one or two who may become strong candidates in the future (Ross Barkley springs to mind in this regard), but few whose current claims are too compelling.

Once the post World Cup "shake-out" has been concluded, Wayne Rooney is likely to be by far the most senior member of the set-up, both in terms of caps and honours won. He also satisfies another criterion, in that he is (despite some protestations to the contrary), pretty much assured of his place in the starting line-up.

To some people, Rooney might not seem like captaincy material, especially for the national team. So what are the alternative options? Well, Joe Hart is the undisputed first choice in his position, he has now accumulated considerable experience with England and at club level, and he has a pretty good public image. Although it is often opined that goalkeepers do not make ideal captains, there are some precedents. Dino Zoff made a pretty good job of it with Italy in 1982. The one counter-argument in the current context is that England, with a youthful bunch of players, lack natural leaders on the pitch, and it might be sensible to give the captaincy to someone in the heart of the action, in central defence or midfield.

Leighton Baines might have been an outside bet for the role, but his shaky performances in Brazil have not helped his cause, putting his position at left-back in potential peril. Gary Cahill has been mentioned by some, and in truth he does not have much competition for his position in the heart of the defence, but does he have the galvanising personality of the great captains of the past? 

In the absence of any other blindingly obvious choices, I would be inclined to give the armband to Rooney at the beginning of the Euro 2016 qualifiers, and see how he fares. Who knows, the responsibility might bring out the best in him?  If the team does well, and his own playing form is good, then there would be no reason to change the situation. As is often observed, the captain in football is less important in an overall tactical sense than in many other team sports, but his effect can often go beyond the symbolic, and help to motivate and inspire those under him.

It will be fascinating to see how Roy Hodgson resolves this matter....

England Out Of the 2014 World Cup

The hopes that Italy could give England a hand proved forlorn, and the Three Lions have exited the tournament with a whimper rather than a roar. Unlike most people, I do not see the prospects as quite so bleak.

It may be a case of interpretation, but England have been nowhere near as miserable in Brazil as they were in some other major tournaments (Euro 1988, Euro 2000, even World Cup 2010).  And at least this time around the ineptitude was concentrated more on defensive frailties than the usual paucity of creativity and technical skill.

Some of the more alarmist pronouncements of the pundits are a bit exaggerated, I feel. There is reason for optimism, in the form of Sturridge, Barkley, Sterling, Wilshere and Lallana. To my eyes, many of the shortcomings in forward positions looked to be a product of a lack of experience, rather than inherent defects in "the system".  Yes, the deficiencies at the back are a matter for concern, but the prospect of remedies in that department somehow always seems less intractable. Good defenders are arguably less difficult to find than those elusive creative and flair players.

All the same, the current England defence is probably the least impressive that I have seen in my time watching England, which goes back four decades. It was unfortunate that the likes of Terry, Ferdinand and Cole all disappeared around the same time, leaving the back line with a very threadbare and mediocre look about it.

I would be inclined to keep Roy Hodgson in his job, not least because there is a lack of realistic candidates to replace him.  Many of the players are still developing and improving, and more promising youngsters will undoubtedly emerge in the next year or so. It would be tempting, in the interests of stability and continuity, to give Hodgson a free run up to the next World Cup, but football in the real world does not work like that. Provided that England qualify for Euro 2016 and give a reasonable account of themselves, it would then be perhaps sensible to use that as a staging post for Roy and the team on the way to Russia 2018.

Another thing which England need to bear in mind is that football is a team game, and cohesion and harmony are very important. It is therefore sometimes necessary to leave out "star" players in the interests of making the machine operate more smoothly. Just picking your eleven best players does not always translate into a more efficient team performance. Putting square pegs in round holes, and picking "names", are not the road to success.

The English media is full of the usual anguished post-tournament talk of bringing in winter breaks, grassroots reform and quotas on foreign players, but I for one am not quite so downcast.  I'll let you known in two years' time whether my (very) cautious optimism was justified. I have been known to be wrong before....