Are Spurs capable of mixing it in the Champions League?

Spurs? In the Champions League?
Following their hard-fought victory at the Britannia Stadium on Saturday, Spurs increased their chances of grabbing that elusive fourth spot in this season’s Premier League. The significance of Niko Kranjčar’s late thunderbolt cannot be understated; for the first time since 2004/05, there is a genuine chance of a team outside of the traditional “big four” finishing in one of the Champions League spots. With Liverpool in the midst of Rafael Benitez’s annus horribilis, Manchester City unable to find any consistency and Aston Villa experiencing their now annual post-New Year slump, Harry Redknapp’s side look best poised to clinch that final Champions League spot.

Having finished within a lasagne’s forkful of Champions League qualification in 2006 under Martin Jol, Spurs fans can now genuinely get excited at the possibility of playing in Europe’s elite competition for the first time since 1962. Whilst not having the decorated European history of the likes of Liverpool and Manchester United, it mustn’t be forgotten that Spurs were the first British club to celebrate European success, triumphing in the 1963 European Cup Winners’ Cup, as well as winning the inaugural UEFA Cup in 1973. Despite runs in the UEFA Cup (now the UEFA Europa League) over the last few seasons, it is fair to say that the perpetually underachieving Lilywhites are relatively inexperienced at the top level of European football. Making the step up to Champions League football is a big transition, and there is no doubt that Spurs’ fans and players alike are eagerly anticipating locking horns with some of Europe’s finest. However, should they finish in fourth, are Spurs capable of mixing it in the Champions League?

Strength
It seems hard to believe that less than eighteen months ago, Spurs were sat at the foot of the Premier League table with only two points from eight games. The miraculous turnaround in fortunes that has occurred since Harry Redknapp took over the White Hart Lane hot-seat has highlighted the strength of Spurs’ squad and Redknapp’s managerial abilities. Having come within a place of Champions League football twice under Martin Jol, it can be said that Spurs have been building a team ready for the challenges of top level European football for quite a while now.

Since the arrival of ‘Arry, Spurs have demonstrated their ability to take their game to the next level. This season alone Spurs have comfortably dispatched of fourth-place rivals Manchester City and Liverpool, as well as providing scintillating displays in the 5-1 and 9-1 thrashings of Hull City and Wigan Athletic respectively. Players such as the likes of Jermain Defoe and Aaron Lennon have stepped up to the plate and fully demonstrated their previously unfulfilled potential, with Defoe already having the most prolific season of his career so far.

Spurs have demonstrated that they have strength in depth, a key component of any top side. Whilst Liverpool have stuttered as a result of Fernando Torres’ continued absences and Steven Gerrard’s loss of form, Spurs have admirably shrugged aside the injuries of key men such as Luka Modrić , Aaron Lennon and Ledley King to continue their assault on the top four. It’s this sort of resilience and strength, previously uncharacteristic of Spurs, which hints at the fact that they may be ready for Champions League football. The fact that they have also managed to juggle their Premier League campaign with an FA Cup run (they are the only top-six side apart from Chelsea still left in it) suggests that Spurs’ current squad possess the quality, depth and mental strength to compete on more than one front.

Away day blues
It has indeed been a very long time since Spurs experienced the bright lights of top-level European football (38 years to be precise), and the nature of said level of football has undoubtedly changed since then. The current standard of Champions League football is considered by many to be the best in the world, and Spurs will have to up their game if they are to succeed within it.

There is a dearth of players with decent Champions League experience in Spurs’ squad, with Heurelho Gomes, Peter Crouch and the on-loan Eidur Gudjohnsen being the only players to have really done so. If Spurs do qualify for Europe, then it is absolutely essential that they address this; otherwise it is certain that their inexperienced shortcomings will be exposed by Europe’s finest. With all honesty, how many Spurs fans would feel confident about Sebastien Bassong and Benoît Assou-Ekotto being assigned the duty of trying to shackle the likes of Messi, Ronaldo and Eto’o?

Whilst Spurs may be about to break the “big” four’s stranglehold on the Champions League spots, their performances against these teams haven’t really improved. Embarrassingly, Spurs have not beaten Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool or Manchester United away from White Hart Lane in a staggering 66 attempts. Spurs’ current Premier League positioning seems to mask their inability to compete against truly top teams. If Spurs cannot win at Old Trafford or Stamford Bridge, then what chance do they have of winning at the Nou Camp or the San Siro?

Man-manager
Whilst every man and his dog is aware of the predicament that Spurs found themselves in when ‘Arry arrived, it really is impressive when you consider the progress and development this Spurs side has made since October 2008. Undoubtedly in possession of a talented, yet underachieving squad, Spurs’ success since then owes a great deal to the work of Mr. Redknapp and his managerial style.

It is undeniable that Harry Redknapp is a fantastic man-manager, gifted with the ability to produce the best from his players. Upon arrival at Spurs it was clear that he in was possession of a squad comprised of gifted individuals that Juande Ramos had failed to suitably manage; Spurs’ results immediately after Redknapp took over the helm, including THAT draw at the Emirates and a last-gasp win over the then unbeaten Liverpool illustrate this. Since then Redknapp has drawn upon his expertise to produce consistency from his team, as well as coaxing good performances from players who had previously been written-off or overlooked, such as the likes of Gareth Bale and Roman Pavlyuchenko.

Redknapp is also noted for his ability to nurture and blood young players; indeed it was Redknapp who oversaw the West Ham Academy “graduation” of Joe Cole, Frank Lampard, Rio Ferdinand, Jermaine Defoe and Michael Carrick. His ability to nurture and motivate players is probably only second to Sir Alex Ferguson in the Premier League, and there are very few managers who would be able to fire up and inspire their players with quite the same impact as Redknapp. Portsmouth’s triumphant FA Cup run of 2008 is testament to this.

Underdog
In spite of the good work he has achieved in his career up to this point, making the step up to managing a team in the Champions League may prove to be a huge challenge for Harry Redknapp. Redknapp’s European jaunts have been very limited thus far, with his continental experience restricted to West Ham’s Intertoto Cup triumph of 1999/2000 (and subsequent two-round foray into the UEFA Cup) and a handful of games in charge of both Portsmouth and Spurs’ UEFA Cup campaigns last season.

A cursory look back through Redknapp’s managerial CV will reveal that he is clearly a man who excels at overachieving with the underdog; his accomplishments with Bournemouth, West Ham and Portsmouth serve to illustrate this point. It can be argued that managing Spurs is his first post in charge of a “big club”, and as such he does not have prior experience of managing a club of such stature. The pressures and challenges of managing a “big club” differ greatly from the expectations that Redknapp has been used to for most his career and only time will tell whether or not he can handle this. The combined pressures he would face in 2010/11, should Tottenham reach the Champions League proper, would certainly dwarf any pressures he has faced before in his managerial career.

Is Owen Hargreaves a World Cup option for Fabio Capello?

With Sir Alex Ferguson hinting that Owen Hargreaves is set to make his long awaited (and oft-delayed) return from injury in Thursday’s reserve team derby match, questions have been asked again as to whether or not Fabio Capello should put the tousle-haired midfielder on the plane bound for South Africa this summer. Despite the fact that the ex-Bayern Munich man has not played any competitive football for 18 months, many feel that putting him in the 23 man squad is crucial if England are to stand a decent chance of winning the World Cup. With the midfielder’s chances of playing this season remaining slim, would it be worthwhile gamble to take him to the World Cup?

Anchorman
Whilst England’s fortunes have witnessed an impressive turnaround since the introduction of Fabio Capello as manager in December 2007, there are still are doubts over England’s ability to compete with the world’s best. As England prepare to face the likes of Spain, Argentina and Brazil, concerns have been expressed over the paucity of genuinely world-class English holding midfielders. Capello’s current preferred midfield line-up, with Gareth Barry and Frank Lampard in the middle, does not contain any players who particularly excel at protecting the back four. Whilst Barry does a good job of distributing the ball and creating play from a deep position in the centre of midfield, it can’t really be said with a great deal of conviction that one of his main strengths is marshalling the attacking threat of the opposition’s playmaker.

On the other hand, Owen Hargreaves (voted England’s Player of the Year following his tireless displays in the anchorman position during the 2006 World Cup) is viewed by many as the man best suited to nullifying the attacking threat posed by the likes of Messi, Kaká and Iniesta. In addition to adding an extra dimension of defensive safety, deploying the use of a dedicated midfield “destroyer” (i.e. Hargreaves), would diminish the defensive duties of Steven Gerrard, and in particular Frank Lampard, freeing them up to concentrate on the attacking side of the game. It is no coincidence that the goal threat possessed by the prolific Lampard is partially extinguished when forced to play in a deeper role for England; using Hargreaves in the holding position would allow Lampard to make more of his customary “late runs into the box” and exert a larger creative influence.

Versatility
With Glen Johnson only having recently returned from injury and Ashley Cole unlikely to feature again this season, there is a distinct possibility that England will start the World Cup without two fully-fit first choice full backs. Couple this with the dearth of quality replacement full backs and the limited squad size, and it appears that the inclusion of “versatile” players is a necessity. Aside from Aston Villa’s James Milner, Owen Hargreaves is the only other English player who can competently fill in across a range of positions, having comfortably played before at club and country level at both full back and defensive midfield. It is this “utility player”-esque quality of Hargreaves that provides one of the strongest arguments when deciding whether or not Manchester United’s number four should go to South Africa.

Crocked
Due to chronic patellar tendonitis, Hargreaves (now aged 29), was 27 the last time he played competitive football.  Included in Manchester United’s Champions League squad at the start of this season, Hargreaves was recently omitted from this squad in favour of rookie right-back Ritchie De Laet in a move that clearly demonstrated Ferguson’s doubts over Hargreaves’ ability to compete in the latter stages of the competition. With Ferguson also noting that “his recovery has been slow”, would it really be wise to take a player lacking competitive match practice and fitness to the world’s elite stage?

On several occasions Capello has stressed the importance of current form upon selecting his England squads – hence the seemingly perennial omission of Hargreaves’s club-mate Michael Owen. Capello is not one to allow his players rest upon their laurels and has shown that he is more than willing to wield the proverbial axe when players aren’t playing or are badly out of form. With only nine matches remaining in the Premier League season, it is highly unlikely that Hargreaves will be able to build full match fitness and form prior to the start of the World Cup.

It has also been suggested that part of the reason for Hargreaves’ long rehabilitation has been due to psychological concerns, as well as fitness issues. If Hargreaves is unable to handle the pressure of returning to play competitive club football, then surely he cannot be mentally strong enough to handle the pressure of a return to football on the world’s biggest stage.

Whilst Owen Hargreaves is undoubtedly a quality footballer, taking him to South Africa would represent a huge risk. There is no guarantee that he will be the same player he once was when he returns from injury, and sacrificing a full recovery for the sake of playing in this year’s World Cup may be damaging to the player in the long run. Indeed, Capello appears to have found a balanced midfield and unsettling this at such a crucial stage could be detrimental to the team. On this logic it seems probable that Hargreaves won’t be the only Owen watching the World Cup from the comfort of his own sofa.

Is it time for the use of video technology in football?

As the world of sport increasingly begins to embrace the advent of video technology, many calls have been made for football to jump upon the bandwagon. The recent media furore surrounding the Republic of Ireland’s contentious failure to qualify for this year’s World Cup finals appears to have provided fresh impetus for the introduction of video technology into football. With senior officials within FIFA and UEFA casting admiring glances towards the use  of ‘Hawk-Eye’ in both tennis and cricket, many believe it is now only a matter of time before similar methods are adopted in football. But would such a fundamental change help or hinder our beloved beautiful game?

High Stakes
With the likes of Messrs Wenger, Ferguson and Hughes all making calls for the inception of video technology, it is getting harder to ignore the clamour for the introduction of these methods. The increasing media scrutiny and interest within the game, coupled with the domineering financial influence and aspect of the sport means that the stakes are now higher than ever. Indeed, the price of failure is costlier than ever – a cursory glance at the perilous plights of Charlton Athletic, Norwich City and Southampton demonstrate how devastating the knock-on effects from Premier League relegation can be.

With the margins for error being so minimal these days, it is claimed that the use of video technology would eliminate the injustices attributable to poor offside, penalty and goal-line decisions once and for all. It is hard enough for downtrodden clubs to accept relegation from one tier to another, but that pill becomes so much harder to swallow when they believe that their fate has been determined by a culmination of fortuitous decisions going against them.

The frenetic, breakneck pace of the game (particularly in England) means that it can often be tricky for officials to keep up. For example, with what degree of certainty can a referee actually decide that a foul has occurred within the box when a breakaway counter-attack has occurred and he is a good 30 yards away? Similarly, when a ball is hoisted back into a congested penalty area following a set-piece, how can a linesman convincingly claim that an attacking player is or isn’t offside when he is a good 20 yards away on the touchline? Introducing video technology would help to alleviate these doubts.

Respect
The start of the 2008-2009 season heralded the introduction of the FA’s ‘Respect’ campaign, a move aimed at increasing player respect for match day officials. 17 months later, and even the most optimistic of FA officials would be hard pressed to say that the campaign has been a resounding success. The competitive and passionate nature of our sport means that players’ hearts often rule their heads during the course of a game. This is most prevalent when a hugely contested or erroneous decision goes against them; the treatment of Norwegian referee Tom Henning Øvrebø during Chelsea’s ill-fated Champions League semi-final match against Barcelona last season serves to illustrate this point.

Decisions would be a lot harder to protest when clear video evidence would prove a player wrong. In this instance, it seems almost certain that less ire and vitriol would be aimed at beleaguered officials.

Video Nasty
However, such motions for change have not been universally welcomed. Commentators have noted that the use of video technology has been a success in cricket, rugby and tennis due to the ‘stop-start’, broken-up nature of these sports; the fact that game-play in these sports is broken up means that the impact of video technology is not disruptive. Many detractors argue that the introduction of video technology into football would severely disturb the flow and pace of the game. This argument is particularly salient when considering the speed at which football is played in England, particularly at Premier League level. Critics believe that deploying video technology in football would ruin the sport as a spectacle. The frustration of having to wait for a minute or two whilst the referee waits for the fourth official to check video footage several times a match would certainly frustrate both players and fans alike.

Swings and Roundabouts
The evils of which video technology is supposed to rid football of aren’t new problems; they’re problems that have existed within football since the formation of the sport. Whilst players and managers will bemoan the misfortune of erroneous decisions that have gone against them, all teams benefit and suffer from poor decisions, and it is thought that such injustices ‘iron themselves out’ over the course of a season.

It is these perceived ‘injustices’ within the game that form the talking points for the rest of week whilst we wait for next Saturday to come! If video technology was to rid football of these issues of debate, then surely some of the magic of the game would be lost. And losing the essence, the spirit and the magic of this wonderful sport would surely be the biggest loss of them all.

Do Premier League players require more protection from referees?

The horrific injury sustained by Welsh starlet Aaron Ramsey during Arsenal’s victory at the Britannia Stadium has served to reopen the debate on whether or not Premier League footballers require more protection from referees. Occurring almost two years to the day since THAT injury suffered by Ramsey’s teammate Eduardo, players and managers alike (particularly those of the Arsenal persuasion) have responded by calling upon referees to adopt a more vigilant approach when officiating upon Premier League matches. Is this just a knee-jerk reaction to the latest high-profile leg break or a worrying sign that referees really do need to change their stance?

Harder, faster, more aggressive
Disregard the myopic viewpoint of the incensed Mr. Wenger, and it is evident that Ramsey’s injury was the result of Ryan Shawcross mistiming his tackle in an attempt to (legitimately) win a 50/50 ball. Unfortunately, this challenge graphically demonstrated the risks associated with modern top-flight football; the pace and aggression of Premier League football is such that challenges like this are now part and parcel of the game.

No longer can players neck ten pints of bitter on a Friday night and then turn out for their club on a Saturday afternoon. The modern footballer, as exemplified by the likes of Steven Gerrard, Cristiano Ronaldo and Didier Drogba, is a finely-tuned athletic machine. As such their bodies are more susceptible to the dangers of the ‘hard and fast’ nature of Premier League football. Many feel that officials should adapt their approach to mirror the altered nature of the sport and the players competing within it.

Calls have been made by several managers and players for referees to discard an almost ‘laissez-faire’ style of officiating in favour of a ‘zero tolerance’ approach to over-zealous physical play. This view acknowledges the physical side of the game, but demands the stamping out of dangerous challenges in order to protect players and prevent serious injury. It is thought that if referees were more willing to blow the whistle for fouls and to hand out cards, then players would think long and hard before making the sort of ‘reckless’ challenge that led to the injury of Aaron Ramsey. Essentially, as stated by former Chelsea and current Portsmouth manager Avram Grant, the main task of referees should be “protect[ion] of the game and to protect the players from bad injury”. If the protection of players from bad injury is to be of paramount importance, then the alteration of the way that referees officiate matches is seemingly essential.

It’s a man’s game
In spite of the beautiful, almost ballet-like style of football preferred by some of the Premier League’s leading teams, it mustn’t be forgotten that football IS a contact sport. Accordingly, players must be ready and able to handle the fierce nature of competitive football. It is unsurprising to hear that many clubs instantly place foreign acquisitions straight onto intensive strength training regimes upon arrival in England, in order to ‘bulk themselves up’ for the rigours of Premier League football; for example, Fernando Torres states that this was one of the first things Rafa Benitez instructed him to do upon arriving at Anfield.

Regardless of their team’s playing style and ethos, players have to be prepared to deal with the physical side of the game. By the nature of the sport Premier League football is a passionate, fiery game, played out by men manifesting pent-up aggression. This element will never change and it must be the duty of the players to ensure that they can deal with this and to make sure that their presence is felt.

Ooh la Liga
Opponents of ‘zero-tolerance’ refereeing highlight the example of refereeing in La Liga to demonstrate the ills of such an approach. Vilified by the quartet of players, managers, fans and pundits, referees in Spain’s top flight are infamous for their ‘card-happy’ approach to policing matches. A glance at disciplinary statistics for the 2008-2009 season shows that La Liga teams averaged over 100 yellow cards and seven red cards over the course of the season; an astounding statistic when you consider that the Premier League average for the same season was 59 yellow cards and three red cards. The Iberian-approach to refereeing means that officials have a lot more control over the flow of the game, as the fact that the whistle is blown a lot more frequently in Spain leads to a more broken-up affair. Whilst this does inevitably minimise the risk of serious injury to players, it does create a more infuriatingly stop-start spectacle.

One of the main reasons that Premier League is loved worldwide is because of its breakneck speed and flow. Aligning our refereeing approach with the one prevalent in La Liga would surely detract from this.

Whilst the visually horrifying injuries such as those incurred by Ramsey, Eduardo and Diaby clearly evoke emotion, it must be remembered that such injuries are extremely rare. These injuries should be seen as coincidental and as a regrettable by-product of the modern game. It is for this reason that I feel that Premier League players do not require more protection from referees.

Irritation, part 2

Due to unparalleled levels of contentedness and busyness of late, I have regrettably had far less time and reason to concentrate on issues of irritation than usual. Thankfully though, my unerring ability to moan and nitpick returned with a colossal bang last night.

Sitting uncomfortably in the back of my father’s car, I sighed as I heard the opening strains of that Beyonce song about single ladies (which according to my thorough Wikipedia-based research, is curiously entitled “Single Ladies”). As one might expect, I don’t really care much for Beyonce. I generally harbour an apathetic attitude to most of her songs, not really disliking or liking them, but greeting them with a tidal wave of indifference. Except this one. This one really really gets my goat. And here is the reason why.

Due to my tendency to over-analyse things when there is absolutely no reason to do so, I often categorise things (in this case, songs) for fun. Unfortunately for Mrs. Jay-Z, her tepid effort was mentally filed by yours truly under the category of “songs that evoke female empowerment dance moves” (coincidentally, my least favourite mental song category).

Now I’m sure you’re all aware of what this entails. You know the type of song. The song that, when it comes on in a club, leads to a mass drunken display of faux-fuckyou!-feminism, with hordes of girls seductively cavorting as if to say (quite contradictorily) “I don’t need male attention or commitment, but look at me anyway, and look at what you’re missing out on”. Now the really funny thing, is that this sort of act is often participated in by the type of girl who is usually seen later on in the evening sporting runny mascara, sobbing after one too many Bacardi Breezers, no doubt bemoaning the lack of male attention she has received throughout the evening (otherwise known as “The Crier” or “The Burden”, there’s ALWAYS one).

As a result I ask all of you good people to join me in urging all DJs to avoid playing “songs that evoke female empowerment dance moves”, and subsequently rid our clubs of these blubbering wrecks!

Eddycrane
X

p.s. In order to further illustrate the ills of  “songs that evoke female empowerment dance moves” I had planned to critique the merits of the song “My Humps” by the Black Eyed Peas, but my deep-rooted hatred of Fergie et al really deserves a blog entry in itself…