Tomorrow sees Wayne Bridge and John Terry on the same pitch for the first time since all of the revelations came out about Terry and Bridge’s ex. It’s going to be fun to watch, and there are a few things you should be looking out for:
In the pre-match build-up, Sky to talk endlessly about the two coming face-to-face for the first time.
Or, Sky failing entirely to mention the elephant in the room.
In the tunnel, Bridge choosing to stand at the back of his team, as far away from Terry as possible.
The camera to linger on Bridge and Terry during the pre-match handshake.
I actually think Bridge will refuse to shake his hand, and give him a proper daggers look.
The first tackle between the two to be a foul, and to result in a melee of sorts.
Bridge to get injured (not necessarily by Terry).
Terry to get sent off (not necessarily for fouling Bridge, although that would be nice for the storyline).
Drogba to writhe around on the floor after being in the vicinity of Bridge for the first time.
gospelofmoll asked: As a follow up to my (anonymous) Jensen question, which do you think was the bigger shock: Denmark '92 or Greece '04? Furthermore, with the increase of the Euro field from 16 to 24 beginning in 2016 do you think that will help the minnows cause towards winning again or simply allow bigger nations that screwed up in qualifying get a reprieve? (Hello England circa 2008)
Denmark’s victory in 1992 was the stuff a screenwriter dreams of. Originally they didn’t qualify, and only got into the tournament when Yugoslavia descended into civil war and were banned. They then proceeded to win the whole tournament, to the surprise of pretty much everyone.
In 2004, when Greece won it, it was equally unexpected, but not quite so dramatic or poetic in nature. They qualified relatively easily, if memory serves, and there wasn’t as much of an outsider element to it. Admittedly, nobody anticipated them winning the tournament, but it was different from ‘92.
Maybe Greece was a bigger surprise because they didn’t really have any big names or outstanding players. It was a victory for tactics over superstars, even if it was a bit dull to watch (in 6 matches, they only scored more than one goal once).
Denmark were exciting though, with Laudrup up front and Jensen in the middle. Having a keeper of Schmeichel’s quality behind you probably gives you that licence…
I’d say that Denmark was the bigger shock, purely because of their late entry to the tournament.
On your second question, I was surprised to see that Euro ‘92 only had 8 teams in it. It’s amazing that in the space of 6 tournaments that number has trebled! Denmark only had to play 5 matches to win the tournament, whereas 2016’s winners will have to play 7.
It’s a stupid format too: 6 groups of 4, from which the top 2 of each group go through, and the 3 best third-placed teams, giving 16 in a knock-out stage. What is the POINT of the group stages if 75% of the teams go through?!
It seems like it will just allow a few minnows to play 3 more matches before getting the boot out of the competition, rather than failing to qualify. And it’ll make the tournament a lot longer too: 51 matches instead of the current 31. More of a strain on the hosts (France, Italy or Turkey).
Thinking about qualification for the tournament, I’m assuming that they’ll be staying with the 9 groups format. One host will qualify automatically, leaving 23 teams. So that’s the top 2 of each group going through, and then playoffs for the 3rd-place teams and the best 4th-placed team?
So you can finish 4th in your group and still qualify? Wow.
It’s basically guaranteeing qualification for the bigger countries, and for most of the slightly smaller ones (Norway, Belgium, etc). UEFA are framing it as being great for the minnows, but in fact it takes a lot of pressure off the bigger teams.
I find it quite amusing that there’s a discrepancy in the FIFA rules regarding player ownership and club ownership. A player can only play for two teams during one football season, according to FIFA rules (PDF), which has caused some problems for a few players who have been loaned out and what-not during the autumn, and then can’t be sold in the January transfer window.
But when it comes to club ownership, these rules are completely non-applicable. Portsmouth are now on their fourth different owner (fourth!) this season, after the buyout of the previous owners’ shares by one of their creditors.
So the Portsmouth players are now theoretically playing for a fourth different company/person that pays their wages, which surely must be in conflict with the above rule?
It seems that there is one rule regarding players (i.e. employees), and another regarding owners (i.e. employers), which to my mind goes against a whole number of laws regarding employment and freedom of movement for workers…
theredpanda asked: How do you feel about John Terry staying on as the England captain considering his affair?
Also does the Sports Minister hassling the FA constitute the same interference that got Togo banned for two African Nations tournaments?
I think the John Terry situation is quite funny, really, but also really troubling in a freedom of the press situation. I write enough on my usual blog about the chilling effects of injunctions and the like, so I’ll leave that side of things for that blog.
As much as I detest Chelsea, I have to admit that Terry is a born leader, and that he is the most natural person to take on the captaincy role for England. He’s an absolute shoe-in to start every game, and there’s not too many other players we can say that about.
And the other potential England captains each have their own transgressions to deal with: Gerrard’s assault trial; Rooney’s temper and inclination to get sent off; Lampard’s playboy nature; Ashley Cole’s money-grabbing cunt-like personality. Would you prefer any of those? And nobody else is really a definite in the team every week, so you can’t pick them.
I really don’t give a crap about his alleged affair and infidelity with Wayne Bridge’s bird, in relation to his performance and status as England captain. If he’s a leader on the pitch, and commands respect from his teammates, that will do for me.
Bearing in mind that past England captains include Beckham (adulterer, corporate sell-out, got sent off in a huge match), Adams (convicted drunk-driver, spent time in prison), Shearer (elbow-tastic, dirty player), and so on, Terry’s not the worst.
On the second question, it should be noted that we don’t have a Sports Minister, per se. He’s actually the Minister for Culture, Media and Sport, which always struck me as an odd combination.
The only time that sport ever seems to cross his lips is when there’s some media headlines and column inches to be made. He’s not even in charge of the Olympics! We have a separate minister for that…
And it’s not as if he’s making an original statement. He’s merely parroting whatever it is that Middle England wants to hear, in an effort to score political points.
Believe it or not, but the government has no say over who is England captain, or in fact who represents any of the home countries at whatever sport, be it professional or amateur. These sports run themselves, and have their own rules for everything from grass roots up to the national teams, and by and large they operate pretty effectively.
The government can merely attempt to influence this from the outside, looking in. They are merely a voice, and as I said above, it’s a politically-loaded voice at that. We can safely ignore it.
On the Togo issue, that’s a fucking disgraceful decision. They’re punishing the team for being the victim of an attack. How does that work?!
Yes, the team should’ve followed the organisers’ rules regarding flying to games, but surely an African football body should realise that costs are often at a premium nowadays. Many countries simply can’t afford that kind of outlay, and to ban them for the next two tournaments is a ridiculous decision.
Anonymous asked: Did you see Jensen score?
If only, if only! I remember it happening, but I wasn’t there, unfortunately.
Back story: John Jensen was a Danish midfielder that Arsenal signed in the early 1990s. At his old club, and for the national team, he was known as a goal-scorer from the middle of midfield, but he didn’t live up to that reputation whilst at Arsenal.
He used to shoot really often, but it would never go in. It became a joke, eventually, and I think it was something like 130 games into his Arsenal career before he finally scored. Away at QPR, if memory serves.
This moment entered into Arsenal folklore, and immediately there were t-shirts made up with the slogan “I was there when Jensen scored”. I think I’m right in saying that they sold many, many more t-shirts than the actual number of fans on the night…
pterodactyls asked: American Landon Donovan scored his first Premier League goal yesterday. I don't expect that it was a big deal, he's just some guy, but it's still pretty neat. Is Everton even a good team?
I saw the goal this morning, and it was a hell of a deflection. They all count though! Donovan’s debut for Everton came against Arsenal, actually, and he played pretty well. Should be a useful player to have in the squad for the second-half of the season.
Everton are a pretty good team, middling to fair. A couple of years ago, they were very good, and pushing for a top-four finish, but the wheels have come off a little since then. They had a bad start this season, but are steadily recovering.
They’ve got some good players in their squad (Cahill and Fellaini spring to mind), and an excellent manager, so they’re underperforming, really.
I find it amazing that Utd can run up these eye-watering debts, because banks are willing to support them based on the name/brand status, and that the football authorities turn a blind eye to the sheer level of debt in which they find themselves.
And yet teams lower down in the leagues get huge point deductions and are effectively crippled because of debts of a mere (in the grand scheme of things) £250,000 or so. Yes, these clubs got themselves into debt and problems, but all it takes is the withdrawal of backing from either a bank or the multimillionaire owner and the club goes tits up.
Can you imagine what would happen if the banks behind Man Utd starting calling in their debts, rather than just accepting interest payments? Utd would be fucked, absolutely fucked.
And they’re not alone in running up massive debts, or relying on the never-ending pockets of their owners. To varying degrees, Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea, Man City, practically every big team, is in the same boat.
I like to think that Arsenal’s debt is a little more structured, having been taken on voluntarily in order to fund the stadium move, and with a solid plan regarding paying it off, but we’re as equally enslaved to the banks as anyone else.
Yet we see clubs, famous clubs with lots of history, go to the wall. Luton Town got screwed over, and now that area has no league football team. Teams like Southampton, Chester, Bradford, all of them got points deductions for relatively small financial issues.
It’s a shame that the hypocrisy is so brazen, it really is.
Liverpool’s home matches have now been moved from Sky Sports to the Gay Adult Channel. Apparently the sight of 11 arseholes being hammered for 90 minutes every week was far too explicit for a sports channel.
Cheers to a mate for sending me that one.
afootballreport asked ‘Who has been Arsenal’s Player of the Year so far? For me, it would have definitely been RvP, but now I’m not sure.’
OK, this was originally asked on my other blog, but here seems a better place to answer.
For me, it’s got to be Alex Song. He’s been absolutely fantastic in the defensive midfield role, and has really grown into it this year. You can see just how much he dominates that part of the pitch, breaking up attacks and intercepting passes. His positional sense is just tremendous.
He’s also very good with the ball at his feet, unlike other players who do the Makelele role, including Makelele himself. Song is a lot more confident taking the ball on and going past players, surging into the box ahead of the other midfielders.
But he’s equally aware of times when one of the centre-backs goes past him, just dropping into the middle of defence when Gallas or Vermaelen heads upfield momentarily. Gilberto used to do the same thing, effortlessly, and it’s a sign of footballing intelligence to recognise the need to cover gaps when they arise.
He’s also a very physical player, which is something we sorely lack in midfield. He adds a bit of grunt and an ability to compete against teams which come to kick us off the park.
I should also add that Gallas has been immaculate this season. His partnership with Vermaelen seems to be one that just works.
