Sunday 29 December 2013

ENGLAND CRASH AGAIN; COOK HAS TO GO.

Following yet another crushing defeat for the England cricket team in Australia, the future of Alastair Cook is suddenly the topic of debate.
 
Cook was groomed for the captaincy for some time before he was eventually given it, after Andrew Strauss retired, despite him having no real experience at the job. In days gone by, an England captain was almost always either an amateur gentleman, trained in the public school system, or an existing County captain with several years of experience; no longer. In fact, a good few of the recent England captains have had little or no captaincy experience prior to being given the England job and their success has been varied. Sadly, the almost total separation that now exists between County and International cricket means that players are prevented from honing their skills with a county and are whisked off to be ensconced in the England camp, being moulded into whatever the current style of play is while also being protected from failure and disappointment. Many of them hardly ever seem to play and have little chance of ever getting into a real run of form; batsmen play a couple of innings a month and bowlers send down 300 or 400 overs in a year, nowhere near enough to find their true rhythm.   
 
Cook has been a fine batsman though his form has suffered greatly of late, presumably due to the added burden of captaining a dysfunctional team. That he has been unable to encourage his side to improve and that he appears to do little more than stand around with his head in his hands, or stroking his chin, is a sure sign that he is a man out of his depth. Cook has none of the dynamism of some of his more successful predecessors and his team is the poorer for it.
 
When I was a lad, the captain of our junior school team was chosen because he was the best player; while this system may be good enough for school teams, it is hardly the way to pick the best man to lead a national side and so it has proved. Cook is no more a captain than were Kevin Pietersen and Ian Botham; all were appointed because they were good players, with little real thought as to their captaincy abilities. The trouble now is, should Cook be deprived of the job, who would replace him ?
 
First in line would normally be the vice-captain, Matt Prior, but he too has suffered a collapse in form and has even lost his place in the team. Additionally, his captaincy experience is even less than Cook's. Stuart Broad has captained the '20-20' side but it is rare for a bowler to be given the main job; the last pure bowler to be handed the poisoned chalice was Bob Willis , and that was more than 30 years ago. A few all-rounders have had a go but none has been particularly successful since Ray Illingworth, in the early 1970s. Of the others in the current side, Pietersen's already had a go and failed, and his overall attitude is far from what is needed in a captain; Ian Bell has never appeared to be in the running for the job while Carberry, Root, Stokes and Bairstow are newcomers, young and inexperienced. Graeme Swann has gone and Tim Bresnan is on the fringes of the team as is Monty Panesar. Jimmy Anderson is, perhaps, the only one who could, possibly, take the job, but he's another bowler; would he even want it ?
 
For me, Cook is simply not up to it. The only immediate replacement would be Jimmy Anderson, who has matured into a fine bowler, an excellent fielder and, while having no pretensions as a batsman, can often keep one end up for protracted periods of time. Beyond Anderson, the selectors would have to look outside of the current squad, but there are few candidates even there. Several county captains are overseas players while several others are on the wrong side of 30 and with no international experience.
 
Effectively, the system is to blame for the current mess in which the England team finds itself, though others may blame the coach, Andy Flower. In truth, the blame lies with those who designed the system and appointed Flower but there is little chance that they will see it this way. Instead, they'll sack Flower and Cook and appoint another inappropriate captain. "Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose".

Sunday 22 December 2013

SWANN'S EXIT RINGS ALARM BELLS !

Graeme Swann's sudden and unexpected retirement from all forms of cricket comes as another blow to the beleaguered England cricket team. It follows on the heels of Jonathan Trott's departure from the side for reasons of mental health and not that long after Andrew Strauss made an equally sudden and unexpected exit.
Swann has cited problem's with his arm as one of the main reasons for his decision but he is only 34 and surely had a year or 2 left in him. He has been one of England's most successful bowlers, taking 255 wickets in 60 Test matches, a strike rate which compares favourably with most. With England struggling to make any impression on the rampant Australians, his departure from the team seems most odd.
One is left wondering whether we have been told the whole story. The continuous round of international matches of all sorts, with associated media coverage and constant demands for special appearances, may well be a subsidiary reason, but one that cannot be mentioned; sponsors wouldn't like it. Indeed, some of the players probably wouldn't like it either as it could lead to a reduction in their bloated incomes.
For men like Swann, Trott, Strauss and, a few years ago, Trescothick, to suddenly walk away from the game that they've devoted their lives to must surely ring alarm bells in the minds of all sensible sports administrators. Clearly, something is wrong..

BBC LACKS OBJECTIVITY OVER COLEMAN.

The BBC has a knack of treating anything which affects itself or its personalities as being of paramount importance and the death of David Coleman was no exception. Yesterday, the demise of this second rate broadcaster was the top news story, taking up much of successive news programmes and causing all genuine news to be squashed into whatever few seconds remained.
 
Coleman has been presented as the epitome of broadcasting genius, a man of immense sporting knowledge and understanding when he was, in fact, a man prone to making statements of the bleedin' obvious, regular gaffs, and getting his commentaries so ridiculously wrong that it was painful. One always knew that when Coleman shouted out "And now 'X' is moving into position to make his challenge", 'X' was actually beginning to run out of steam and would soon be overtaken by most of the field. Far from being a man of great understanding, he seemed to know very little and be almost totally unable to read sporting situations.
 
Coleman loved being associated with major sporting names and was a perpetual name-dropper. His chairmanship of 'A Question of Sport' was awful and his ability to make the most stupid remarks legendary, as was noted on numerous occasions by 'Spitting Image' and 'Private Eye'.
 
Once again, the BBC has shown how inward looking it is, how much it sees itself and its people as being of the greatest importance. It has no objectivity and, as a news broadcaster, it is now of no use whatsoever. It should be broken up.

Thursday 19 December 2013

ENGLISH CRICKET DIES IN AUSTRALIA.

The spectacular decline of the England cricket team has been quite a story.
 
A few months ago, loud-mouthed pundits, such as Ian Botham, were predicting that England would win the 2 Ashes series 10-0. Admittedly, they did win 3-0 in the summer but, even, then, there was evidence that things would not be quite the same in the return series. Now we know.
 
England have been comprehensively thumped in the first 3 tests of the series and there have been few bright spots. The batting has, with only 2 or 3 isolated exceptions, been abysmal, while the bowling has simply proved to be not up to the job. Even the fielding has been, at best, lacklustre. What has gone wrong ?
 
Firstly, captain Cook is no captain. His leadership appears to consist mostly of pulling anguished faces or covering his head with his hands; there is little in the way of contact with his players, little obvious and real encouragement or advice. Pietersen remains a law unto himself, occasionally a brilliant match winner but as much use as a chocolate teapot when the heat's on. Michael Carberry has shown some ability and Ian Bell has been more reliable than others, but Matt Prior, the vice -captain, has been as much use as his boss, scoring few runs while missing catches and stumpings. When it comes to the bowling, the much vaunted attack of Anderson, Broad and Swann has had little bite. The absence of a genuinely fast bowler has been a huge disadvantage and one wonders what's happened to Steven Finn.
 
This England team appears old, tired and disjointed. It lacks leadership and passion. It may well be that its players lack real match practice, as they rarely have any chance to play regularly. A constant round of a few Test Matches interlaced with assorted limited overs slogs is no way to develop top class players; the frequent suggestion that they need a rest after a few games is laughable.
 
Jonathan Trott's mental problems may be an indicator of even deeper problems in the overall set-up but whatever the truth, something is wrong and something needs to be done about it. This is yet another example of money and vested interests taking precedence over all else, and the end result is the demise of our national summer game. 

Wednesday 18 December 2013

AVB HAS GONE: NOW TIME TO DUMP LEVY.

So Tottenham have finally bitten half of the bullet and sacked Andre Villas-Boas. Now we just have to see the back of Daniel Levy.
 
Supporters of AVB have produced a variety of statistics that purport to show how successful he really was and how wrong it was to sack him. However, what they ignore is the simple reality of his team's appalling recent performances. They may well have had a good year last year but that was with a team put together by his predecessor and that included Gareth Bale. Having brought in a raft of new blood, AVB was simply unable to blend them into an effective side, at least when they were expected to follow his tactics. While they've won the majority of their matches this season, these have been predominantly against lower-grade opposition; whenever they've come up against a decent side, they've been beaten, culminating in the miserable showing against Liverpool last Sunday.
 
Obviously, there is now much speculation about who will be the new boss, but first up is the Capital One Cup match against West Ham.  A few weeks ago, the Hammers came to White Hart Lane and won 3-0, a match which really started the alarm bells ringing at Tottenham. Whether caretaker manager Tim Sherwood can revitalise his side for this confrontation will be the first test of his credentials and we'll soon know whether or not the problem was with AVB's approach. I can see a resounding win for the home side tonight, perhaps 3 or 4 - 1, which could be a precursor to a real revival.
 
Unfortunately, the really deep-seated problem at White Hart Lane is still there. Since Daniel Levy became Chairman in 2001, the club has seen 11 managers come and go - George Graham, Glen Hoddle, David Pleat (twice as a caretaker), Jacques Santini, Martin Jol, Clive Allen (caretaker), Juande Ramos, Harry Redknapp, Andres Villas-Boas and now Tim Sherwood. If Sherwood doesn't keep the job, it'll soon be 12. No team can perform successfully with such regular disruption and the man responsible for all of this mayhem is Levy. While there can be no doubt that some of his choices were better than others, it is also abundantly clear that several should never have been appointed; some simply fell out of favour or with him.
 
Levy is an incompetent meddler. As long as he stays, Spurs will continue to underperform, whoever the manager is.

Sunday 15 December 2013

WHEN WILL TOTTENHAM RID THEMSELVES OF LEVY & AVB ?

Since Tottenham were soundly thrashed by Manchester City, they've had a very easy time of it. Two matches against third rate European opposition, both of which they won, 2 league matches against teams in the lower reaches of the Premier League, Fulham and Sunderland, which they also won, and a game against a misfiring Manchester United which they managed to draw. The media and assorted footballing experts have pronounced that the crisis is over and 'Spurs are back on track'.
 
Watching their efforts against Liverpool this afternoon, it is very clear that the 'experts' don't know their collective arses from their collective elbows. In the first half, Tottenham were every bit as hopeless as they have been all season against decent opposition - no bite at the front, midfield far too slow and outplayed, and defence at 6s and 7s and frequently non-existent. The second half saw Tottenham press much more, but by then, Liverpool were sitting on a 2 goal lead and content to protect it. Tottenham had more of the match and made a few chances but were still unable to convert possession and territory into goals; at the other end, Liverpool continued to run rings round an inept defence and took their chances. To add insult to injury, the usually brilliant Paulinho was sent off for a late challenge on Luis Suarez which was probably more worthy of a simple yellow card. In the end, Tottenham were completely overrun by a far better team and lost at home, again, this time by 5-0, but the worst thing is that they never looked remotely as good as the opposition. In fact, they were pathetic.
 
This team has oodles of talent and yet is performing woefully when up against proper opposition. Once Manchester United get their act together, which they will, and with Newcastle showing real form, Tottenham will slide backwards into the middle of the table. There is nowhere else for a team of their obvious talent but with no real plan; they will enter the next season with no European matches to worry about and few hopes of achieving anything other than another mid-table result..
 
While talent is owned by players, the plan is something evolved by the manager and his staff. If we accept that the players *do* have talent, the failure must be with the manager and this has now gone on for too long. Additionally, the manager was appointed by chairman Daniel Levy, whose record at appointing managers is about as poor as that of any chairman of any club in history.
 
GET RID OF BOTH OF THEM - NOW ! 

Wednesday 4 December 2013

TIME TO BE RID OF POINTLESS FEMALE SPORTS' REPORTERS.

Very often, the sports' news on BBC television is presented by a woman; why, is a mystery.
 
It seems that BBC news has now devolved almost all of its sports reporting to women regardless of their knowledge of the games they're reporting on or their relevance to them. This is a clear example of BBC political correctness gone mad.
 
I have no problem with women reporting on female sports, unisex sports or indeed any sport if they are knowledgeable and relevant. However, top class football is an almost entirely male preserve, so why do we have a woman reporting the results when she clearly knows nothing about them ? In fact, the longest item in the bulletin was something to do with Beckham, who no longer plays, and a few of his mates who are similarly unemployed; what has this to do with sports' news ?
 
Sue Barker was a fine tennis player and is a good presenter for tennis, as is Sue Smith; Hazel Irvine is similarly well placed having been an international player and so are the likes of Denise Lewis in athletics and others in golf, cycling, rowing and gymnastics, but why do we have irrelevant and unnecessary women commentating or reporting on male rugby, football or cricket matches ? They don't belong there; it's a ridiculous sop to political correctness.
 
Why do we have to have female nonentities in the studio reading out reams of prepared scripts of which they have no understanding ? It's time that the BBC, and the rest, dispensed with 'PC' and returned to employing knowledgeable people to report on sports, just as they do with every other subject. Gender has nothing to do with it and a misguided attempt to introduce an utterly specious gender balance is farcical.
 
It's time for men to reassert themselves.