Pre-match blues: Another night with an imbalanced England midfield

As we ready ourselves for another evening of England, I wanted to look at some of the aspects of our current midfield and how it's affecting the style of play and tempo at which we're approaching international fixtures.

I'll keep it short and sweet but i'll follow it up with some analysis following the game and before the equally crucial match against Poland.

It's likely that Roy will play 4-3-3 again tonight and if he's consistent with recent matches, he'll pick Wilshere-Lampard-Gerrard as his midfield axis

I've got real issues with that trio for a number of reasons.

Firstly, it's the arrogance. Not one of the three is suited to playing the anchor role with any nous or conviction and without somebody to sit and protect the back four, you do fear that we're open on the counter. It's a struggle to name an elite team in Europe (domestically or on the international stage) who doesn't play with a holding midfielder and yet Roy feels that we don't need one. I just can't buy the argument that we don't need somebody to play that role at home against Montenegro. It's disrespectful to solid opposition and it stinks of the exact type of arrogance which has plagued our national side for decades.

Secondly, it's the balance, or rather I should say lack of balance. Roy is selecting three guys who love time on the ball (they often dictate play when playing at club level) so the manager is essentially asking each of them to reduce the amount of possession and touches that they're all used to by a third. Who of the three would you mark out as the player who monopolises possession for England? Could you confidently answer? I can't and it often appears as if there is a battle between the three of them to get on the ball and stamp their authority on the way in which we're trying to play.

Finally, they just won't go beyond the ball. We're picking three midfielders who aren't exactly renowned for their movement off the ball and it's strangling our options when we're in possession. Lampard used to be excellent at breaking late into the opposition's penalty area but he's not got the same legs as he once had and he's more suited to taking up a deep lying role. And what's more, you can copy and paste that statement for Gerrard, leaving Jack who isn't a natural goal-scorer and is also much more comfortable with the ball than without it.

Whilst Roy continues to select them on the basis of them being the three best midfielders in the country, England won't have a chance of moving forward as a national side. They might well be the best of the current midfield crop but they're all of a similar type and picked together they make up an inefficient and lacklustre midfield without any zip, panache or flair.

Now let's hope they go out tonight, make me look like a prize fool and put on a show.

Off the Ball: Stephane Sessegnon - Manchester United (a)

This is the first of a weekly feature that I'm going to write following every weekend's games and goals in the Premier League.

The aim is to bring some attention to those who rarely receive it. To the players who make a contribution to a goal being scored without being credited with an assist or the goal itself. The focus of these articles are on those players who don't win you any points in your fantasy football team or find their photo alongside a match report. This feature is about work off-the-ball and it's about creating space for others by dragging defenders out of position and opening up space for a fellow team-mate.

The first in this series highlights the role of Stephane Sessegnon in creating the wonderful goal scored by Morgan Amalfitano this weekend at Old Trafford. Sessegnon, offloaded by the now ex-Sunderland manager Paulo Di-Canio this summer, is not somebody noted for his work-rate but on this occasion he excelled himself on a number of levels.

As Amlfitano carried the ball into United's half, he was chased hopelessly by Januzaj and faced with the opposition centre-backs, Evans and Rio Ferdinand.

In this situation you would have expected one of the defensive pairing to go out and meet him, but the run of Sessegnon left both in no man's land.

Coming from behind Rio, the WBA attacker darted between the two centre-backs, dragging Ferdinand's attention away from the oncoming Amalfitano.

Sessegnon carried on his run to the right touchline, forcing Evans to hesitate and leave Amalfitano to drive towards goal.

Sessegnon's movement stopped Evans from confronting the ball and pulled him completely out of the action.



Amalfitano was left one-on-one with Rio who found himself with completely the wrong body shape to make a decisive challenge.

A quick nutmeg and a classy finish later and West Brom were one up at Old Trafford.

You can view the goal by following the link below...

▶ The goal... - YouTube

Thanks for taking the time to read.

Per Mertesacker - defying the 'laws' of the Premier League

A quick search of Per Mertesacker's name on Twitter and you'll quickly get a feel for the general public's perception of Arsenal's enormous German international.

'Slow'

That seems to be the word most commonly associated with Per. The word that consistently appears against his name, week after week, game after game. It's there every time Arsenal concede a goal and it's there every time the Gunners lose (although that hasn't happened very often recently).

Mertesacker's speed is highlighted by opposition coaches (Chelsea coach Christophe Lollichon expected Marseilles to exploit Arsenal by targeting Per in their recent Champions League fixture) and it's routinely picked on by pundits as a weakness in Arsenal's defence.

And yet, for all his athletic deficiencies, Per is continually selected for Arsenal and remains the mainstay of Germany's defence. It just doesn't add up.

Is it that the likes of Wenger, Low and Klinsmann have been blind to this for all these years? Do they not read the results of Per's sprint tests?

Or is it that Mertesacker, now capped 93 times for Germany, makes up for a lack of speed by being one of the most intelligent centre-backs to have graced our league in the last ten years?

I suspect the latter.

With or without Per

Whichever way you want to look at it, Arsenal are on a mighty fine run.

Since a 2-1 defeat to Spurs in March last season, they've lost just once on the opening day of this year to Aston Villa and beaten the likes of Bayern Munich, Marseilles and their North London rivals (in a more recent fixture) along the way. You don't need to be a detective to see that their run of form coincides with a consistent partnership between Koscielny and Mertesacker and the stats speak for themselves.

In the last 18 matches, they've averaged a clean sheet every other game and effectively blunted the likes of Soldado, Michu, Berbatov and Lukaku on separate occasions. They've only drawn twice since the defeat in March and only against Villa have the pair conceded more than once in a Premier League match.

There is no doubting that Koscielny has been crucial to Arsenal's change in fortunes but he's not often singled out for criticism. Per, on the other hand, has been targeted ever since joining Arsenal and yet his performances suggest that much of the criticism has been unfair.

The German's stats are up there with the best when it comes to interceptions and aerial battles won, and whilst he's not somebody who wins lots of tackles, he makes up for that by giving so few fouls away. Oh and to top it off, he's even managed to chip in with three goals, the most recent against Stoke last weekend.

Those first five yards...

Playing centre-half for Arsenal is no easy gig.

Wenger's style permits his full backs to involve themselves in the play whenever his side have got the ball and the likes of Gibbs and Sagna are deemed essential when Arsenal attack. It makes the Gunners a potent attacking force but it also leaves them vulnerable if they give the ball away.

The pitch below shows the space left for opposition teams to exploit when counter-attacking Arsenal. With the full-backs out of position, Mertesacker and Koscielny are left to cover vast swathes of the pitch.

So, the question is: How could somebody like Mertesacker, deemed lethargic, cope with these situations and still remain effective?

With Per, it's all about those 'first five yards' being played out in his head. The German clearly has an outstanding football brain that allows him to anticipate danger and cut out threatening attacks decisively. His positional sense is unmatched across the league and it enables him to deal with attacking players whose speed he can't match. Where other defenders rely on their athleticism to get them out of trouble, covering up mistakes, Per consistently gets himself in the right place, at the right time, and deals with the problem before it becomes catastrophic.




The best is yet to come

Mertesacker has been prodigious at the heart of Arsenal's defence and Wenger is reaping the reward for showing faith in the towering defender. His leadership qualities are gradually coming to the fore, he's got the respect of his teammates and slowly but surely, he's starting to win round the doubters.

The obsession with athleticism and in particular, speed over the ground, has driven people to assume that a lanky and ungainly athlete like Mertesacker would never make it in the English top flight. And yet, if we were to look at the central defenders who've stood out in the Premier League era, they'd all have one thing in common; a footballing intelligence that surpasses their more athletically gifted peers.

Per fits nicely into this category.

Thanks for taking the time to read.

Fresh start and a new direction

Where to begin?

It's been a few years since I last wrote anything related to sport and although the odd person has encouraged me to start up again, I've not felt compelled....until now.

For those of you that know me, I'm seeing this as an opportunity to take some of my typical weekend pub-talk and turn it into something worth reading. I'm challenging myself to create something from all the opinion and all of those predictions which fill up too much of your lives on a weekly basis.

A cousin of mine planted this idea a year or so ago after one of those 'chats'. The sort of 'chat' which typically sees me talking sport at either a family member or friend for a considerable period of time.

If i re-call correctly, I was defending a number of Arsenal players,who at the time were unpopular among both mainstream media and the majority of fans. Becoming increasingly frustrated with my point of view, James (my cousin) asked for something more substantial to support my argument and suggested I do something worthwhile with my unconventional opinions.

I didn't listen but I think it's a pretty good idea and so here I am writing now.

Ultimately this blog is about the following:

• It's designed to show people, who base all of their opinions on the five minute clip edited by the team at MOTD, that there is another way to look at things.

• It's intended to show up pundits who watch highlights for a living and provide lazy soundbites to be gobbled by the masses and regurgitated in every public house across the country.

• It's aimed at all the naysayers and all the 'one bad performance in a televised game and he's useless' types.

• It'll be statistical, it'll be tactical and obviously it'll be controversial.

First up, the BFG...G (Big Friendly German Giant if you're wondering) - Per Mertesacker.

Thanks for taking the time to read

A round of applause for the ineptitude of the ICC

Every sport wants to expand its horizons. Football held its last World Cup in Africa, the NBA and NFL are playing matches in London and just last month two English Clubs played out a Rugby Union fixture in Abu Dhabi. They all want to find new markets, seek out new opportunities and most of all want to spread their game as far and wide as possible.

All seems rather logical, doesn't it?

And yet, the ICC continues to defy logic. Their decision to cut the 50-over World Cup from 14 teams to 10 for 2015 - excluding the associate nations from the competition - is not only short-sighted but detrimental to the game world-wide. They claim their decision is based on a desire to maintain competitive standards in the competition and instead want associate nations to develop through exposure to the T20 World Cup each year.

But they really are missing a trick. Of course we want a competitive World Cup played out over a reasonable period of time - nobody in Cricket would argue otherwise - but that doesn't mean that we want to discourage developing nations in the process. How do the ICC propose Ireland, Kenya Canada and the Netherlands incentivise their players when they only have one competition to strive for each year? How does the Irish Cricket Board keep people like George Dockrell and the O 'Brien brothers from looking towards representing England in the future, if they are only able to play T20 on the World Stage?

Ironically, some of the associate nations are giving the 'heavyweight' nations more competitive Cricket then there fellow top-tier relatives have done in recent weeks, leaving egg on the faces of the governing body. But, it's not just this recent World Cup that has seen upsets and matches belying the form book. As recent as 2003, Kenya shocked the World and reached the semi-final of the competition and in 2007 Ireland were able to reach the knockout stages in the Caribbean. Does that not represent competition and progress?

Undoubtedly, the continued participation of smaller nations in the T20 World Cup is encouraging for the cricketing community and there is value to the argument that the shorter form of the game will allow the associates to be more competitive on a regular basis. But that doesn't make up for or mask the enormity of the decision to take away 50-over Cricket from developing sides.

By cutting the size of the World Cup, the ICC are not only taking the 'World' (so aptly put by Mr Swann) out of their premier ODI competition, but they're also showing their true colours on how committed they are to expanding the game. Bullied by the corporate aims of the superpowers and predictably lured by increased television revenues, the governing body are seemingly crushing the progress made in the associate nations over the past ten years.

Good to know the game is in safe hands.

Ready, Steady...Panic

If we're in the middle of a recession then somebody failed to mention it to the Premier League Football clubs willing to pay extortionate fees this January. First we had Edin Dzeko move to Manchester City for 27 million pounds, then Aston Villa parted with 18 million (subject to rise to 24) to bring Darren Bent to the midlands. If that wasn't enough, deadline day saw an incredible splurge of activity as Liverpool brought in the Uruguyan Luiz Suarez for over £22 million as well as splashing £35 million pounds on Newcastle's Andy Carroll. Leaving Anfield was the talismanic Fernando Torres who moved to the capital to join Chelsea for £50 million and the champions weren't finished there; also adding the Benfica centre half David Luiz for in excess of £20 million. A window full of activity and money spent aplenty.

Each club will argue that the money spent represents the quality they are buying and in some cases that remains true but if anybody thought that Carroll was worth £35 million prior to the 31st of January 2011 then they were certainly keeping quiet about it.

It's clear that the man, who until recently wanted to be a 'Geordie legend', has considerable talent and you won't get many doubting that he has the attributes to succeed at the highest level. Carroll is tall, athletic, strong, powerful in the air and has an element of skill not necessarily associated with your stereotypical 'targetman'. He's taken to the Premier League, like a duck to water, and his record over the first half of the season would suggest that he's destined to achieve not only in the top flight but on the international stage as well.

So why the furore over his transfer?

Liverpool have taken a punt and a ridiculous one at that. To spend £35 million pounds on a 22 year old, who has played only half a season of Premier League football, is excessive to say the least and reflects the sort of gamble that a club would only take on deadline day. Forget the potential of the lad, forget how Newcastle valued him and forget the amount of money brought into the club by the sale of Torres. Liverpool have splashed this money out of sheer panic and will rue their decision to blow this much on a player of Carroll's calibre. £35 million should be reserved for a world class player and not for an individual who looks like he may be able to, one day, grow into a top class striker in the Premier League. You might argue that it's the market inflating prices but the deal smacks of desperation from a Liverpool board looking to cover for the loss of Torres and Newcastle have done an incredible piece of business.

Remember this; Michael Ricketts had a good season once....

'One step forward...'

The Autumn Internationals saw an England side progressing towards the World Cup with such promise that you could be forgiven for thinking they had an outside chance of contending for the ultimate prize. Okay so they were out-classed by the All Blacks and beaten up by a monster South African pack, but some valuable lessons were learned and the quite brilliant manner in which they dispatched Australia gave hope to the nation that this group of fresh faced individuals might just have a successful future on the International stage.

Fast forward a couple of months and that optimistic outlook has been shelved again. Injuries to key players and question marks over some of the important selections has put paid to that and a feeling of uncertainty has crept in. England aren't ready and this World Cup was always going to come too soon, but all of a sudden challenging France for the Six Nations crown looks a little less feasible and there is a fear that the developments ongoing under Johnson could stagnate.

It's not so much the injuries to Lawes, Croft and Moody, because they can't be helped, but who they are to be replaced by. England's improvement has resulted from the selection of a different breed of forward and by reverting to able and try-hard plodders they risk undermining the style they've developed in the last year. With all due respect to Louis Deacon and Joe Worsley, who have been and still are outstanding professionals, they don't offer the same impact, threat or skills set to the men they are replacing and more importantly they don't offer the same dynamism.

International Rugby has moved on. Gone are the days of the Lock who got by on his setpiece and rucking alone. All of a sudden a Second Row is expected to be able to pass and carry the ball, tackle in the tight but now in the loose also and generally act as an extra backrower. In Lawes, England have produced a new breed but in selecting Deacon they revert to the plodding option who isn't going to throw the pass that sends Chris Ashton the length of the field. The same goes for Worsley. Make no mistake about it, the brute from Wasps tackles and boy he tackles hard but it's more of a case of what he doesn't do than what he does. Joe doesn't offer a lineout option, he doesn't carry well in the loose and he certainly isn't going to 'corner-flag' like Croft does.

Perhaps there isn't the pool of players available to Johnson to continue the style they've developed? Maybe Worsley and Deacon will perform admirably in this upcoming Six Nations? Only time will tell. Let's just hope that we don't hear that dreadful phrase from every microphone of every pundit this February when referring to England; 'One step forward...'.