Thick of it or bird's eye view

Coaching and managing top professional sports teams is an unforgiving business. Staff turnover is massively high in this cut throat world, and the very best performers are always looking for that something extra which can give them the edge over their rivals. And yet, there seems to be a large role to be played by tradition - this can be the only explanation for the strange difference of approaches between rugby coaches, who tend to sit up high in the stands, and football managers who prefer to be down on the touchline (except when they're banned by the fourth official, of course). Intuitively, this seems like the wrong way round - the world of rugby is such a physical and high intensity sport, where being up close to players would seem to be the best option. Here you can gee up players to ensure they're playing at maximum intensity, get a good feeling of stamina and energy levels, and make your opinion clear to the referees (although it would have to be done politely, given rugby's strict rules and traditions about respecting referees). Whereas football, with its greater degree of tactical variety focusing on the use of space, would seem to benefit from a bird's eye view - enabling managers to manipulate their teams, as a general would move his forces. There probably isn't one approach which is decidedly better than the other, with the different approaches most likely to suit different people - but it would be nice to see managers from both sports experimenting with other approach...

More swearing please

The England team have restored the faith of their supporters. Well, they haven't gone that far perhaps (let's be realistic, this is a good Swiss team, but it is their first competitive game under new management), but this was certainly the best performance in a long time, with aggression and commitment not seen since before the world cup. Perhaps most promisingly, England have come across a style of play which is naturally suited to the English players. Learning from France's demolition of Switzerland during the world cup, Roy Hodgson and his team had prepared with a view to hitting the Swiss on the counter attack - and it worked, with England's two goals coming from swift attacks on the break. While this is clearly a weakness of the Swiss team, it is a style of play well suited to this team, with pace in abundance (imagine when Walcott is back in the team) and the players brought up on the fast action and end to end football of the premier league.

While in the past, the press has lamented the absence of 'technical' players capable of controlling the game from an advanced position up the pitch, a focus on passing out of defence , rather than relying on the long ball is much more critical. In Spain, youngsters are forced to pass out of defence, this kind of training for England's young players wouldn't mean that they have to practice tiki taki football - but it could be combined with the English preference for fast direct football with powerful effect.

The only problem with adopting such a counterattacking style, is what to do when the opposition don't play fair, and also sit back and defend, such as during the Norway game. Then the players need to be able to adapt and adopt different ways to get the ball in the back of the net, which can only come from leadership on the pitch to communicate a required change.

Finally, a big well done is due to the Arsenal players who appeared in Stonewall's rainbow laces advert (in partnership with a major bookmaker). It was funny, self-deprecating and for a very good cause. And, given footballs perceived hostility to the gay community, a brave decision for them to be involved. While its painful to promote a bookmaker, posting this link is more than worth it.

A new chapter. The same story.

This blog previously asked for a bolder choice of England captain than Wayne Rooney, so it is predictable that this article is going to take issue with the 'new chapter' promised by Wayne Rooney that would form under his captaincy. But in this instance it is difficult to follow an unpredictable pathway.

Although England secured a win, and Rooney the winning goal, it was an uninspiring performance and also, perhaps more depressingly, raises the spectre of much dreary debate to come. Perhaps most disappointingly, there is no sign of a new culture of commitment to the England team, with mass substitutions at the end of a lifeless friendly the symptom. Surely Rooney, on his debut as England captain, would have demanded that he plays the full 90 minutes to lead his team? Unfortunately, Rooney also seems to lack the natural leadership demanded by this role, as he sat glumly in the stands rather than welcoming substituted players off the pitch as other support staff and players did. Also, his performance has also been questioned, and the performance of Welbeck deemed to be of higher standard. Sadly for Welbeck, he won't start the next game against Switzerland as dropping Rooney will be unthinkable for the England management. Although this blog has previously championed Joe Hart as captain, perhaps better, given the current team, would be to issue the captaincy on a short term basis, in order to keep competition high and provide flexibility in case of a drop in form - particularly important at the moment as few players other than Sterling seem to have their positions unquestioned.

But it is unlikely that the status quo will shift in the short term, and England's malaise will continue, with ever dwindling crowds. Roy Hodgson has blamed this on the quality of the opposition, which certainly is part of the cause, but more critical is the lack of connection between the national team and the public. Until this is corrected, which will only be done by performances of more commitment and verve, the attendances will remain low.

But of more concern from last evening's game was the return of the lazy 4-4-2 is rigid argument. Does anyone else not realise that rigid is an incredibly empty and useless description of a formation? By all means say that a formation is ill-suited to a team or opposition and give the rationale for it - but to lazily describe it as 'rigid', purely on the basis of the fact that it is a nice sounding description that has become a widely accepted truism is a waste of everyone's time. Another concern is an emerging debate on whether Wilshere and Henderson can work in midfield together, bringing back bad memories of the Lampard-Gerrard debate. Either they can play well together or not - please can the debate move on from trying to crowbar the best players into a team and start discussing how to select the best team, which isn't necessarily made up of a collection of the best players. Sadly this debate will probably rumble on, as correspondents insist on recycling tired old storylines and phrases.

Five steps to mending English football

The build up to this summer’s world cup was the first time that I can remember there being a complete absence of hope or expectation of success for England’s football team, as years of underperformance at the highest level finally took their toll on weary English fans. And yet, remarkably, the England team somehow still managed to perform below expectations, with three uninspiring performances against teams that did not make it much further in the tournament themselves. What is even more remarkable is that there has been very little soul searching following this dismal tournament, indicating that there is an acceptance that this is just the way things are, and we are not likely to be able to change it for the better. This blogger disagrees and the following article sets out five simple steps to restore some pride to the English national team.

1)     A captain to set the tone

First things first, the England team is now without a captain, and this provides an ideal opportunity for a implement a short-term fix and set the tone for the future development of the team. Candidates for the role are thin on the ground, but two names have been mentioned in particular - Wayne Rooney and Joe Hart. While Wayne Rooney has the experience and star player status, his well publicised inability to perform at the highest level should surely count against him. And one would assume his ability to be an inspirational leader is limited to leading through his performances on the pitch, the ability of the captain to enhance the performance of the team would be held hostage to Rooney's form and confidence. He is also too closely linked to the poor performances of the team over recent years, and overlooking him should be a key symbol that players will no longer be able to expect selection as a right, regardless of their performances for the team.

Joe Hart represents a much surer choice. Although, as goalkeeper, he is distanced from his teammates on the pitch, he is the one player who seemed to demonstrate any passion for playing for England - simply having the captain belting out the national anthem (he was the only player to do so with any kind of gusto at the world cup), sets the tone for the other, younger, players to really relish having the opportunity to represent their country. Also, as a relatively new member of the squad, he is protected from links to the perennially underachieving 'golden generation' - breaking from the past should be a critical aim for the future development of the team.

But most importantly, because of the consistently lacklustre performances by a team full of multi-millionaire players who are brought up expecting success, returning passion and motivation to the England team should be a key goal for the England team. This is why Joe Hart gets my vote for Captain.

2)     Actions, not words – start training coaches

After the French team flourished 15 years ago, much was made of the success that stemmed from their national training centre which allowed the national team members to train together, with the best possible facilities, from a young age – creating a group of technically sound players who knew each other well and could play as a team.

And now with Germany's re-emergence as a dominant force in world football, there has been much written and spoken about the number of qualified coaches that they have across the country, serving not only the elite footballers, but right across all levels of grass roots football (Germany - 34,970, Italy - 29,420, Spain - 23,995, France - 17,588, England - a paltry 2,769). This creates greater competition in all parts of the game and improves the chance that we will have more Englishmen managing top teams in the country. And if two minds are better than one, what better than having tens of thousands of trained coaches in the country to create new ideas of training players to higher and higher standards.

The FA has the resources, it has the facilities (especially now St George's park has finally arrived), and it should now make a bold statement of exceeding all other countries in training new coaches. And once we have reached parity in this field, we should stop being the country chasing the pack and start leading the field by creating our own higher level diploma of coaching - the PhD equivalent of football coaching, so we become the envy of the world when it comes to coaching knowledge and expertise.

3)     Expand coverage on free-to-view television

I'm not naive enough to suggest that we should return all domestic football to free-to-view television is the best route forward - the financial meltdown of the premier league is in no-one's interest - but there has to be some benefits to increasing access to watching the highest quality football in the country. And there are benefits for the  broadcaster brave enough to be innovative in this area, particularly given the now competitive environment of football broadcasting, following BT's entry into the market. For example, if BT sport were to combine with ITV to co-host the opening fixture of the year, they would increase goodwill whilst simultaneously advertising their product at the start of the season when the fight for new customers is at its most intense.

Another area that should be targeted is giving the terrestrial coverage a bit more scope to improve their coverage. With Match of the Day fast becoming an irrelevant side show, providing a bit more time (maybe later in the week) to go into greater depth of high quality analysis of the games would help improve understanding of the game to a wider audience.

4)     Reconnect clubs with ordinary fans

If you want to go and watch premier league football as a family day out - you're going to struggle. First you've got to get hold of the tickets, which is no walk in the park, in one of the most popular leagues in the world, particularly at the big clubs. And then you've got to have the financial firepower to be able to buy four tickets at exorbitant prices. Requiring clubs to make all but the most expensive tickets available at affordable prices would help strengthen ties of the clubs with their fans, regardless of their wealth. Surely the riches being offered by television money means that the clubs can be a bit more benevolent when it comes to ticket prices (and they can continue to try to make as much money as possible from corporate and in-stadium activities as they want)?

5)     Create more rounded footballers

Professional footballers increasingly have to sacrifice so much in the pursuit of success that they are disconnected from the rest of the world. Exposing the players to other parts of society and life is good for the well being of the players who don't make it to the top, but also to those who eventually commit to football full-time. Requiring young players to have 6 month exchanges at clubs' academies abroad, where they stay with a host family and are required to learn the local language is just one way where they can learn a skill whilst also furthering their footballing education. This exposure to other cultures will also make the players better suited to travelling abroad for international tournaments.

Five steps and its not rocket science to do any of them - but they won't count for anything unless they are acted upon swiftly, and if people have the patience to stick with them over a 5-10 year period until they pay-off. There are no quick wins to becoming world leaders and every year the powers that be need to identify more steps like these to keep the English game moving forward. The inertia of the past is the biggest threat to a continually under-performing England team...

Tradition, but not just for tradition's sake

Debate rages between the modernisers and traditionalists in football. There are those who are willing to rebrand their clubs in an effort to secure extra commercial benefits - whether that is through a change in the kit of a club (as in the case of Cardiff City) or a change in the clubs name (as in the case of Hull City/ Tigers). In both of these cases, the new owners of these clubs claim the rebranding helps them to secure greater access to lucrative Asian sponsors and fans. But fans responded furiously, upset that their clubs' histories and traditions were bring cruelly discarded and that they, as die hard fans, deserved to have their voices heard and that these traditions deserve to be protected in their own right too (as in a leading editorial in this Saturday's Times). And not to say that they are wrong in voicing this opinion, but it would seem to be that this argument is like a red rag to a bull and that it would be better to place their argument in commercial terms. Their argument could be that, just as with the success of luxury European brands in Asia, so can these teams build successful brands based on an image of tradition and history. The new branding can always be integrated sympathetically over time through away kits and nicknames, marketing and mascots.

But as with Cardiff's new kit, I suspect that the drive for rebranding will win through, as commercial priorities force smaller clubs to be more bold in their changes than the larger clubs, just as young professional rugby clubs all started adopting new names to compete with the likes of Leicester Tigers and London Wasps, or how IPL teams adopted solar branded names, along the US sports model. In an increasingly crowded sports market place internationally, the drive to adopt successful practices from other sports will almost certainly continue...

Post-Fergie blues

It was inevitable really - despite all the claims in the press that he deserves time to settle in, unreasonable pressure is already being heaped on David Moyes, even though he has only been in the Man Utd hotseat for the equivalent of the opening 5 minutes of a match. And while much has been written about his problems in the transfer market, perhaps the only legitimate concern for fans should be his many references to the peerless atmosphere at his new club and how this compares with the underdog atmosphere at Everton, giving the impression that he doesn't yet fit in with his new players' winning mentality. Time to stop making references to Everton and make himself the chief winner - but, simply, this will take time and I hope that he gets it...

Pulis for the FA?

Tony Pulis is sadly no longer a manager of a Premiership Team - which will mean an increase in the number of players diving/ needlessly shouting and abusing referees. The BBC has a good interview with him, where he points out the need for English football to get to the point where it isn't trying to copy a model in one country or another. This makes perfect sense, because, for one reason, we're slow and bad at copying - just look at how long it took us to put in place a system to match France's Clairefontaine training ground for national players. It was also something which Clive Woodward instilled into English rugby before it was able to win the world cup - to move from trying to match the best to being the team the others wanted to copy. But Clive Woodward also recognised that this needed to be done one step at a time. First catch up with the other teams, and only then can you be in a position to become the team which is ahead of the curve. Still, it's a better clarity of vision than I've ever heard from the FA...perhaps it is time for Tony Pulis to take hold of the reins of football development at the FA?

International selection and availability top of the agenda

It doesn't seem to matter what the sport is - there are selection controversies affecting national coaches across the country. So let's try to break it down into manageable chunks:

Rugby

This most surprising of all twists and turns of the past week comes from Rugby Union, where former England coach Andy Farrell has resigned from Saracens. Having earlier turned down a permanent coaching post with England in order to remain with Saracens, there seems to have been a change of heart and he will now serve out the rest of his time with Saracens. With the era of intrigue at the RFU seemingly, hopefully, at an end (although it appears Martyn Thomas is continually trying to drag the RFU back to the bad old days as he is considering issuing a writ against his former employees), there has also been no suggestion that Andy Farrell has been recently courted by the England camp to review his decision. Only time will tell if his intention is to return to the international fold (did the end of this season with Saracens fail to live up to the excitement of being involved with the England team?) - but he would certainly make an impressive appointment to join England as defensive coach (and Stuart Lancaster has indicated he'd be happy to have Farrell join his team), freeing up Mike Catt to take on a specialist attacking role.

Football

Meanwhile, the England football team's preparation ahead of Euro 2012 has ignited the nation's press into action - moving swiftly from mild disinterest in a team with modest ambitions to full scale scandal alert following Roy Hodgson's failure to invite Rio Ferdinand and Micah Richards up to the national squad following the injury which sidelined Gary Cahill. The Rio Ferdinand situation is a real can of worms and the only surprise is that it took this long for it to blow up into a full media frenzy. It appears that Hodgson decided that he could only take one of them to Krakow for the tournament as the alternative would be to have a divided camp which would make a successful tournament nigh on impossible. He then made the decision to pick Terry as the player in better form and, having made this decision, is unable now to select Ferdinand barring an injury to Terry himself. The explanation given that his non-selection was therefore a half-truth, as he would have been selected if he had been judged to be playing better than Terry. And for all the rights and wrongs of this course of action, at least it has the advantage of limiting the number of senior players travelling to the tournament and allowing a few younger players to get some experience of losing playing on the international stage. However, the final comment should go to Rio himself - he can certainly be applauded for (eventually) backing the team despite his omission.

The Micah Richards plot line is also a complicated one. Having first apparently turned down the opportunity to join the standby list in a fit of pique, it was then reported that he asked not to be included because he was so devastated at having been left out. It seems a strange reaction to say the least (particularly given the likelihood of injuries giving the standby list players a fairly strong chance of getting into the squad) and one hopes that in the future players take heed from this episode and always keep themselves open for national selection - short of injury concerns, surely any opportunity to join the national squad should be accepted regardless of perceived snubs or disappointments?

Cricket

And finally to cricket - the England squad has suffered a mixture of players disappointed at being rested by management against their wishes and another choosing to rest himself against the wishes of management. While the decision to rest Jimmy Anderson and possibly Stuart Broad seems a wise one given the amount of cricket that is stacked up ahead of them, it is also encouraging to see how hungry both players are to get caps and wickets for England. However, it's likely that this disappointment will pass once they're (almost certainly) reinstated to the team for the South Africa tests. And although some fans may be disappointed not to see the best available team for England play at Edgbaston, at least they will be hardly short changed with some superb replacements available and, in the very worse case, a lower standard performance should, all other things being equal, make for a closer match.

Meanwhile, Kevin Pietersen has retired from all short forms of cricket at international level, citing the need to preserve his fitness to compete in the Test side. Now while he has had a number of injuries affect his career, he appears to be in good shape and doesn't suffer the pressures on the body experienced by fast bowlers to require such caution at the age of 31. However, it would be unfair to label it as being purely financially motivated to enable him to be free to play in the IPL, rather, I would imagine, it is a decision based on the desire to perform more regularly on what is perceived as the biggest, most prestigious, stages - that is Test cricket for England and international Twenty20 tournaments such as the IPL.

It seems that the most obvious conclusion from these developments is that the one day format is under increasing pressure - if there was a focus purely on Twenty20 and Test cricket, this would lower the demands put on players in terms of volume of cricket and allow players to concentrate on the most popular (and, admittedly, lucrative) forms of the game.