The Carling Cup Final last Sunday didn't show itself in the best of lights thanks to the mass brawl that ensued near its end, but two players did avoid the fisticuffs and covered themselves in glory as they did so. Chelsea's Didier Drogba scored twice to win the match while Arsenal's Theo Walcott scored his first goal for the club in reply.
Let's connect the two in our usual spurious fashion...
Didier Drogba
or ‘Top Drog’ as he’s known to many of his fans, currently leads the way as top goalscorer in the FA Premier League. Though born in the Ivory Coast, he began his footballing career in France playing for Le Mans, Guingamp and Marseille. The man who signed him for the latter of these was
Alain Perrin,
one-time manager of Portsmouth. Though he helped the south coast club avoid relegation towards the end of the 2004/05 season, he failed to start 2005/06 in a convincing fashion and was sacked eight months after his arrival at Fratton Park. Christened ‘Reggie’ by fans and popular press alike after the TV sitcom character of the same name, he was succeeded in the manager’s position by
Harry Redknapp
who had done the job once before in 2002. Harry Redknapp not only played for and managed Bournemouth but achieved the same feat with West Ham United with whom he started out as a player. Redknapp’s playing days ended in 1979 at another London club, Brentford, as was the case for
Stan Bowles.
‘Stan the Man’ was a cult hero of the 1970’s and was well-known to like a bet or two. This was once shown in a match he played for QPR against Sunderland at Roker Park in 1973. The home team had recently won the FA Cup and were displaying it on a pitch-side table when Bowles accepted a financially-induced challenge from one of his team-mates. Could anybody knock the Cup off the table by kicking the ball at it? Stan Bowles did with a fearsome drive that understandably outraged the Sunderland fans. He went on to score two in the match, reinforcing his image as the natural replacement for
Rodney Marsh
at Queens Park Rangers. Marsh wasn’t so good when it came to bets. As a Sky Sports pundit, he offered to have his hair cut off if Bradford City avoided relegation in 2000 and suggested Wigan fans could put him in stocks and throw rotten tomatoes at him if their side didn’t win more than seven games in the 2005/06 season. Marsh got both wrong, although he was later spared the rotten tomato treatment. Marsh shares the same birthday, October 11th, with
Sir Bobby Charlton,
scorer of 199 goals for Manchester United and 49 goals for England. Charlton is simply one of the greatest English footballers that ever lived. Having survived the Munich air disaster that ended the lives of many of his United team mates in 1958, he went on to win a World Cup winner's medal in 1966 and a European Cup winner's medal in 1968. He still holds the record for most England goals and most appearances for Manchester United, all of which earned him a much-deserved place in the English Football Hall of Fame in 2002, four years ahead of Arsene Wenger, current manager of an Arsenal side featuring
Theo Walcott.
Although the 17-year-old is yet to reach the heights of Sir Bobby, he can at least claim to have done something he didn't, and that's play in and score during a League Cup Final. Let's hope in years to come we can say he spearheaded an England campaign that resulted in a World Cup Final win just like Charlton did. (Well we can dream, can't we?)
Wednesday, 28 February 2007
Sunday, 25 February 2007
The India Equation
In March 2007, FIFA will begin a new pilot scheme which, it's hoped, will reinvent the game of football in a country that perpetually underperforms on the world stage - India.
India have never reached the World Cup Finals - in fact the only footballing success they've enjoyed came with a fourth place finish in the 1956 Olympics and a gold medal in the 1962 Asian Games. It's now over forty years since India did anything of note in footballing terms, and for a country with a population of around 1.1 billion, it seems staggering that they haven't achieved more before now.
All of which got us thinking... how many other countries are there around the world that are failing to find success in relation to their population? We decided to look into the matter...
First we needed some sort of equation - a mathematical way of correlating who had achieved what and who was concealing the biggest set of inhabitants within their borders. It seemed all very easy at the outset, but once we ended up hip-deep in statistics, we soon found it was anything but.
So let's start off with 'achievement'. Quite honestly, if you haven't played in the World Cup Finals, you're not going to score very highly. Yes it's all very well to say you've reached the Finals of your own continental tournament, i.e. the European Championships, Copa America, and so on, but it pails into insignificance compared to the World Cup. Case in point: Greece won Euro 2004, yet failed to qualify for World Cup 2006. Need we say more?
In our equation, each country scores a point for every round reached in a World Cup Finals tournament, with an extra point awarded to the outright winners. For every World Cup that a country failed to reach after they affiliated to FIFA, we've knocked off a point. To round things off, we then gave each country a rank based on the number of points scored (so Brazil got 1, Germany 2, etc.) and that sorted out the 'achievement' side of the equation.
So onto the 'population' bit. Quite straight forward - we divided a country's population by a million, knocked off the stuff after the decimal point, then ranked it. Having got the rank, we then divided it by 10. (Example: China has the biggest population of all the 206 countries, so 206 became its rank. 206 divided by 10 is 20.6 so China's population rating is therefore 20.6.)
Add the achievement rating to the population rating and there's your final score for each country. So according to our figures, who are the biggest under-achievers in world football? Yes, you've guessed it - India. They scored 94.5 on our system, 0.4 ahead of near neighbours Pakistan in second. In third place were Bangladesh (who have a population greater than that of Russia), and just behind them on 93.5 points were the Philippines.
The highest-placed African country were Ethiopia in sixth place on 93.1 points and Europe's biggest under-achievers were Kazakhstan in 23rd place on 88.7 points.
At the other end of the table are Uruguay who, with a population of just under 3.5 million, have won the World Cup twice. In a system where lower points means a higher rating, Uruguay did exceptionally well to score just 17.2 points. Second best were Sweden with 19.2 points, then in third were Brazil - population: 188 million - followed by (West) Germany in fourth and Italy in fifth.
England came in seventh with a score of 23.2 ahead of France in tenth, but Scotland did well to come in 18th on 32.4 points. Ireland were two places behind in 20th while the United States showed how a heavily populated country can be successful by finishing 23rd.
So what can we derive from our final list? Well we can gather a greater sense of admiration for those countries who have achieved much despite having a small population from which to make team. The likes of Belgium, Hungary, Switzerland and Austria may not hit the headlines very much these days, but they deserve our respect for what they've done up to now.
Conversely one can look to the opposite end of the list and see which countries should be doing better. What we see are mainly Asian and African countries that we can only assume have a wealth of talent waiting to be discovered and honed into a force to be reckoned with. Until then though, the world awaits a World Cup Finals that introduce the likes of Thailand or Sudan, and thanks to FIFA's new scheme, it might happen sooner rather than later.
BOTTOM 10
-------------------
197th Tanzania
198th Sudan
199th Myanmar
200th Thailand
201st Ethiopia
202nd Vietnam
203rd Philippines
204th Bangladesh
205th Pakistan
206th India
TOP 10 AND OTHER NOTABLES
-------------------------------------------------
1st Uruguay
2nd Sweden
3rd Brazil
4th (West) Germany
5th Italy
6th Argentina
7th England
8th Belgium
9th Hungary
=10th France / Spain
14th Netherlands
15th Mexico
18th Scotland
20th Republic of Ireland
23rd USA
25th Portugal
27th Northern Ireland
43rd Australia
45th Wales
59th China
64th Greece
71st Canada
Download:
You can download a PDF version of the list by clicking here.
India have never reached the World Cup Finals - in fact the only footballing success they've enjoyed came with a fourth place finish in the 1956 Olympics and a gold medal in the 1962 Asian Games. It's now over forty years since India did anything of note in footballing terms, and for a country with a population of around 1.1 billion, it seems staggering that they haven't achieved more before now.
All of which got us thinking... how many other countries are there around the world that are failing to find success in relation to their population? We decided to look into the matter...
First we needed some sort of equation - a mathematical way of correlating who had achieved what and who was concealing the biggest set of inhabitants within their borders. It seemed all very easy at the outset, but once we ended up hip-deep in statistics, we soon found it was anything but.
So let's start off with 'achievement'. Quite honestly, if you haven't played in the World Cup Finals, you're not going to score very highly. Yes it's all very well to say you've reached the Finals of your own continental tournament, i.e. the European Championships, Copa America, and so on, but it pails into insignificance compared to the World Cup. Case in point: Greece won Euro 2004, yet failed to qualify for World Cup 2006. Need we say more?
In our equation, each country scores a point for every round reached in a World Cup Finals tournament, with an extra point awarded to the outright winners. For every World Cup that a country failed to reach after they affiliated to FIFA, we've knocked off a point. To round things off, we then gave each country a rank based on the number of points scored (so Brazil got 1, Germany 2, etc.) and that sorted out the 'achievement' side of the equation.
So onto the 'population' bit. Quite straight forward - we divided a country's population by a million, knocked off the stuff after the decimal point, then ranked it. Having got the rank, we then divided it by 10. (Example: China has the biggest population of all the 206 countries, so 206 became its rank. 206 divided by 10 is 20.6 so China's population rating is therefore 20.6.)
Add the achievement rating to the population rating and there's your final score for each country. So according to our figures, who are the biggest under-achievers in world football? Yes, you've guessed it - India. They scored 94.5 on our system, 0.4 ahead of near neighbours Pakistan in second. In third place were Bangladesh (who have a population greater than that of Russia), and just behind them on 93.5 points were the Philippines.
The highest-placed African country were Ethiopia in sixth place on 93.1 points and Europe's biggest under-achievers were Kazakhstan in 23rd place on 88.7 points.
At the other end of the table are Uruguay who, with a population of just under 3.5 million, have won the World Cup twice. In a system where lower points means a higher rating, Uruguay did exceptionally well to score just 17.2 points. Second best were Sweden with 19.2 points, then in third were Brazil - population: 188 million - followed by (West) Germany in fourth and Italy in fifth.
England came in seventh with a score of 23.2 ahead of France in tenth, but Scotland did well to come in 18th on 32.4 points. Ireland were two places behind in 20th while the United States showed how a heavily populated country can be successful by finishing 23rd.
So what can we derive from our final list? Well we can gather a greater sense of admiration for those countries who have achieved much despite having a small population from which to make team. The likes of Belgium, Hungary, Switzerland and Austria may not hit the headlines very much these days, but they deserve our respect for what they've done up to now.
Conversely one can look to the opposite end of the list and see which countries should be doing better. What we see are mainly Asian and African countries that we can only assume have a wealth of talent waiting to be discovered and honed into a force to be reckoned with. Until then though, the world awaits a World Cup Finals that introduce the likes of Thailand or Sudan, and thanks to FIFA's new scheme, it might happen sooner rather than later.
BOTTOM 10
-------------------
197th Tanzania
198th Sudan
199th Myanmar
200th Thailand
201st Ethiopia
202nd Vietnam
203rd Philippines
204th Bangladesh
205th Pakistan
206th India
TOP 10 AND OTHER NOTABLES
-------------------------------------------------
1st Uruguay
2nd Sweden
3rd Brazil
4th (West) Germany
5th Italy
6th Argentina
7th England
8th Belgium
9th Hungary
=10th France / Spain
14th Netherlands
15th Mexico
18th Scotland
20th Republic of Ireland
23rd USA
25th Portugal
27th Northern Ireland
43rd Australia
45th Wales
59th China
64th Greece
71st Canada
Download:
You can download a PDF version of the list by clicking here.
Friday, 16 February 2007
Shirt Legend: England
The big debate following last week's Friendly international between England and Spain wasn't whether England could have played better or whether Steve McLaren should be replaced as manager. The main discussion seemed to revolve around whether the new England home strip was all that much different from the previous one.
You see, what Umbro and many other kit manufacturers seem to forget is that all genuine football fans feel a tingle of excitement at the time when a new kit is launched, and that's because they're expecting to get something new and exciting for the next season or two. What we saw last week was all well and good, but if you squinted a bit it could have been the same kit as the one England had before.
All of which leads us to dwell on England shirts of the past. Not all of them were great, but they were definitely all interesting for one reason or another. Since 1964, England have sported fourteen white shirts and here they all are in pictorial form (click on the image to see an enlarged version).
(Image removed pending replacement - apologies for any inconvenience)
Shirt A, of course, is the classic shirt worn by the World Cup Winners of 1966. Plain and simple, it was made by Umbro and became a design classic. When Don Revie became manager in 1974, though, it was all change. A new commercial era had dawned where the demand for replica kit grew and grew, so to reflect that, Admiral were drafted in to make a snazzy new shirt (Shirt B). It featured a lighter shade of blue, stripes along the sleeves and a proper collar.
Not everybody liked it, least of all Jimmy Greaves who likened the new England kit to pyjamas, but it became the image of England in the 1970's. Admiral's second kit came into force in 1980 and this time there was even more red and blue to upset the traditionalists. Shirt C achieved maximum exposure during the 1982 World Cup and has recently become a cult favourite among fans looking for that essential bit of retro kit.
In 1984, Umbro were reinstated as official England designers and their first kit back (Shirt D) saw a return to a more traditional look with navy blue coming back and red colouring being almost discarded. There was now a shadow pattern woven into the fabric as well, a feature that continues to this day, but in 1987 it was all change again with the reintroduction of a round collar and a splash of red here and there (Shirt E).
Come 1990, it was World Cup time again and yes, you've guessed it - they dropped red from the kit once more. The new kit had a navy blue winged collar and a funny triangular bit of business just below it but that was about it, apart from an Umbro logo pattern around the sleeve ends (Shirt F).
Shirt G is one of the less memorable ones of recent times, coinciding with the wilderness years of Graham Taylor's managerial reign, but it did feature some cleaner lines and of course, the return of that red colouring around a rather odd-looking collar.
When Euro 96 rolled around though, there were wholesale changes for England's white shirt design. For a start, Umbro's famous diamond logo was replaced with a big fat depiction of the company name in text only, but more controversially than that, the red had been ditched again - this time in favour of light blue as a complement colour (Shirt H).
A year later and Umbro went for their boldest design yet (Shirt I) incorporating navy blue and red side stripes. It was smart enough, but some felt the clean white appearance of the shirt was being compromised, so in 1999, Umbro went for a change which was just as dramatic but for different reasons. Their next kit (Shirt J) was more like the one worn in the early 1960's with it's round neck and simple white with navy blue trim. The Umbro diamond logo was also back with a vengeance.
2001 ushered in a return to more modern-looking fare (Shirt K) with a simple red stripe being used to give a splash of colour to an otherwise straight-forward design, and in 2003 that red stripe transferred to the shoulders and sleeves in a move that more prominantly than ever reflected the Cross of St. George from the English flag (Shirt L). It was also the first ever England shirt that could be worn inside-out, the reversible version having a navy blue stripe along the sleeves.
In 2005, the Cross of St. George appeared fully-fledged, albeit in stylised form, on one shoulder of Shirt M. All other stripes and trim were done away with to leave another clean, predominently white design. It would appear this was uppermost in the minds of Umbro's designers when Shirt N entered the public domain last Wednesday, a red ribbon-like stripe replacing the cross and traversing from one shoulder to the other. There's also a hint of the Three Lions badge in the navy blue trim that runs down either side of the new shirt, not to mention a sparkly gold Umbro badge that appears above the red stripe.
So that's the full collection, but which one's your favourite? Do any of them fill you with pride or do some of them make your blood boil?
Let us know by leaving your comments, but also by way of a survey, tell us below which shirt you like best. Simply click on your favourite choice and hit the 'Vote' button to register your preference.
You see, what Umbro and many other kit manufacturers seem to forget is that all genuine football fans feel a tingle of excitement at the time when a new kit is launched, and that's because they're expecting to get something new and exciting for the next season or two. What we saw last week was all well and good, but if you squinted a bit it could have been the same kit as the one England had before.
All of which leads us to dwell on England shirts of the past. Not all of them were great, but they were definitely all interesting for one reason or another. Since 1964, England have sported fourteen white shirts and here they all are in pictorial form (click on the image to see an enlarged version).
(Image removed pending replacement - apologies for any inconvenience)
Shirt A, of course, is the classic shirt worn by the World Cup Winners of 1966. Plain and simple, it was made by Umbro and became a design classic. When Don Revie became manager in 1974, though, it was all change. A new commercial era had dawned where the demand for replica kit grew and grew, so to reflect that, Admiral were drafted in to make a snazzy new shirt (Shirt B). It featured a lighter shade of blue, stripes along the sleeves and a proper collar.
Not everybody liked it, least of all Jimmy Greaves who likened the new England kit to pyjamas, but it became the image of England in the 1970's. Admiral's second kit came into force in 1980 and this time there was even more red and blue to upset the traditionalists. Shirt C achieved maximum exposure during the 1982 World Cup and has recently become a cult favourite among fans looking for that essential bit of retro kit.
In 1984, Umbro were reinstated as official England designers and their first kit back (Shirt D) saw a return to a more traditional look with navy blue coming back and red colouring being almost discarded. There was now a shadow pattern woven into the fabric as well, a feature that continues to this day, but in 1987 it was all change again with the reintroduction of a round collar and a splash of red here and there (Shirt E).
Come 1990, it was World Cup time again and yes, you've guessed it - they dropped red from the kit once more. The new kit had a navy blue winged collar and a funny triangular bit of business just below it but that was about it, apart from an Umbro logo pattern around the sleeve ends (Shirt F).
Shirt G is one of the less memorable ones of recent times, coinciding with the wilderness years of Graham Taylor's managerial reign, but it did feature some cleaner lines and of course, the return of that red colouring around a rather odd-looking collar.
When Euro 96 rolled around though, there were wholesale changes for England's white shirt design. For a start, Umbro's famous diamond logo was replaced with a big fat depiction of the company name in text only, but more controversially than that, the red had been ditched again - this time in favour of light blue as a complement colour (Shirt H).
A year later and Umbro went for their boldest design yet (Shirt I) incorporating navy blue and red side stripes. It was smart enough, but some felt the clean white appearance of the shirt was being compromised, so in 1999, Umbro went for a change which was just as dramatic but for different reasons. Their next kit (Shirt J) was more like the one worn in the early 1960's with it's round neck and simple white with navy blue trim. The Umbro diamond logo was also back with a vengeance.
2001 ushered in a return to more modern-looking fare (Shirt K) with a simple red stripe being used to give a splash of colour to an otherwise straight-forward design, and in 2003 that red stripe transferred to the shoulders and sleeves in a move that more prominantly than ever reflected the Cross of St. George from the English flag (Shirt L). It was also the first ever England shirt that could be worn inside-out, the reversible version having a navy blue stripe along the sleeves.
In 2005, the Cross of St. George appeared fully-fledged, albeit in stylised form, on one shoulder of Shirt M. All other stripes and trim were done away with to leave another clean, predominently white design. It would appear this was uppermost in the minds of Umbro's designers when Shirt N entered the public domain last Wednesday, a red ribbon-like stripe replacing the cross and traversing from one shoulder to the other. There's also a hint of the Three Lions badge in the navy blue trim that runs down either side of the new shirt, not to mention a sparkly gold Umbro badge that appears above the red stripe.
So that's the full collection, but which one's your favourite? Do any of them fill you with pride or do some of them make your blood boil?
Let us know by leaving your comments, but also by way of a survey, tell us below which shirt you like best. Simply click on your favourite choice and hit the 'Vote' button to register your preference.
Sunday, 11 February 2007
Dumb Footballer of the Year Award
There are some players in the game who attract the contempt of fans all over the country. There are some who find themselves on the wrong end of the fans' ridicule. And then there are some players who are frankly so dumb that they defy any such categorisation. These are the players we'll be saluting in the Some People Are On The Pitch Dumb Footballer of the Year Award.
The first nomination is for Jens Lehman of Arsenal and Germany.
He is deserving of his place on the shortlist following the Arsenal v Wigan Athletic match on Sunday 11th February 2007. Here's why:
Wigan led the match from the 35th minute following a goal by Denny Landzaat and sensing a chance to hold on for a rare away victory at the Emirates, they set about frustrating their hosts by wasting a bit of time here or there. Chief culprit for the Latics was Chris Kirkland, their goalkeeper. He was duly booked by the referee for his trouble.
As the match progressed, Arsenal got more and more desperate for an equalizer and ever more wound up by the liberal wastage of time by Wigan. Finally, Arsene Wenger's side drew level in the 81st minute after a Fitz Hall own goal. Thierry Henry couldn't help but rub salt in the wound for Kirkland with a quick word in his ear as he returned the ball to the centre spot but there was more to come for Arsenal.
Four minutes later, Tomas Rosicky gave his side a 2-1 lead and with five minutes of normal time remaining, Arsenal were feeling like justice had finally been done. To ram home the point, Jens Lehman stepped into the fray to give Wigan a taste of their own medicine now they had their noses in front.
As the ball went off the pitch behind his goal, Lehman was handed the ball by one of the ball-boys. In an effort to deliberately waste some time for his own team, he made a weak attempt to throw the ball back onto the pitch which, unsurprisingly, resulted in the ball bouncing back to him via a nearby billboard.
He'd succeeded. By the time he'd returned to the pitch with the ball, the Wigan players had already pointed out the offence to the referee and his yellow card was being raised into Lehman's line of vision. It seemed fair to the rest of us that if Kirkland had been booked for timewasting, so should Jens Lehman.
Lehman himself might have even agreed, yet he'd overlooked one thing. Lehman had already been booked four times this season, so this fifth booking meant he'd be banned from playing in Arsenal's next game.
Stupidity out of immaturity, you might think, until you learn that Arsenal's next match is the Carling Cup Final against Chelsea. Jens Lehmann had taken himself out of the running for a place in a prestige Cup Final by acting like an impetuous schoolboy. That's Jens Lehman, 37-year-old goalkeeper of Arsenal, known to many as 'Super Jens' although, we suspect, not as many as before the Wigan match.
So there you have it - our first nomination for Dumb Footballer of the Year and it has to be said it may take some doing to beat that opening gambit, but rest assured there will be more on the way soon. Watch this space...
The first nomination is for Jens Lehman of Arsenal and Germany.
He is deserving of his place on the shortlist following the Arsenal v Wigan Athletic match on Sunday 11th February 2007. Here's why:
Wigan led the match from the 35th minute following a goal by Denny Landzaat and sensing a chance to hold on for a rare away victory at the Emirates, they set about frustrating their hosts by wasting a bit of time here or there. Chief culprit for the Latics was Chris Kirkland, their goalkeeper. He was duly booked by the referee for his trouble.
As the match progressed, Arsenal got more and more desperate for an equalizer and ever more wound up by the liberal wastage of time by Wigan. Finally, Arsene Wenger's side drew level in the 81st minute after a Fitz Hall own goal. Thierry Henry couldn't help but rub salt in the wound for Kirkland with a quick word in his ear as he returned the ball to the centre spot but there was more to come for Arsenal.
Four minutes later, Tomas Rosicky gave his side a 2-1 lead and with five minutes of normal time remaining, Arsenal were feeling like justice had finally been done. To ram home the point, Jens Lehman stepped into the fray to give Wigan a taste of their own medicine now they had their noses in front.
As the ball went off the pitch behind his goal, Lehman was handed the ball by one of the ball-boys. In an effort to deliberately waste some time for his own team, he made a weak attempt to throw the ball back onto the pitch which, unsurprisingly, resulted in the ball bouncing back to him via a nearby billboard.
He'd succeeded. By the time he'd returned to the pitch with the ball, the Wigan players had already pointed out the offence to the referee and his yellow card was being raised into Lehman's line of vision. It seemed fair to the rest of us that if Kirkland had been booked for timewasting, so should Jens Lehman.
Lehman himself might have even agreed, yet he'd overlooked one thing. Lehman had already been booked four times this season, so this fifth booking meant he'd be banned from playing in Arsenal's next game.
Stupidity out of immaturity, you might think, until you learn that Arsenal's next match is the Carling Cup Final against Chelsea. Jens Lehmann had taken himself out of the running for a place in a prestige Cup Final by acting like an impetuous schoolboy. That's Jens Lehman, 37-year-old goalkeeper of Arsenal, known to many as 'Super Jens' although, we suspect, not as many as before the Wigan match.
So there you have it - our first nomination for Dumb Footballer of the Year and it has to be said it may take some doing to beat that opening gambit, but rest assured there will be more on the way soon. Watch this space...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)