Week 1 - On your marks, get set...

It seems rather surreal that the Premier League is starting again. After all, it hasn't really gone away, has it? What with the constant bombardment of transfer rumours (most from seedy tabloids with nothing more than the Ashes to fill the back pages), the resurgence of Manchester City and Ancelotti's diamonds, we find ourselves being over-prepared for the start of the Barclays Premier League season, a task which began after that humbling defeat in Rome.

Given that the start of the season is the one time during which all clubs align their goals and start on level footing, it seems naive to expect no surprises. And indeed we got one when Liverpool succumbed to Tottenham Hotspur at White Hart Lane. It was the complete antithesis of last year's famous Pavlyuchenko-inspired victory, this time coming up against a considerably more insipid 'Pool side for whom the loss of Xabi Alonso might hurt just a fraction more than Benitez has projected. Lucas and Mascherano, fine tacklers as they are, could not muster any sort of possession throughout the game, resorting to snapping at the deft heels of Lennon and Modric. They are not the only ones to blame, though. The trio supporting Fernando Torres were bereft of ideas, in particular the anemic Ryan Babel, for whom Benitez's patience is surely running thin. Gerrard had a poor game but it sums up Liverpool's afternoon when he, having to drift back behind Babel and Kuyt to gain possession, looked like the only player in red who was capable of mustering something.

It is interesting that Spurs applied the similar tactic of two holders in front of the back four. What made the difference, though, is that Huddlestone and Palacious were infinitely more sure of their abilities and each other's presence, enabling them to alternate freely between protecting the back four and driving forward. Modric looked more and more convincing in his free role down the left, and Lennon is continuing the form of last season's back-end that had Fabio Capello jotting down another potential solution to that conundrum on the right flank. Up front was the only place where Spurs looked slightly lost, Defoe and Keane not being able to find the right combination of deadly accuracy and deep drifting that would enable them to gel seamlessly. It is somewhat surprising that 9 million pound signing Peter Crouch failed to make his debut here, although he may be given a chance after the performances of Keane and Defoe, who failed to translate his fine England form into Premier League potency. Of course, the defence was the standout today, with Benoit Assou-Ekoto, never having scored for Lens or Tottenham, placing an early candidate for goal of the year into the top corner of Pepe Reina's net. Sebastien Bassong, the 8 million pound signing from Newcastle, also managed to showcase his prowess at the attacking end as he outjumped Carragher to connect with Modric's beautifully weighted cross, thereby giving Tottenham a thoroughly deserved win. Granted, Andriy Voronin should have had a penalty, but it was somewhat just that he didn't get it as Liverpool deserved to lose after what was a display lacking any of the consistency that brought them within 4 points of Manchester United last season.

It was said that this is to be Liverpool's year to end the title drought. On this display, not seeing it happen for awhile sounds like the best possibility. Benitez has some serious work to do before he can start the mind games again.

Premier League 2009/10

Well folks, I'm back. After a temporary hiatus from blogging about football I have decided that it is in the best interests of not only myself but everyone else if I start again. Besides, reading blogs just motivates me to have my say. Every weekend you'll have my post-game analysis and previews, as well as predictions for the season.
Here's to another glorious 9 months of E.P.L. action!

Josh

And so it ends. One of the most respected managers of the modern game, Luis Felipe Scolari, departs Stamford Bridge after a tenure which started promisingly but has ended in the most bitter of circumstances. To the credit of Chelsea's billionaire sugar-daddy Roman Abramovich, he finally got rid of the Brazilian, though why he was appointed in the first place remains to be seen. Scolari leaves behind him a team devoid of any sort of confidence, a team in danger of missing out on qualification for Europe's elite club competition next season, and worst of all, an unbalanced team of disgruntled individuals. But why, for a club that was tipped to wrest the Premier League from Alex Ferguson's all-conquering young charges, has it all gone to bits? Let's perform a bit of in-depth analysis, shall we?

Tactical Inflexibility

Yes, Mr. Scolari is a World Cup winning manager. Yes, he has an incredibly high pedigree at the top levels of the game. Yes, he is revered from afar. Therefore, doesn't it seem contradictory that a manager of his calibre should be sacked little over half a season into his tenure at (supposedly) one of the biggest footballing clubs in the world? Not quite, if you follow the way he has managed this team of stuck-up prima donnas.

First of all, Chelsea fans were led into an unfortunate delusion when the team were playing well and defeating challengers at the Bridge and most impressively, away. In the first half of the season, their away record was second to none. Chelsea's brand of free-flowing football had pundits everywhere grinning from ear-to-ear, daring to believe that the Blues had finally found a way of playing the game beautifully and winning simultaneously. However, this system of sleek football was based on one point, a point which, to the dismay of the fans and Abramovich, was discovered and negated by teams such as Liverpool and Manchester United. This point was, and still is, the threat of the overlapping full-backs. Jose Bosingwa, a right-back of significant calibre, was brought in by Scolari so he could implement this system. By having Bosingwa and his opposite number Ashley Cole overlap into the attacking half, the wingers could move in, provide extra bodies in attack and get on the end of deadly crosses. This style of play hid another inadequacy in the Chelsea side: a lack of natural width. Since the departure of Arjen Robben (who is in the form of his life at Real Madrid), Chelsea have not found a natural wideman with the pace and skilfulness to dribble around defenders and hug the touchline. Scolari has had to use various players on the sides, such as Florent Malouda, Salomon Kalou, Joe Cole and even Nicolas Anelka on the left, when the Frenchman's natural position is clearly that of a striker. Now, with Cole (the only decent winger at the club) out for the season, this inadequacy has been highlighted even more glaringly. Couple that with the fact that teams have more or less rendered the fullback threat useless by packing the sides with fit players who keep Bosingwa and Cole pinned down in their own halves, and you have a team without width, and thus without much attacking impetus.

Scolari has also failed to play Deco, Frank Lampard and Michael Ballack in the same team successfully. When all three have played together, Deco has been shunted out to the left flank, with Lampard and Ballack left in the centre of the park. This still poses the problem of a crowded midfield, while none of the players have even thought of going into form except Lampard (although he does not have the impact that Gerrard does at Liverpool). I seem to recall an old proverb about cooks and broth...

The strikeforce didn't fare much better under Luis. Didier Drogba seems to have nothing else on his mind these days than whining to greedy journalists about his pathetic life at Stamford Bridge or throwing coins at fans. He has complained on numerous occasions about his desire to play alongside Nicolas Anelka, but whenever Scolari relents to that demand, the both of them do not look like trying to play together. Anelka, despite being the league's top scorer, has not scored for around 7 or 8 games in the Premier League, and one has to wonder whether his tendency to take too many touches and hold the ball up is really worth it.

John Terry has, along with Lampard, been a solid performer this season. He still possesses the ability to marshal his defense well, and thus there is hope for Chelsea. Elsewhere, though, massive change is needed.

Inability to get on with players and staff

O.k., ignore the fact that his "English no so good". The fact is that Scolari simply did NOT get along with the players (*ahem* *Anelka*) and the staff. Back in the good old days when Lampard and co. would steamroll Hull City, people may have conveniently overlooked this. Now, it is being magnified just like every other little failing. The exit of Steve Clarke, the highly influential first-team coach, did not do much to help matters, and Scolari may be wishing that he had the chance to continue working with Clarke. Whatever you may think, Scolari did not have any firsthand experience of the gruelling 10 month experience that is a Premier League season. Clarke had this experience in bucketloads, and it is conceivable that the club would not be in this position had he stayed.

Roman's impatience

As if the two generations of Champions League winners that have risen from the ranks of Manchester United were not enough, Roman Abramovich still sticks to the same flawed outlook that he had when he took over Chelsea 5 years ago: Money = Success. Oh, sure, they won two consecutive Premierships with Mourinho, but do not forget that there were no genuine challengers for the title. Liverpool, as always, were negligible, Arsenal were a fading force, and Manchester United were in the midst of a rebuilding phase. Now, with United's playing group in their prime, Chelsea's lack of a backbone has been glaringly placed in the spotlight. To create a quality team you MUST NURTURE TALENT FROM A YOUNG AGE. Surely the failure that was Real Madrid's galacticos stunt would have been enough to convince Roman? Teams have to have a balance of young and old in their squads, or they risk having to shoulder the cost of a massive rebuilding phase, which unfortunately looks set to take place at Chelsea. "Fergie's Fledglings", players like David Beckham, Paul Scholes, Nicky Butt and Ryan Giggs were nurtured from a tender age, and this contributed to the team's overall success. Ferguson has repeated the feat with the likes of Wayne Rooney and Cristiano Ronaldo, and now looks set for even more success at home and abroad. Chelsea, meanwhile, will struggle to qualify for the Champions League this season, and must seriously consider rebuilding in the summer. Another lesson to be taken from United is the continuity of their manager. Now, I'm not saying that to have success a manager must stay in charge for over 20 years, but there has to be a consistency. I refer to two characters: David Moyes and Arsene Wenger. Need I say more?

Conclusion

Chelsea are not a foregone case. They have a collection of supremely talented footballers in their ranks, many of whom would easily make a World XI. However, it is the inability of this squad to play together that is causing trouble. The leadership group needs to sit down and think about how they are going to establish a unity among the players that does not come from being bought at ridiculously inflated prices, but comes from going through the thick and thin together. That, coupled with a decent, long-lasting manager will see the Blues rise to some sort of respectable platform again.

Case Study - Tottenham Hotspur

Prior to the start of the 2008/09 season, Tottenham were a team with lofty ambitions.  Having triumphed over Chelsea in the Carling Cup final, expectations were sky high.  "Let's aim for Europe", they said.  "Qualify for the Champions League!", ventured some more daring (or sarcastic) fans.  Starting the season on a low, it has just gotten worse and worse, in spite of Harry Redknapp's fairytale start to his role as manager after the sacking of Juande Ramos, which saw Spurs beat Liverpool 2-1 and draw with Arsenal in an incredible 4-4 tie at the Emirates.  Fast forward a few months, and they are fighting for their Premier League status with "undignified" opposition such as West Bromwich Albion and Middlesborough.  Before I go off on this tangent too much, let's take a look at what is seemingly a strong lineup.

(As of 09/02/09)

Goalkeepers: Cudicini, Gomes

Defenders: Corluka, Dawson, Woodgate, Assou-Ekoto, Hutton, Bale, King, Rocha, Chimbonda, Gunter

Midfielders: Zokora, Bentley, Huddlestone, Lennon, Jenas, Gilberto, Palacios, Modric, Taraabt, O' Hara

Forwards: Defoe, Keane, Pavlyuchenko, Bent, Campbell

*sourced from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tottenham_Hotspur

First-team line up (most common on a week-to-week basis)

Goalkeeper: Gomes

Defenders: Corluka(RB), Dawson(CB), Woodgate(CB), Assou-Ekoto, Bale(LB)

Midfielders: Bentley(RM), Palacios (CM), Modric (CM), Lennon (LM)

Forwards: Keane(CF), Pavlyuchenko (CF)

A classic 4-4-2 if there ever was one.  We can see Corluka and Bale taking up the right and left back spots respectively, sandwiching the two centre-backs.  Palacios acts as the defensive midfielder here, the Honduran having been snapped up as a replacement for Didier Zokora.  Modric, who also excels at playing behind a single striker, is usually deployed in the creative role behind the forwards, while Bentley and Lennon provide the width, switching wings occasionally (although the effectiveness of Bentley on the left has to be debated).   Onto the forwards.  Pavlyuchenko plays as the target man, with Keane in his role as the free man.  

One thing to be touched on is that some wingers have the tendency to move significantly infield.  This can render a team's play very narrow, and thus easier to defend against.  I previously stated that wingers DO move inside, but only when the FULLBACKS overlap.  This lack of width has been an unfortunate feature of Tottenham's play this season, with Bentley in particular having the tendency to play almost as a central midfielder.  Corluka is not the most adventurous of fullbacks, which is perhaps why manager Redknapp sometimes switches the more width-focused Lennon onto the right-hand side.  In Bentley and Lennon we see contrasting styles of wingplay.  Lennon is your typical blinding-fast player, with quick feet and an eye for goal.  Being a right-footed player on the left-hand side, he has the tendency to cut onto his right foot and shoot, as opposed to bringing it onto his left to cross. He has an immense dribbling ability, and gets past most defenders with ease. Bentley, on the other hand, is not nearly as fast and agile as Lennon, but makes up for it with his footballing brain and ability to see a pass or a cross.  He resembles David Beckham in his prime, but Bentley is not YET as visionary a player as Beckham was. However, wingers of Bentley's type tend to do more defending than of the Lennon type, simply because they are less attack-minded. These 2 contrasting styles are pretty much stereotypical of the type of wingers in the Premier League.  

The 4-4-2 is adaptable to defensively-minded situations as well.  If, for instance, Tottenham lead by a scoreline of 1-0 with 15 minutes until full-time, the manger will in most cases take off one of the strikers (usually the secondary one) and replace him with a defensive midfielder.  In this case, the formation would be a 4-5-1, one on which I will touch later.  This means that there will only be one striker up front, with the playmaker (Modric) attempting to support him but in a much deeper role. The defensive midfielder will add an extra body to counter the attacking thrusts of the other team, and hopefully protect the lead.  

Conclusion: Tottenham Hotspur is a stereotypical 4-4-2 team.  The passing game works well with this system, with ballplayers such as Bentley and Modric contrasting with dribblers like Lennon.  However, leaky points in the 4-4-2 are the tendency of the wingers to drift infield and negate the width,  and the fact that strikers can drop too deep to get the ball, leaving little options up front.   

Formations

O.k., as this is my first official football analysis, I will be focussing on one of the foundational aspects of professional football: formation.  Surprisingly, many people overlook formation these days, as modern footballers are so adept at switching positions that eventually the concept of a player in a set position is rendered somewhat pointless.  However, every team that employs this system of "total football" needs to employ a base formation, on which they can improvise.  

For those footballing novices out there, the most common formation used in professional football is 4-4-2.  (For obvious reasons, the goalkeeper is not included) This system relies on a solid back four (two centre-backs and a right & left back), a four-man midfield (2 central midfielders and 2 wingers) and 2 strikers.

This system is also one of the most improvised in football.  For one, the strikers do not usually play side-by-side (a notable exception was Manchester United's Rooney-Tevez partnership, which involved two players of similar style), but generally have one playing ahead of the other, with the secondary striker "playing off" the front man.  This involves a lot of running into areas such as the wings and dropping into the midfield to get the ball.  The front man, meanwhile, usually has the task of holding up the ball long enough for the midfielders and the support striker to get into advanced positions.  

The midfield, meanwhile, does the majority of the running.  Two central midfielders of attacking intent are usually incompatible, meaning that a "diamond" formation is employed most of the time.  This formation involves one midfielder playing the defensive role just in front of the defence, protecting the back four and not venturing forward as much as his partner, who is given the license to play behind the strikers and offer that extra man in attack. Of course, both midfielders need to possess stamina to run back and forth in the centre of the park.  If you picture this midfield in your head, you will get the image of a diamond, with the 4 men being the points of the diamond.  The wingers, meanwhile, are a tricky bunch.  They are almost always (when available) fast, agile players, who have to be able to run up and down their respective touchlines, providing crosses for the attackers to get on the end of and assist the defense in dealing with the wide threats of the other team.  As such, they are quite often the fittest members of the team.  

The defense is the most stable part of the formation.  The 2 centre-backs are usually tall, physical players who are not afraid to put their bodies on the line. The 2 full-backs deal with the wingers of the other team, preventing them from getting crosses into the box.  However, the modern game has developed so much so that the full-backs now act as wingers as much as anything else.  They provide width on the overlap, giving the wingers the opportunity to get into the box and add the extra man to the attack when the cross comes in. Of course, this means that the full-backs have to be pacy and have to be able to get back into position quickly. Prime examples of this type of fullback are Patrice Evra of Manchester United and Jose Bosingwa of Chelsea.  

O.K., now that you have a basic idea of the most common formation in football, let's look at a case study, shall we? In my next post, I will analyse the lineup of Tottenham Hotspur in detail. Stay tuned.

Introduction

Good day and welcome, my fellow football enthusiasts.

How do I know that you are enthusiasts? Well you're reading this blog aren't you?

Having said that, this blog will be dedicated to my observations, analyses, rants, musings and so on and so forth of the global phenomenon that is the beautiful game.  

So sit back, read, and comment if you feel so led.  

I hope my posts are introspective and insightful thoughts into the inner workings of football.

Cheers.