...Lads

Click here to see proper lads. Whaaaay!

...Messi, Ronaldo and co. have much to prove if they are to be considered true greats

It seems, with Brazil’s convincing 3-1 win over Ivory Coast and Portugal’s 7-0 mauling of poor North Korea, that normal service has resumed at last. All that this tournament needs now is for Spain to trounce Honduras in tonight’s game and the big teams will finally have begun to live up to their collective reputation. The big stars, though, are yet to shine as individuals.

Of all the famous names at the 2010 World Cup in South Africa four stood out before the tournament began, which was reflected by their $20 million price tags in our My World 11 Fantasy game. If you haven’t already guessed these men were Kaka, Wayne Rooney, Lionel Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo. So far only Ronaldo has scored, against a demoralised North Korea and with the good fortune of the ball bouncing onto his boot via his back and then his head.

Kaka is beginning to shake off the cobwebs of a stop-start season with Real Madrid and did well to set up Elano’s goal yesterday, although this is his only meaningful contribution so far. His farcical red card yesterday may mean that may have to wait until the knockout stages to put that right. Ronaldo, his team-mate at Madrid, has been quiet but for sporadic flashes of quality.

Although Messi has been lauded by the commentators in both games so far, I personally don’t think he is playing anywhere near his best. In my opinion Carlos Tevez and Sergio Aguero (when he has come on) have had as much impact. I think he, like Steven Gerrard for England, concentrates too much on living up to his reputation on the international stage rather than relaxing and playing his usual game. Didier Drogba and Samuel Eto’o try to win games almost single-handedly for their countries, but with such talented players around him Messi has no need to do this.

It seems that Rooney forgot to pack his football brain when he left for South Africa. England seem to be feeling the pressure more than any of the big teams and Rooney has just not been himself. Having watched him all season at Old Trafford, the Rooney I watched on TV against Algeria looked like a bad impersonation. His positioning and touch were way off, and he wasn’t much better than the woeful Emile Heskey alongside him. He alone can turn England’s fortunes around, but unless he somehow pulls himself together for the final group game against Slovenia, his team could be on their way home.

Of course the big players are being marked more tightly than others, but this is nothing new for them. Is the weight of expectation too much for their young shoulders to bear? It is often said that for an excellent player to be remembered as a true great they must prove themselves at a World Cup. By this logic, not one of the fabulous four mentioned above, despite the fact that they are all Champions League winners, can yet be included in the distinguished list of names that have weaved their magic into the rich tapestry of the history of the World Cup. Having said that, they all have time on their sides.

...the BBC develop an option to filter out drone of Mick McCarthy

The BBC has reported a record number of complaints about the dull, monotonous drone that accompanies their screenings of the World Cup in South Africa, and so from early next week will be offering an option to filter out the noise of Mick McCarthy.

“It’s giving me a headache,” said Richard Croft, from Barnsley,“I can’t imagine why anyone would want to listen to such an offensive sound for a minute, never mind a full hour and a half. My wife and I thought there was something wrong with the TV, until we realised what it was.”

FIFA chief Sepp Blatter has refused to act, stating that he does not want to interfere with the unique culture and history of such a proud country.

Derrick Bird, from Winchester, wrote: “I have to watch the games with the volume down, it really has ruined the tournament for me. I could maybe understand it if the sound it produced had any variety or if it played a tune or something, but I just can’t handle the low-pitched whining, game after game!”

The recently disgraced Lord Triesman has admitted that a key facet of the England’s bid to host the World Cup 1018 was a promise that Mick McCarthy would be banned from all stadiums.

For this tournament, however, it seems that a sound filter is the only option. As from the Portugal versus North Korea game at Monday lunchtime viewers can press the red button on their remote control to choose from coverage with or without Mick McCarthy. While the broadcaster can’t promise to filter out the sound completely, they say it will make the World Cup more bearable.

... Adidas should withdraw the Jabulani and rescue the World Cup!

Yesterday’s blog covered one well-publicised issue particular to this World Cup: the widely unpopular vuvuzela. The conclusion was that by handing over the mantle to South Africa you also give them the choice of how the tournament should be run off the pitch.

Another aspect which is having a negative effect on the tournament is the Adidas Jabulani ball. At the start of every tournament there is the same old guff about lighter modern balls travelling faster and moving more to the disadvantage of the goalkeeper etc., with journalists jumping on small complaints (usually by goalkeepers) in an attempt to fill empty sports pages before the tournament begins.

Last World Cup it was said that the Adidas Teamgeist ball was hard to handle, unpredictable and so on. Some players complained, but then after five minutes of the opening game Philipp Lahm smashed it into the top corner of the Costa Rican goal, and the issue was all but forgotten.

Philipp Lahm, Germany vs Costa Rica, 2006

This time Siphiwe Tshabalala scored another great opening goal for the hosts, but unlike with Lahm in Germany it seems that was a one off. This time the speculation seems to be valid. Everybody is complaining, goalkeepers and outfield players alike. Adidas claim the ball has been painstakingly tested, but this cannot have been by top players, as the complaints rolled in as soon as the 32 competing nations began to train with it. It seems that rather than being hard to save as usual, this ball is also hard to strike.

If the ball is to the benefit of the attacking player, the only people who really suffer are the goalkeepers faced with the task of stopping them, and the odd set of fans who fall victim to their ball-induced errors. Billions of others around the world are happy to see more goals, especially if they are anything like Lahm’s.

The frequent sightings of quality players like Fernando Torres blazing miles over the bar, or Marek Hamsik failing to produce the bend he requires, is commonplace in this tournament and this tournament alone. As I said yesterday only Cristiano Ronaldo and Xabi Alonso have come close to scoring goals from any real distance, the kind that have been commonplace in previous World Cups. If these players can’t strike the Jabulani as they mean to what chance do other, less talented players have?

The fact that not many people seem to realise is that this ball isn’t actually any lighter than those used at previous World Cups. The thinner air at altitude does have an effect, but not all of the venues are at altitude. So if these excuses are void the problem must be one of design.

Unlike the vuvuzela debate, with issues of culture and politics tied in, this problem is simple. Adidas have designed hundreds of excellent footballs. The technology has worked in the past be it the old-school stitched balls or the Tricolor of 1998, with it’s 32 independent bladders surrounding one central bladder (I’m really worried that I didn’t have to research that!).

Yes, if Adidas withdrew the Jabulani now it would be a PR disaster for the company who have invested so much into being the official ball supplier of the World Cup, but it wouldn’t be as bad as being held accountable for spoiling the first World Cup to be held on African soil.

By the way, check this out, it's like football porn! (I think I might be quite sad)

...The World Cup so far

So, we are into our sixth day of football. Almost a quarter of the tournament has passed already, enough to get a flavour for this World Cup in South Africa. As we look back on the 16 games played so far what has stood out to make this World Cup different from the previous 18?

I will get one main element out of the way quickly. So many column inches have been wasted on this subject and I would not like to add more than is necessary. The vuvuzela cannot be ignored. Like most others I find the noise unbearable but, having watched the Confederations Cup in South Africa last year, I expected it. It is a symbol of national pride and tradition for the country. It is South Africa’s World Cup to do as they like. They have earned this right by their progress as a nation.

With the exception of Germany’s drubbing of Australia there have been many tight, nervous encounters. So far nine games have been 0-0 at half-time. This tension should relax as the players find their feet in South Africa.

Many of the slim score-lines in the tournament so far have come as a result of the winning team protecting their lead and being hesitant to press for another. Games such as Argentina’s 1-0 win over Nigeria and today’s victory for Chile over Honduras by the same margin were so much more one-sided than the score-line suggests.

Although the goals have been few and far between at least there has been some romance. New Zealand yesterday exposed the danger of hanging onto a narrow lead in what was a exhilarating, memorable moment for the Kiwis – who scored to draw with a vastly superior Slovakia side in second half injury-time to earn their first ever point at a World Cup – not to mention for the tournament itself. Switzerland have just beaten the European champions and World Cup favourites Spain. A great result (unless you’re Spanish, of course) but typically of the competition the score was 0-0 at half-time, 1-0 at the final whistle.

The reasons for so many tight, goal-shy games could of course be due to outside factors. The criticism of the Adidas Jabulani ball has been vindicated by the poor quality of shots from distance. Only shots against the woodwork from Cristiano Ronaldo and Xabi Alonso, two of the finest strikers of a ball in the game, have come close to recreating some of the long-range thunderbolts seen in Germany four year ago. Rather than putting ‘keepers at a disadvantage it seems easier to get a hand to these balls than it does to hit them accurately and with power. The makers of the Jabulani blame the altitude, but then they would do, wouldn’t they?

Altitude does seem to be affecting players, as expected. Games have been tapering off more so than usual as they enter the final stages. Players are more content to let the ball do the work than to make attacking, lung-busting runs and risk being caught out of both position and breath. This could explain why Argentina, who lost 6-1 to Bolivia in the highlands of La Paz in qualifying, didn’t score more than one past Nigeria. Maybe the players should use vuvuzelas to strengthen their lungs.

One plus about the conditions in South Africa is that it is not as hot as in previous years. Especially in Japan and Korea but also in the heat of a German summer players struggled with the heat and humidity. A South African summer, at altitude, would have been unbearable. Whereas Brazil won in the humidity of 2002 and Italy won in Europe in 2006, the altitude of South Africa doesn’t really give an unfair advantage any of the favourite teams.

Not that these favourite teams are living up to that tag. Spain lost, Italy, France and England drew and even Brazil made hard work of minnows North Korea. If the altitude, the ball, the trying to communicate through the din of the vuvuzelas and so on level the playing field in South Africa, this can only be good for the tournament. But please, let’s have some more goals!

...Italy's draw against Paraguay proves the 4-3-3 does not always work

Last night’s match between Italy and Paraguay was a refreshing sign that the charge of the 4-3-3 may be halted before it envelops the footballing world entirely.

Barcelona have enjoyed great success with the formation. Jose Mourinho won the European Cup with Porto against all odds and then back-to-back Premier League titles with Chelsea playing 4-3-3...and so on.

Too many teams though, in my opinion, fall back on the 4-3-3 as a safeguard when things aren’t going too well; the philosophy being if you can’t beat them, join them.

The shape, rather than innovative, versatile and positive as such a switch may suggest, can also be negative. The coach escapes criticism off the pitch as the formation suggests attacking football; on paper he has swapped a midfielder for a striker, but the 4-3-3 can be the public facade for a 4-5-1. When two teams play this same formation (as happened many times in the Premier League last season) games can be scrappy and devoid of chances.

The manager has an extra man to flood the midfield and limit the space given to the opposition’s schemers. He has wingers who are often asked to drop back into midfield leaving the lone front man isolated and battling two central defenders for every ball. As a result this central striker is often the archetypal ‘big man’ whose immobility can make him predictable should he be starved of the support from midfield he needs to do his job effectively.

There are situations when the 4-3-3 can work, but many others when it can be disjointed, with players being asked to play out of position. It can work when a team has genuine wingers or second strikers comfortable when playing out wide. With the glut of such players at his disposal Diego Maradona is justified in playing this system with Argentina. When three mobile, versatile forwards are rotating and dragging defenders around as Argentina did against Nigeria the effect can be devastating. With this in mind it is even more surprising that Antonio Cassano was excluded from the Italy squad.

Raymond Domenech, the France manager, simply seems to have run out of ideas as to how to get his men to play to their potential and so has followed the trend. He has left out his country’s all-time leading scorer and former captain, Thierry Henry. While he has been admittedly short of form for Barca he has been so as part of a 4-3-3. Put simply Domenech’s tactics work against France’s best player over the past decade.

Nicolas Anelka, preferred in the central role, is not comfortable with his back to goal, nor is he strong enough in the air to play this position alone. If Domenech’s switch to a 4-3-3 had been anything more than a late knee-jerk reaction to his team’s profligacy pre-tournament he would surely have taken Karim Benzema.

Marcelo Lippi’s team also suffered a poor warm-up schedule, and so he reverted to the 4-3-3. This meant playing last season’s top scorer in Serie A, Antonio Di Natale, as one of the two wide supporting strikers, with the consistently inconsistent Alberto Gilardinho up top. The patient catenaccio style favoured by the Italians meant that Gilardinho was kept embarrassingly quiet by the Paraguayan defence.

Italy were deservedly trailing 1-0 until Lippi swallowed his considerable pride, brought on Mauro Camoranesi (who like Henry is a victim rather that a benefactor of the 4-3-3) and switched to 4-4-2. Suddenly the Italians were running the game with the recognisable pomp of old, rescued a draw and were unlucky not to win all three points.

If Domenech was watching last night's game and wants to avoid a display as flaccid as we saw against Uruguay he should take note before it is too late for ‘Les Bleus’, in what will surely be his last tournament before Ramond Blanc takes the reins. Great teams make others imitate them and not vice-versa, which is probably why you don’t see Brazil or Spain pandering to the modern scourge that is the 4-3-3.

...England and France aside the top teams are living up to expectations

Just over three days since the start of the World Cup and ten games (or fifteen hours) of football watched. Can we keep this up for a whole month? Of course we can!

There have been some fairly dull matches (especially the 0-0 draw between France and Uruguay) and some nervy individual performances, but of the teams in with even an outside chance of winning the tournament only France and England have really disappointed so far.

The Netherlands were quiet by their standards earlier today but never looked threatened by Denmark and showed sparks of their potential in the tournament even without Arjen Robben. Eljero Elia of Ajax, on as a substitute, showed that he can offer the pace and penetration on the left wing that was badly needed as an alternative to the neat but often pedestrian play of Rafael van der Vaart, Wesley Sneijder and co.

Germany showed a fresh, attacking approach during the game yesterday evening in which they thrashed Australia 4-0. This could have been helped, rather than hindered by the loss through injury of their captain and dominant dressing room force Michael Ballack. His absence gives more of a free reign to Bastian Schweinsteiger and his young Bayern Munich team-mate Thomas Muller, whose superb goal – breaking into the area and beating a man before slotting calmly into the corner – showed an energy that in all probability is beyond the 33-year-old Ballack.

Argentina proved that however unpredictably and tactically haphazard Diego Maradona may be, they have the players to beat anyone. Although Maradona seems to have galvanised an enviable team spirit within his squad, and as technically adroit as their six attacking players are with some outstanding replacements on the bench should they be needed, you can’t help thinking that they could have been even better had Maradona used his head for once, and not his lion heart.

One of Argentina’s only weaknesses is at right-back. Apparently Jonas Gutierrez is one of the first names on Maradona’s team-sheet but as Alan Shearer (who knows Gutierrez well from his time at Newcastle United) said, he is an attacking left-winger and not a right full-back. This showed as he was caught out of position time and again and earned a yellow card for a clumsy recovery tackle on one of those occasions.

As has been well documented Maradona inexplicably left out the Champions League winning pair of the versatile former captain and superb full-back Javier Zanetti, who surely deserves to start in Gutierrez’s place, and Esteban Cambiasso, one of the main protagonists of Argentina’s metronomic passing game in Germany in 2006. While this is a disappointment it is the omission of Juan Riquelme (after a petulant argument between the two men) that is most saddening for lovers of the beautiful game.

One of the finest passers and set-piece takers in the global game, Riquelme could have been the catalyst to maximise the significant danger of Argentina’s myriad attacking threats. The clever runs of Messi and Tevez could have been pin-pointed by his superb passing range. Seba Veron also has a formidable passing repertoire but prefers a withdrawn role these days. He and Riquelme, with Javier Mascherano doing the dirty work behind them, could have formed a formidable midfield trio. Angel Di Maria has potential but is not yet on the same level as these three.

Another Inter Milan treble winner, Diego Milito, will have been disappointed not to start in place of Gonzalo Higuin. Although Higuin was excellent for Real Madrid this season, Milito scored the only two goals of the Champions League final in his last competitive game, so it is surprising that Maradona did not let him try to continue his hot streak and play him from the beginning.

Apart from Argentina the real entertainment so far has been provided by England’s Robert Green. I am an Englishman myself, but I couldn’t help but laugh out loud at his comical error. At least it was in the first game and Green has a chance to redeem himself, but I personally wouldn’t give him the chance. However, it is hard not to feel sorry for him. All these jokes are getting out of hand. In fact, you could say they’re crossing the line...