World Cup Heroes or Big Stage Zeroes? Piece 1: Find Yourself a Keeper…

There’s a famous quote that states are only 2 things that are certain in life – death and taxes. However, I’d like to add another potential certainty to the mix – the unsubstantiated optimism of an England football fan. For years, at every major tournament, we play down our chances in the weeks before, saying that we’re building for the future. Inevitably, in the first game, we take a scrappy 1-0 win against the likes of Burkina Faso, Greenland or Narnia with a 91^st minute own goal, and it’s then that we know the cup is definitely coming our way.

As is traditional, we love to cast our own opinion about the squad as we all know best – I’m no different, so have made my judgments about Gareth’s Gang and have assessed their chances in the competition as well. The first instalment is a look at the guys in the gloves – goalkeepers.

Who made the cut?

1 – Jordan Pickford:

2017/18 Stats – Games: 38 (0 as sub) Clean Sheets: 10 Goals Conceded: 58 (1.5 per game) Saves: 121 England Caps: 3

From Southgate’s comments after the game against Nigeria, along with the fact he’s been handed the number 1 shirt, it’s safe to assume Pickford might be starting at least the first game of the tournament. Bar any major blushes – read Scott Carson, Paul Robinson and Rob Green – he’ll don the gloves for the entirety of the tournament. Whilst he’s managed to start every game for Everton this year, he’s not got a great deal of international experience – nor would I describe him as a ‘match-winning’ keeper. He’s done his hard graft, however, keeping for England at nearly every age group.

13 – Jack Butland:

Games: 35 (0) Clean Sheets: 6 Goals Conceded: 61 (1.75pg) Saves:  141 England Caps: 7

Butland can perhaps count himself a little unlucky to be seen as England’s number 2. After a long spell as Joe Hart’s understudy, he gave a very good account of himself in the few England games he’s played. However, conceding nearly 2 goals a game for the Premier League’s bottom club isn’t a particularly strong argument for being picked. Clearly he’s a better keeper than the stats suggest and was let down by his defence this year – but he’ll have to sit tight until Pickford makes a major error, for this tournament at least. When he joins a big club in the summer, he could make a big push for the number 1 spot in the future.

23 – Nick Pope:

Games: 35 (1) Clean Sheets: 11 Goals Conceded: 35 (1 pg) Saves: 113 England Caps: 0

Statistically the best English keeper in the Premier League last season, Pope has the most clean sheets and fewest goals per game on average. Despite playing 3 games fewer, he still made nearly as many saves as Pickford – for all of Burnley’s brilliance, they would not have been as effective had it not been for his performances. Would love to see him be given a go on the big stage, but his international calibre (or rather, lack of) will get in his way; he has never played a game in an England shirt at any level.

Unlucky to miss out:

Tom Heaton:

Games: 4 (0) Clean Sheets: 0 Goals Conceded: 4 (1pg) Saves: 8 England Caps: 3

Obviously based on this season, there was no way Heaton was going to make the 23 man squad. With the emergence of Nick Pope after Heaton picked up an injury, he couldn’t elevate himself back to Burnley’s number 1 and was therefore never really in contention. He can count himself very unlucky to have picked up an injury and would’ve made an excellent deputy within the squad – is a reliable standby, however.

Fraser Forster:

Games: 20 (0) Clean Sheets: 4 Goals Conceded: 30 (1.5pg) Saves: 67 England Caps: 6

Forster is another in a long list of English keepers who found himself as his club’s number 2 – funnily enough, to another Englishman, in Alex McCarthy. Statistically, the 2 had very similar seasons – both playing around half the fixtures, conceding on average 1.5 goals a game and keeping 4 clean sheets. In itself, those comparisons are probably enough of a reason to have omitted Forster – who found it difficult to cope with the mental side of being dropped. Hopefully, he’ll come back stronger and push his way into the fold again.

Joe Hart:

Games: 19 (0) Clean Sheets: 4 Goals Conceded: 39 (2pg) Saves:  54 England Caps: 75

Another keeper that couldn’t managed to hold onto his club’s number 1 shirt – let alone the country’s. The final column, however, speaks volumes about Joe Hart – whilst all other keepers mentioned in this piece have amassed 19 caps between them, Hart has managed nearly 4 times that in his own career. Quite simply, he has never recovered from the public humiliation that Pep Guardiola lumped upon him. If we were being cynical, it could even be said that, whilst for a long period of time he was England’s standout keeper, he was also lucky that, he was rarely challenged for the spot during his reign as number 1.

Will they save the day?

Honestly, the idea of Jordan Pickford as England’s number 1 isn’t one that’s going to make our opposition quake in their boots – whilst he has certainly earned the right to be plying his trade on the world stage, he’ll have to use the experience to sharpen up very quickly. Whilst we can say there isn’t really a standout number 1, at least we do have a good cohort of keepers – any of them could certainly contribute positively to the team and put in a match-winning performance on their day. Without over reliance and unnecessary pressure on just one keeper, here’s to hoping whoever starts will be able to keep England in the cup.

Barmy Bancroft and Stupid Smith – a load of balls…

We’re currently in the midst of a great Test match series, with South Africa and Australia competing toe to toe. With the scoreline now at 2-1, with another test to play, you’d be forgiven for thinking the only real spectacle was on the field. With some fantastic test cricket on display, there’s certainly a lot to be excited about – but the off-field antics have written the headlines…

Crossing the boundaries…

With Australia opener David Warner squaring up to South Africa wicket keeper Quinton De Kock after the first game, it was clear that the formalities weren’t going to be withheld to the confines of the boundary ropes. Pace bowler Kagiso Rabada was banned for ‘physical contact’ with Australia captain Steve Smith during the second test – a ban later overturned. Darren Lehmann then took the extraordinary step of bemoaning the South African spectators and players, saying that his side had received an unprecedented amount of abuse; this, coming from a coach who told his side and nation’s fans to ‘send Stuart Broad home crying’ during the Ashes.

Tamper Tantrum

The controversy has not ended there, however; rather, it has escalated beyond belief. For a reason known only by the self-labelled Australian ‘Leadership Group’, they decided that they would be able to get away with ‘ball tampering’ – an offence that, within the cricketing circle, is probably one of the most disgraceful deliberate acts. Cameron Bancroft, the 26-year-old opener new to the team, was the fall guy – having a small piece of tape in his pocket, he was able to effectively sandpaper the ball, making it more difficult for the South Africans to play.

Ashes Laughs to Downright Daft

Steve Smith and Cameron Bancroft were very quick to play the media in the light of ‘headbutt gate’ – after Jonny Bairstow was alleged to have thrown his head at Bancroft. This press conference saw a complete change in character, from class clowns to sat outside the headmaster’s office. Smith, as captain, was quick to eliminate all blame from his opening batsman – who had admitted it was his idea, and was ‘nervous with all the television cameras around’ and ‘panicked when he got caught’.

Bancroft’s actions, whilst arguably inexcusable, are potentially forgivable – new to the test game for his nation, he has acted according to his captain’s plans and he was stupid enough to agree to be the player who carried it out. Being labelled as ‘the junior player’, however, attempting to absolve him of any blame, is out of the question – he’s a grown man who understood he was breaking the rules and new to the team or not, he should never have put himself in such a position.

Sorry seems to be the hardest word!

Steve Smith cut a disconsolate figure during the press conference – he knew he was in for a drubbing and news has just come out that he’ll be banned from the next test. Whilst his apology seemed sincere, one quote has made more of an impact on me than any other – when he simply said ‘our actions are regrettable and we will make sure this never happens again’.

Firstly, he doesn’t offer any personal regret – rather than saying ‘I/we regret our actions’, he simply says ‘they were regrettable’ – to me, it sounds like he regrets getting caught, rather than regretting cheating. Further to that, he goes on to say ‘it won’t happen again’ – said as if that makes any difference at all; the issue isn’t with any future action, it’s the fact that he has implemented a means of cheating within his team. He has appeared arrogant, unapologetic and, realistically, pretty stupid in thinking that he could ever get away with it.

From Oz’s Cheaters to our record beaters

Sadly, this news seems to have overshadowed brighter news, with a great display going under the radar. With a positive way to finish the piece, England have broken a cricketing record! It’s not the men with their dismal 58 all out, but rather the women in their Twenty20 triangular series with India and Australia. In chasing down 198, with Danielle Wyatt smashing a 52 ball century and becoming only the second female to hit two T20 hundreds, England made the highest ever run chase in the women’s T20 game – with Jenny Gunn becoming the first ever cricketer to reach 100 international T20 caps. Whilst all the focus is on the doom and gloom within the men’s game, it might be worth reflecting on the brilliant displays our women’s team have been putting in.

 

Football Pundits: Inciting or Insightful?

One of the latest nuggets of football news is the outburst from Antonio Conte, who branded Sky pundits Gary Neville and Jamie Redknapp as ‘stupid’ after their criticism of Chelsea’s approach against Manchester City. Now I’m no pundit myself, but in registering a grand total of zero shots on target, I’m not entirely sure Conte has much to fall back on…

The outburst, however, has brought about a wider inquest than just the influence of this incident – after the Crystal Palace vs Manchester United game, Neville and Jamie Carragher discussed at length, the impact that pundits and their opinions have on managers. The key question within the debate – and the crux of this piece – Why do managers care so much about what pundits think?

Insight

In my opinion, punditry is so important in building up not only the story of the game, but helping fans understand how a game is influenced all over the pitch – the attention to detail that the ex-professionals can offer is sometimes astounding. In their pre, mid and post-game analysis, they cover statistics, video recordings and debate to an extent that must make data analysts green with envy. So why is it that managers, for the most part, dismiss the musings of the pundit as poppycock, inciting and downright rubbish – when to a fan (this fan, at least), you can hang on nearly every word they say?

Managing – Mind Games

I think the first answer to the question posed above, is that managers know full well that, typically, the pundit’s analysis is absolutely spot on. But as fans, we can often be naïve in thinking that being a football manager only involves taking training, picking a team and buying and selling some players. The job of the manager extends much further than that – they need to prepare their team each game and give them the best possible chance of winning – whilst the tactical side is clearly the most important, the manager also needs to instil belief and take care of the psychological side of the game. A pundit’s criticism is simply fuel to a manager’s fire – rather than focussing on the mistakes the players may have made during the game, they’re able to deflect all the attention onto the comments made in the studio. ArseneWenger was happy to throw club legend Thierry Henry under the bus – after criticism’s Henry made of Arsenal’s performances during his time at the club’s academy, Wenger was livid – he said Henry must choose Arsenal or Sky. Hurt by his old manager’s scathing, he chose Sky – he claimed that surely it was also the manager’s job to make their team aware when they’re performing badly.

Mourinho’s Moans

Jose Mourinho has given us many examples of this in his tenure as Chelsea and Manchester United, but two incidents stand out the most.

Firstly, as Chelsea manager, he poured scorn upon Redknapp – in Jamie’s criticsim’s of Chelsea’s then performances, Mourinho was interviewed after beating Liverpool (thus ending a run of bad results) and famously moaned; “you speak with Jamie Redknapp and he tells you everything about it. It is about winning – you have your pundits and Jamie Redknapp, who is a brilliant football brain, they can explain to you everything.”

Now there is no doubt that Mourinho’s tone is one of sarcasm – but why did he need to make such a gripe after a hugely important win for his side? The answer is simple – because, rather than the articles being about the lack of form Chelsea had been in at the time, all the focus was then on the ‘war of words’ between himself and Redknapp – the players were shielded from any criticism at their recent performances with Mourinho taking the flak.

Secondly, now at Manchester United, he took aim at club legend Paul Scholes. Scholes had accused Pogba of “strolling through games,” after United managed to end a run of three draws in defeating Everton. Mourinho, unhappy with such criticism, hit back in defence of his mercurial midfielder and, referring to the ‘Class of 92’ dismissed the opinions of, as he labelled them, the “kings of rock and roll,” claiming Scholes was simply jealous of the money Pogba was earning.

Now that’s clearly a ludicrous claim – Scholes, those watching the interview –  I’d go as far to say even Mourinho himself, know that simply isn’t the case. But, rather than the focus being on United’s run of form, all eyes were now on the damage of Scholes’ relationship with his former club.

Insightful or Inciting?

Football managers do probably find pundits annoying – whenever their team is criticised, it must hurt their pride and disappoint themselves that they’re not performing at a high standard. The most annoying thing about the pundit, is that they’re normally always spot on in their insight and analysis – the criticism is entirely fair and warranted.

As long as punditry exists, manager’s will use them as a scapegoat and aim to deflect away from the poor performances they may be watching over. Whereas the fan can clearly see the insight, the manager (appears, at least) can only see the incite.

Guardiola: Lucky Man or Legendary Manager?

It’s been a little while since the last post, but hopefully it’ll be worth the wait!

Pep Guardiola.

Most individuals within professional football agree that his tactical intelligence is near unrivalled. For a man with such an extraordinary record – he’s taken 6 league titles in 8 attempts, currently sitting on top of the pile in his 9^th season – he is often the subject of huge debate; just how good a manager is Pep? Is he simply lucky to have managed 3 of the best teams in the world? This piece will delve into the myths and statistics behind the charismatic Spaniard and aim to answer the very question – is Pep Guardiola a lucky manager, or a legendary manager?

Lucky man – not lucky manager

There is no denying that Pep Guardiola is a very lucky man – there are very few people that can boast a record of managing the best team in Germany, Spain and currently in England. There are even fewer managers who can claim to have garnered success anywhere near the level of the Spaniard – to herald a managerial record of his quality, you might need a little more than just luck.

Stats the way to do it…

Trophies

Guardiola’s managerial statistics are unbelievable. Firstly, we’ll take a look at Sir Alex Ferguson – regarded as the best manager to have graced the Premier League. Ferguson’s record is exceptional. The man took his Manchester United side to 38 trophies in 27 years – an average of 4 trophies every 3 years – and won the league at a rate of every other season. If you look at current managers, Jose Mourinho averages more trophies per season than Ferguson, with 25 trophies across his 15 years since taking over at Porto – that’s 5 trophies every 3 seasons. Carlo Ancelotti comes close with 20 trophies in as many years and Arsene Wenger also has a strong record, averaging just under 1 trophy per year with 17 in 22 years.

Pep Guardiola, in his 10 years as manager, has won 21 trophies – an average way beyond his counterparts of over 2 a year. In fact, his first season with Manchester City was Guardiola’s first ever year without taking home any silverware – a season that’s sure to be forgotten soon with his side still competing across 3 fronts and way ahead in the Premier League.

Winning is a habit, losing is a shock

The technical stuff

Before you read this section, it’s well worth pointing out that statistics aren’t always the best measure of how good a manager someone is – but these statistics really do speak for themselves. This section does get slightly technical, so if you’re interested in that sort of stuff, fire away! If not, it’ll all be summed up simply in the next section.

To win trophies, you have to win games – but beyond winning, you also have to avoid losing to pick up as many points as possible along the way. Therefore, although win percentage is important, comparing that to loss percentage is just as important. If we want to get technical, the best managers are those with the highest “win/loss” index – simply their win percentage minus their loss percentage. If a manager wins 100% of their games and loses 0, they have a score of 100. If they lose 100% of the time and never win, they’ll have a score of -100. For a general point of reference, the win/loss index of the average manager across the top 5 leagues in Europe (excluding the top 4 clubs) has been measured at 5.7.

As with the previous comparison, we’ll start with Sir Alex Ferguson – a man who, as manager of Manchester United, mustered up a strong win percentage of 58.1%. On the flipside, he lost 17.8% of his games, leaving him with a win/loss index of 40.3. Wenger couldn’t quite match the manager whose Premier League managerial appearance record he broke recently – winning 54.1% as Arsenal manager and losing 22.8%, his win/loss index is 31.3. Giving Ancelotti the benefit of taking his statistics from the start of his Chelsea spell, he has a fantastic win percentage of 67.5% – only losing 17.5% of his games, he comes in with a score of exactly 50. Although Mourinho’s win percentage is slightly lower – at 65.4% – he only loses 13.9% of his games, giving him a slightly higher score of 51.5.

Even within the small pool of manager comparison here, we can see that scores can vary by 20 points – even though all managers have scores way and beyond the average. Bearing in mind that Mourinho finds himself 10 points ahead of Ferguson and 20 ahead of Wenger, Pep Guardiola’s win/loss index is nothing short of incredible. In winning 72.1% of his games, he already measures higher in Mourinho in that respect – he’ll win 7 more games for every 100 played. He also loses fewer games as a percentage, only losing 10.4% of all games he has ever taken charge of. He therefore ends with a score of 61.7 – the highest score of any active manager by over 10 points.

But what does that mean..?

I’m well aware that the technical side of things may just be a weird bunch of numbers  that don’t seem to mean much, may come across as very complex and just seem a little bit pointless. To put those statistics simply – Pep Guardiola is very good at his job. In an average season, he’ll win more games than anyone else, and lose fewer games than anyone else – both of those mean a league trophy is all but guaranteed.

Winning is easy when all you do is spend…

It’s hard to dispute that Pep Guardiola has been lucky with the amount of money he’s been given to spend – but that’s simply part and parcel of managing a big club. Look at Real Madrid, who broke the transfer record for Ronaldo and Bale and Manchester United who threw money at Juventus for Paul Pogba and it’s clear to see that money doesn’t simply buy success. Whilst Guardiola has bought more than his fair share of players, he’s also moulded them into a system that, at times, seems genuinely unbeatable. Given the fact that Manchester United and Real Madrid can easily compete financially, with 2 managers who have been in their jobs a similar amount of time to Pep, it should be that both times are at the top of their respective leagues – but this isn’t the case. United sit 16 points behind 1^st place; Real Madrid 14 points – for all the money you’re able to put into the team, there’s clearly another factor playing a bigger part – the person in charge.

So – Lucky or Legend?

I’ll be honest – if you’d asked me this question a few years ago, the answer would’ve immediately been ‘lucky – anyone could’ve won with the team Barca/Bayern/City have’. But now, it’s clear to see that Pep builds his teams meticulously, plans his tactics masterfully and grinds out results mercifully. He is clearly, and will continue to be, the best active manager around and will obviously go down as a legend when he chooses to retire. The statistics and trophies simply don’t lie.

PS: We can all forgive an FA cup loss to Wigan – he wouldn’t be the first City manager to have the honour…

VAR: Failure, or the Future?

In light of a few recent fixtures throwing up a few talking points, this week’s piece will focus on the benefit and the future of the ‘Video Assistant Referee’ (VAR).

Firstly, I think that VAR is a fantastic step forward for football – whilst a lot of other sports have embraced the benefit of technology, football has trailed somewhat far behind. Take rugby, cricket, tennis and hockey as four examples and the benefit of a video review system is obvious.

The Key Issues:

Referee referrals

Currently, football works on the idea that a decision will undergo ’referee referral’ – that is, that if a referee or their assistant feels they’re unable to make a decision without assistance, they can call on the VAR to offer their advice on the decision.

The problem that football will experience is nothing to do with the technology itself, but rather that, in comparison to the sports mentioned previously, it’s simply more difficult for a referee to implement. Rugby have managed to get some way around this with their ‘Television Match Official’ (TMO) – if the referee spots a potential infringement, they will let the game carry on, but make the TMO and more importantly the players aware that they need to check the footage to see if the infringement did occur. There are massive benefits to this – the game goes ahead as normal, meaning that if there wasn’t an issue, the final result of the play can stand; if there was an issue, play is simply brought back to that stage. The TMO will use the time that play continues in order to check through the footage and try to give the referee a decision almost instantaneously after play stops, limiting the pause in play. Although football is in its early days of video technology for the referee’s use, it is clear that the pause in play is already a major concern – in Liverpool’s FA Cup tie with West Brom, VAR took a total of 5 minutes out of the game – their added time after the game was only 4 minutes.

Crowd Involvement

All 4 sports referenced at the start of the piece have all understood the need for the fans to understand what’s happening with regards to the technologically assisted refereeing or umpiring decision. With most major sporting venues housing a ‘big screen’, especially those games televised, these sports will show replays of the contentious decision and highlight how the referee or umpire has come to their final decision. Not only does it keep the crowd involved in the game, rather than creating a period of ‘limbo’, but the crowd can then appreciate just how difficult a decision the video assistant may have to make. With football, VAR is currently a covert, external decision maker – the assistant is literally sat miles away from the arena, the crowd don’t know who they are and more importantly, what is actually happening with the decision. Although the referee makes a signal to highlight they’ve taken the decision to go to VAR, that’s all the information anyone gets.

Who is the decision maker?

The final major issue is the making of the decision itself, after the VAR is consulted. In a sport such as cricket and tennis, the decisions tend to be more binary – the decision is either out, or in and the technology almost makes the decision itself.

With football, there will be some binary decisions – take an offside for example, where a player will clearly be simply onside, or offside. The issue arises, however, when a decision for a penalty is referred – the current problem is that no-one is aware of how the process works. Does the referee make a decision and ask for advice, or does the referee have no idea and asks the VAR to make the decision instead?

Hockey and rugby cater for this issue very simply – the video assistant, upon consulting their evidence, will give the official a ‘recommendation’, rather than a decision, and highlight why they’ve come to this decision with the evidence in front of them. For the most part, the official will follow the decision, due to the vast evidence the official is able to access – but it is highlighted that the decision is actually the official’s to make, based on the advice of their assistant. Take the penalty that Mo Salah won against West Brom that went to the VAR – the assistant told the official to give the penalty, rather than offering any advice – a decision that many saw as very soft and heavily based on slow motion replays rather than real time.

Potential Solutions:

In order to solve all the current issues with VAR, football needs to move away from its arrogance in terms of video technology and embrace it as other sports have – their easiest solutions lie in the ways other sports implement their technology.

Player referrals

The first potential solution could be the introduction of the player referral – in hockey, cricket and tennis, this is already implemented. If a player disagrees with a decision, they’re able to ask the official to consult the technology and hope the decision is overturned. This is a limited resource, however, as there is a certain restriction on how many referrals a team or player has – this is simply to eradicated absolute blunders, rather than focus on a reliance on the technology to make the decision. Currently in football, with the referee calling for the decision to go to the VAR, it almost appears that they feel incapable of making the decision themselves and almost rely on them to get the decision correct.

Consistency of application

Although VAR is currently in a trial period, so can’t be used at all games, there needs to be a universal standard across competition. If one Premier League game has VAR, then all need it. If one FA Cup tie has VAR, how is it fair that the rest may not? It may be difficult to implement for non-televised games, but for all games that are on TV, the evidence is already there crying out to be used. If Liverpool had beaten West Brom with the benefit of the penalty awarded through VAR, would it have been fair if Man City had lost to Cardiff after Joe Bennett’s horror tackle only merited a yellow card rather than a red?

Assistance, not reliance

The name itself should be enough to highlight the ‘Video Assistant Referee’s’ role – they are there to assist the officials. The referee should be strong enough to make their own decision initially, albeit without disclosing that to the players if necessary, and get the advice of the assistant purely based on the evidence they’ve got access to. The key factor that hockey have input is the inclusion of a ‘no decision’ – if the assistant feels unable to offer sufficient advice to the officials, they’re able to simply say they do not feel happy influencing the decision one way or the other based on the evidence they’ve seen. It’s then up to the official to make the decision, as it will have been for the 99% of other decisions they will have made.

What is the future for VAR?

Although it appears I might dislike VAR in its current state, it’s clear that, for the most part, it has worked successfully in terms of making the right decision during a match. I would argue, however, that it needs to benefit the sport as a whole, rather than just benefiting a few teams in a few games. Its positive influence for the future is obvious and, with a few simple adjustments, it could really revolutionise the sport after they embrace the vast technology we now have available. The most important point, perhaps the best to conclude on, is that rather than the Video Assistant making a decision that helps the referee have a good match, they should be there to assist the referee in making a decision for the benefit of the game.

The Phenomenon of the Over-Achieving Manager

Whilst taking my time to think of a first piece, I didn’t really know where I should start – with such a variety of topics to choose from, it was a bit of a daunting choice.

However, only a couple of days ago, my first topic was almost chosen for me by the sheer shock of the news that Watford’s manager, Marco Silva, had been sacked. Silva’s Watford sat 10^th in the Premier League on the day of his sacking – taking 4 wins and 3 draws from their opening 11 games, there was genuine excitement amongst the Watford faithful that they’d finally found the man to fulfil their potential of becoming a top 8 Premier League side.

A drop in form – 1 win in his last 11 games – coincided with an approach from Everton; an approach that, in public at least, he rarely acknowledged as ever being close to successful. To the Watford faithful, the consensus is that the right decision was made – a manager whose head was turned by the lure of a ‘bigger club’, no longer seemed to show the desire that initiated his success.

Although I can’t profess to having watched Watford’s performances closely this year, I believe that, although their fans could largely be right, I would highlight another reason that may have led to his departure – a phenomenon simply labelled as ‘over-achieving’.

There’s no doubting that Watford are club with huge potential; that was demonstrated in their early performances this season. Despite this potential, it is not realistic to expect Watford to be consistently pushing put performances to keep them within touching distance of the ‘Top 6’ – they are a consistent mid-table team for sure.

The issue with this comes from the fact that, excluding the ‘Top 6’, clubs are now unhappy just to participate in the Premier League. Membership into England’s elite doesn’t come easily and it appears that certain owners don’t understand this. Take Claude Puel’s sacking at Southampton last year; despite finishing 8^th and coming close to winning the League Cup, Puel was deemed to have performed below the required standard. Southampton now sit in 18^th in the Premier League, in the relegation zone – the statistics themselves show how good a decision his sacking may have been.

The shining example of the issue of the over-achieving manager, however, comes from Puel’s current club, Leicester City. Claudio Ranieri, King Claudio, Premier League winning manager; in his first season at the club, there were questions as to whether he’d be able to save his side from relegation. In fact, he’d go a few better than that, taking Leicester to the Premier League title for the first time, in one of the best sporting stories that will ever be told. Yet, despite the fairytale of the 15/16 season, Claudio was sacked with his side 1 place above the relegation zone in late February 2017. Despite the threat of relegation, Leicester came under heavy criticism for their decision – the key point being that winning the league was never their aim – that they were a side who would have been happy with 15^th place. I have no doubt in my mind that had Ranieri finished 14^th rather than 1^st in that magnificent season, he would still be in his job.

The romance of football is always placed on the underdog – the over achieving manager is one who, in their times of success, are often lauded for the fantastic job they’ve done. Maintaining these standards often comes with a lot of difficulty and with 8 of the 20 managers who started this Premier League campaign already being sacked, the outlook doesn’t seem to be changing any time soon. Whilst managers continue to over achieve, they’ll continue to reap the initial reward and deal with the consequences of inconsistency afterwards.

Silva, however, may be left wondering that if he’d only displayed a little more mediocrity initially, he may still be on the touchlines of Vicarage Road.

 

What is ‘Duncan’s Dugout’?

So, why choose to write a sports blog? Recently, I’ve found myself asking difficult questions about what I want to do in the future – but never really addressed what I wanted to do right now. I’ve always has a very keen interest in watching sport – particularly football and cricket – and playing sport, mainly hockey.

I do have aspirations of covering sport in some capacity in my future, so this is a great way to get some practice in and hopefully publish some decent pieces along the way.

This blog will mainly focus on the two sports I love to watch, as they’re the two I feel I can write the best about – the odd article about hockey, tennis or more may pop up occasionally, but I’ll be sticking to what I know.

I’ll be writing a lot of opinion pieces, focusing on a range of subjects such as selections for the national teams (in light of our dismal Ashes performance); honing in on the performances of players across games and seasons, with comparisons and statistics.

Although I don’t profess to know any more than any other sports-mad fan, with such a keen interest I’m excited to put my opinion out into the public eye. It wouldn’t be worth having an opinion if no-one disagreed with anything written – I’m very happy to discuss anything I’ve written further with readers if you think I’ve got it wrong.

I’ll be starting to get some articles going in the coming days; so if you’ve read this far, thanks very much for your time and stay tuned! I’m on Facebook and Twitter as Duncan’s Dugout, so if there’s anything you’d like me to write, please get in touch!