The Dutch club’s most famous son has come back, but will his famously huge ego get in the way of success?

Johan Cruyff’s name is synonymous with Ajax. After all, the Dutch club’s two most successful periods began with Cruyff at the centre - as a player between 1964 and 1973 and then as manager between 1985 and 1987.

After a 23-year hiatus, the Dutch genius has finally taken up a formal role at Ajax by joining the club’s new supervisory board. Cruyff will oversee the restructuring of the club’s famous youth system and he will be integral to any policymaking. The new board also includes former Ajax and Juventus pitbull, Edgar Davids.

The return of El Salvador, as Cruyff was nicknamed when he played for Barcelona, has got the fans excited, but it has also caused tensions. During the initial talks earlier this year, Cruyff employed a new agent, after which the tone of his long-running attacks on the Ajax board worsened. The situation reached a climax in March when the Ajax board resigned, furious at Cruyff’s confrontational and brusque manner when trying to push through his desired changes. These included sacking several youth coaches, including academy director Jan Olde Riekerink, and replacing them with former players, something that would have cost over a million pounds in compensation.

The outgoing chairman, Uri Coronel, claimed to have saved every rude voicemail message he had received from Cruyff and to have recorded the proceedings of all their meetings. But it was impossible for Coronel and the rest of the supervisory board to remain when it emerged that they had conducted a smear campaign against Dennis Bergkamp, the Ajax legend whom Cruyff envisioned as academy director. Stories insinuating that Bergkamp, a Cruyff protégé, was mentally unfit for the role had been leaked to the press.

Coronel and his fellow board members were predominantly from the business world. They hardly stood a chance in winning a PR war against Dutch football’s most famous legend. Yet last month, Coronel couldn’t resist one last dig at Cruyff: ‘I’ve not seen him here since March. But it’s perhaps wise that I have nothing to add.’ Cruyff was conspicuously absent at the announcement of the new supervisory board at the Special Shareholders General Meeting. Coronel also warned that ‘the club is greater than the individual’ - an obvious reference to the massive Cruyffian shadow that hangs over the philosophy of Holland’s most successful club.

Cruyff is no stranger to controversy. In David Winner’s fantastic portrait of Dutch football, Brilliant Orange, Johnny Rep reflects on Cruyff’s influence during Ajax’s most successful period (1966-73), when they won six league titles and three European Cups in just seven years. Rep, who broke into the team in 1972, reflected on Cruyff’s famously big ego, which saw him lose the captaincy in 1973 to Piet Keizer: ‘It was not easy, not all the time. He said you must do this in a game, or you must do that. It was not easy for me to shut my mouth. He was always saying: more to the right, or to the left, or the centre. Always! If he gave a bad ball, it was not his fault. And he is always right! He is the best and all the time he is right. That was the problem with him for me.’

To read more, go to Spiked.

It’s become a tradition in England to sneer at clubs that have taken on foreign investment, such as Manchester City and Chelsea. City have won the FA Cup since being taken over by Abu Dhabi in 2008, while Chelsea have picked up three titles and several other domestic cups since the Russian Roman Abramovich assumed control in 2003. With both owners pumping close to a billion pounds each into their respective sides, Arsenal manager Arsène Wenger has dismissed such investment as ‘financial doping’.

It is perfectly reasonable to suggest that pumping cash into such clubs has a greater effect in the English Premier League, where the wealth distribution from television deals is more evenly spread than elsewhere in Europe. With the UEFA Financial Fair Play (FFP) rules starting to kick in, however, perhaps this financial doping won’t be as effective in the future. Although this does look unlikely given Manchester City’s attempts to circumvent the financial restrictions.

While major monetary investment is more likely to reap rewards in the Premier League (when attempted sensibly, that is – see Portsmouth, West Ham and others are examples of how it can go badly wrong), it seems that in Spain’s La Liga, it could be the only way to break the eternal duopoly of Real Madrid and Barcelona. The exception was Rafael Benitez’s fantastic Valencia side, which won the title in 2002 and 2004.

Now, however, it seems almost unthinkable for a side other than the aforementioned duo to win the Spanish title. A large part of the Real-Barca dominance is due to the fact that 49 per cent of the television money is split between the two. The other 18 sides have to divvy up the remaining 51 per cent among them. In the modern game, it would be foolish to think sporting dominance isn’t supported by financial strength.

That is why the goings on at Malaga are intriguing. Bought last summer by Qatari sheikh Abdullah Bin Nassar Al-Thani for €36million (a price including the club’s debt), Malaga are laying the early foundations for a sustained challenge to the dominant duo.

To read more, go to Spiked.

First, the UAE footballer Awana Diab, who scored with a back-heeled penalty against Lebanon, was threatened with punishment for his creativity. Then, Manchester City’s Italian wild-child Mario Balotelli was hauled off by his manager Roberto Mancini for attempting a back-heeled finish when one-on-one against the goalkeeper. Diab was also substituted soon after his apparent crime.

This begs the question: is footballing innovation in danger of being classed as disrespect? Diab’s penalty was taken when the UAE were ahead by several goals. If anything, serious questions should be asked of the goalkeeper, who failed to react to a pretty poorly executed backheel, which lacked any pace or power. In fact, Roma legend Francesco Totti, attempted a much better one, albeit in training.

As for Balotelli’s finish, it’s clear that he would be lauded if he had pulled it off. Failure to execute the trick properly is his only crime, in my opinion. The context in which this back-heel was attempted is important to consider before we decide to berate the Italian and label him ‘troubled’. There are suggestions that the young striker felt he was offside, hence the nonchalant, unorthodox finish. It happened in a pre-season friendly against LA Galaxy, where the optimization of fitness is the most important thing, the result is completely irrelevant.

Amateur psychologists among us could even argue that Mancini felt pressure to act strongly in a public sphere against any critics, much like Phil Brown’s infamous half-time team-talk at Hull. For, it was he who brought Balotelli from Inter Milan last summer. It was under his management when Balotelli accumulated more cards than goals last season.

So by hauling off the youngster, and bringing on James Milner, a player devoid of any flair but always a hard worker, Mancini moved dangerously close to becoming the Italian catenaccio-worshipping managerial stereotype, rather than the brilliant striker who used to scored goals with the very flair and innovation he punished his own player for exhibiting.

Surely the most enthralling aspect of sport in general is discovering new boundaries within the rules and thus increasing competitiveness (in this case through creativity and quick-thinking)? These recent incidents are perhaps the extremes that highlight a more stifling climate where the commercial pressures impact on moments of sporting genius.

The importance of winning or surviving relegation to remain solvent mean clubs are likely to bank on a solid, defensive style rather than an offensive, attacking one where moments of individual brilliance are more likely. Sure Birmingham and Blackpool adopted these respective strategies, and sure, both got relegated, but it seems far harder to cultivate a technical, possession-based style than it does a dour, defensive ‘hoofball’ game.

One of the best remembered moments in European football history is the winning penalty of the 1976 European Championships by Czech midfielder Antonín Panenka. In what was the final penalty of the shoot-out, Panenka stepped up to the stop and defied all convention. He chipped the penalty down the middle, as the German ’keeper Sepp Maier dived to his left. This penalty technique is now known as the Panenka penalty.

In contrast, Balotelli’s decision to select a back-heeled finish was in a complete no-pressure situation. It will surely be consigned to blooper reels of the future, and will be used by those who want to promote the narrative of ‘Angry Young Man’ as a stick to beat the young Italian with. But the important point is, Balotelli was also willing to take the risk, even though it was in a situation akin to training. Like Panenka, he undertook the decision to go for the risky option that would leave him to potential embarrassment.

Yes, he failed where the Czech player made the history books. There are countless examples of this but it is the willingness to take the risk that is important. Otherwise sport wouldn’t be any fun if it was only played by rational, ergonomic men on the flat plain in Christaller’s Central Place Theory (GCSE Geography anyone?).

Remember Robert Pires and Thierry Henry’s failed attempt at re-creating the short-pass penalty made famous by Johan Cruyff and Jesper Olsen in 1982? In the post-match reaction, Sylvain Distain, like Mancini and Diab’s team manager Esmaeel Rashed, missed the point and cried disrespect. As Arsenal manager Arsene Wenger pointed out, the intention is rarely, if ever, disrespect, but adhering to the entertainment aspect of sport.

Mancini and Rashed should do well to remember that before they try to punish their players for creativity.

This article was originally written for The Boar.

Cutting down the late Ayrton Senna’s achievements at the pinnacle of motor racing into a 90-minute film was never going to be easy. There were around 15,000 hours worth of archive footage of the legendary Brazilian driver to use. Kapadia notes in a recent interview that ‘it took us four years’ to find the right combination of footage to represent Senna’s 10-year career in Formula One.

The extensive footage of F1, a sport saturated with television coverage, spliced with home-movie images of Senna with his family, provides a touching portrayal of the various aspects of Senna: driver, national hero, winner, philanthropist, family man.

The film begins at the scene of one of Senna’s finest drives, for the unheralded Toleman team at the 1984 Monaco Grand Prix. This performance, in only his sixth Grand Prix, typified his general brilliance in rainy conditions; he was only denied victory because the race was stopped due to torrential rain.
Kapadia swiftly passes over Senna’s development as a youthful kart driver back in his native Brazil, along with his exploits in Formula Three. Instead, the central narrative of Kapadia’s work is the rivalry between Senna and the four-time F1 winner, Frenchman Alain Prost.

There are touching moments between the two, who were team-mates at McLaren for two years during the 1988 and 1989 seasons. An early exchange between the two would fall under that much-despised term ‘banter’, though there is an underlying competitive tension in their words. Prost asks his team-mate, ‘Is it possible to be equal?’ to which Senna replies ‘No’. Prost amusingly concludes: ‘Shit.’

Yet, after spending so much time creating this piece, there is bound to be a partisanship from Kapadia towards Senna, with the dramatic arc seeming to cast Prost, almost unfairly, as the villain to Senna’s heroic protagonist in a simplistic representation of both drivers. Furthermore, the accusation that Prost was in bed with Jean-Marie Balestre - the French president of FIA, Formula One’s governing body - is disappointingly repeated by Kapadia. Whatever the relationship between the two may have been, Senna’s disdain for the politics that have engulfed F1 is made clear.

To read more, go to Spiked

LiberoFootball’s Greg Cross with another hilarious extract from his imagining of Phil Brown’s diary:

(20/05/2011) The Year of Our Lord, 2011.

I await the endless, consuming blackness which is explicitly twinned in glorious juxtaposition of ecstacy that comes with autoerotic asphyxiation. I am strung up, bound, helpless, awaiting my end, my North End, in Big Sam’s ‘Kloomph’ Ikea wardrobe. In tasteful ‘birch’. Preston are down. My reputation, so highly thought of, shot to shit. Shot to the very same faecal matter that lines this festering wardrobe, where I have been since my boys, my Preston boys, dropped me in the brown stuff.

The belt, the belt that was to end it all, slipped off my neck two Saturdays ago. It lies on the wardrobe floor, coated in my own filth, my fetid, squalid filth.

The ‘Thirst Aid’ cap that Mrs Brown bought me back from her travels to Bangkok last year has long been drained of its life-sustaining ‘Um Bongo’.

The ‘Trio’ bars that I found lodged in the back of this wardrobe (sell-by-date, June 1992) long since eaten.

My ‘Bluetooth’ earpiece is dangling from my ear. I can hear Big Sam, downstairs, on his, ordering a pineapple and ham pizza. The sick bastard. The sick, naked, watching ‘Air Wolf’ handsome bastard. I’m upstairs, awaiting release. Release from relegation. Release from unannounced cameo appearences on ‘MOTD2′ and release from the cheap sodding market bought crap red braces that are hanging me like a naked, orange tinged Marionette puppet from Big Sam’s hanger bar.

I don’t want the blackness now. I want promotion. I want to taste the glory again. I want my Preston North End. I want to sign ageing veteran players and take credit for their skill, I want to see Big Sam, doing the ‘Snoopy Dance’ when his latest Amazon purchase slides through the letter box, I want to leer like ‘Hannibal Lecter’ at Kelly Cates next time I am on ‘Talk of the Terrace’, I want to wear a pink cashmere sweater around my neck like a young James Van Der Beek, and I want to sing ‘The Beach Boys’ to my adoring public just one more time.

Cut me down Sam. Cut me down and allow me to be your wingman; you be ‘Maverick’ and I’ll be ‘Goose’. Or ‘Merlin’, depending on my moustache status.’

Which team can score a goal in the 97^th minute, only for there to remain doubts in the supporters’ minds of the certainty of victory – doubts which are confirmed as a 100^th minute equaliser is conceded through a moment of pure stupidity? Of course, it can only be Arsenal, the team, who are dangerously close to becoming a caricature of themselves, through the frequency of their collapses. They have now lost leads in 39 games since they last won a trophy – which amounts to an entire season and one other game of dropping points.

This latest Arsenal collapse in the dramatic 1-1 home draw with Liverpool can only serve to popularize the use of amateur psychology in trying to understand why this Arsenal team are fast gaining a reputation for being the most famous nearly-men in the modern era. Psychological blocks that cannot be overcome, a plethora of injuries hitting key members of the team at vital points during the season, and unfathomable football errors are recurring images when one analyses any Arsenal season for the past few years. It can only lead to media ‘pundits’ proclaiming Groundhog Day.

One would think it would be unthinkable for a title-chasing team to be playing at walking pace when chasing a win with only ten minutes to go till full time. There was no intensity, or movement off the ball to provide options to the player in possession of the ball. Liverpool defended and counter-attacked efficiently but the onus was on Arsenal, and they typically failed to make it count when the pressure was on them to cut Manchester United’s lead to four points.

One must credit Liverpool, but teams like Sunderland and Blackburn have also performed a similar tactical task without too many problems either. When one sees the most technically gifted team in football in Barcelona not hesitating to making several off-the-ball runs to try to make small gaps within the defending team, you wonder why so many Arsenal players remain static. The best team in history doesn’t shirk the hard work and graft required to implement their footballing style, so why should its imitators?

Arsenal manager Arsene Wenger presented his usual post-disappointment interview, protecting the players from criticism and urging the need to keep faith and ‘fight’. The faith Wenger puts in players who have continued to disappoint at vital moments season after season is viewed as misplaced by many. The schtick that these players are ‘mentally strong’ and ‘intelligent’ has been peddled for far too long. The work of sports psychologist Jacques Crevoisier has been promoted as evidence of this, as have the abundance of late goals Arsenal have scored in recent seasons.

Yet such notions fail to hide the lack of application and concentration during the start of games, which leads to the side having to labour to overcome a scoring deficit. When chasing goals late into games, the pattern of play has become highly predictable. Arsenal favour the central areas, which the opposition consequently crowd, leading to an outball to the full-backs, Gael Clichy and Bacary Sagna, who have horrific crossing accuracy statistics.

When a direct threat is required due to the tactical stance the opposition has taken, Wenger usually brings on Nicklas Bendtner. Yet bafflingly, in what could only be described as a nod to seniority, Bendtner, with his aerial threat and physical style, is shunted out wide to accommodate Robin van Persie in a apparently rigid 4-3-3 style. This tactical switch has been adopted by Wenger several times over the past two seasons, strongly distorting the balance of the team. Theo Walcott, who provides a threat with his runs in behind the opposition team, is often sacrificed for this token gesture.

The fact remains that, while Wenger is brilliant at preparing his team in this fluid style of play, he is not that great a tactician. Furthermore, the squad he has rebuilt since 2005, lacks a starting XI strong enough to finish sides as his great starting XI between 1997-2005 managed to do. The onus on the substitutes to make a difference has highlighted the poor quality of the overall squad and Wenger’s own tactical nous.

In comparison, there is a widely-held view that Sir Alex Ferguson’s current Manchester United side is one of the weakest in years, yet the winning mentality and strong squad (relative to Arsenal) allows tactical changes to be made without ruining the balance of the side. It even saw Man Utd field seven defenders (across defence and midfield) against Arsenal in a recent FA Cup tie, leading to a solid 2-0 victory. Sure, Manchester United have spent more overall compared to Wenger’s Arsenal, and are mired in debt, but this hasn’t affected the club’s footballing success, winning three league titles and the Champions League since 2005.

One could argue that Arsenal’s lack of footballing success is due to the financial constraints placed upon the club due to the construction of the Emirates Stadium, but for the past few years, the club has insisted that there are funds in place for buying players. It seems that Wenger is promoting his ideology and essentially asking for recognition for working in self-enforced budgetary restraints. There are no trophies for moral superiority. The club is seeking to improve the commercial side of things, through bigger sponsorship deals and pre-season tours to the Far East in a bid to make sure the need to be able to compete financially in the Premier League isn’t burdened upon the supporters, given that the Emirates is the home of the first £100+ standard ticket.

Yet, the focus of the club has been on retaining the current squad, leading to a vastly increased wage bill as most of the players have been put on increased, long-term contracts, despite winning nothing. Many of these players are essentially squad players, while those, who can make a real contribution to the future of the club see the frequency of the mental collapses of their team-mates, may be looking to transfer away.

The frustration of Cesc Fabregas, who has been longing for a move to Barcelona, could be seen as Eboue conceded a penalty in the 10^th minute of injury time in the most recent fixture vs. Liverpool. He cut a despondent figure. Similarly, Samir Nasri, who is currently in the process of negotiating the terms for a new contract, may reconsider, when he looks at the overall quality of the squad, which has been together for a few years now, but has failed to make the jump to become a trophy-winning side.

This summer is the most important in the club’s recent history. Many fans are hoping the recent takeover by Stan Kroenke leads to more internal pressure on Arsene Wenger to spend at bolster the squad. Yet, it is likely that hesitant promises to spend will be voiced when season tickets and memberships are up for renewal, with the obvious lack of squad depth eventually not being addressed.

The annual ‘transfer saga’ concerning Fabregas to Barcelona will also inevitably occur, but its conclusion will most likely be deferred to next summer when Fabregas’ contract has fewer years to go (when Xavi is older, for the development of Afellay and Thiago would be hindered if Fabregas arrived at the Nou Camp this summer). The emergence of Szczesny, Djourou and Wilshere has been most promising for Arsenal, and returning loanees such as defender Kyle Bartley and defensive midfielder Francis Coquelin will add some depth, youthful quality and bite to the squad. Yet, some attacking impetus is desperately required, with Lille’s wonderfully named Belgian winger Eden Hazard strongly linked.

Whatever changes (or lack thereof) in personnel occur, it is a change in the mentality of the players at the club that needs to occur above all. The mental capacity of this team and their ability to concentrate at vital moments has long been questioned, but the frequency of their self-afflicted disappointments (home losses to West Brom, Spurs, the Carling Cup Final vs. Birmingham, Liverpool at home) may just condemn them to eternal mediocrity.

Barcelona 5-0 Real Madrid (29/11/10)

Barcelona had just scored eight goals without reply at Almeria the previous week, which prompted Cristiano Ronaldo to dismissively say: “I’d like to see them get eight on Monday”. They got five in the end, but it was a performance so complete, it probably felt like an eight-goal thrashing. The result was an era-defining one. They had destroyed their arch-rivals, who had fielded the most expensive side in history, costing €292m. They had rendered the tactics of Real Madrid manager Mourinho, so often the scourge of Barcelona with his exploits with Chelsea and Inter Milan, impotent.

The statistics were also damning. Barcelona had completed 636 passes to Real’s 279. They scored with their first four shots on target, the second being a twenty-pass move accompanied by a chorus of olés. Strangely, Lionel Messi (who has scored a record number of goals this calendar year with an insane total of 58 goals in 54 games) didn’t get on the score-sheet but did assist twice. Surely this game finally ends the pointless debate concerning who is the better player – Messi or Ronaldo?

There were fewer dribbles and less fantasy in Messi’s game, as he adopted the team ethos in precision passing, which humiliated Real Madrid. Xavi, now generally recognized as the best midfielder in Spanish history, hit a 100+ passes for the sixth time this season, completing 114 of his 117 passes. He also scored the opener, before Pedro, Villa (2) and Jeffren Suarez completed the rout. Real were reduced to kicking Barcelona off the pitch and bemused looks at one another, wondering how to cope with such genius.

Barcelona 1-0 Inter Milan (28/04/2010)

Mourinho called this result “the most beautiful defeat of my life”. Inter lead this Champions League semi-final 3-1 from the first leg in the San Siro. This was a clash of vastly different philosophies – tiki-taka and catenaccio. The clash in styles of further emphasised as Mourinho altered his starting line-up minutes before kick-off, replacing the “injured” Goran Pandev for the more defensive Christian Chivu.

In the opening leg, the Catalans had complained that the pitch had been altered to suit Inter’s tactics. This time, the grass had been cut short and watered to Guardiola’s specifications. Barcelona, as expected, monopolised possession, as Inter defended admirably. It was a much harder task as Motta was sent off for a second yellow, catching Sergio Bursquets lightly in the face. The Spaniard went down in a comically inept fashion, holding his face, before sneaking a look to make sure his opponent would be sent off. Inter battled manfully, with Barcelona’s eventual breakthrough coming in the 84^th minute through a smart turn and finish from defender Gerard Pique.

Then Bojan fired the all-important goal in the 91^st minute as the Nou Camp erupted, only for the goal to be disallowed because of a harsh handball call on Yaya Toure in the build-up. Perhaps it was karmic retribution for Busquet’s douchebaggery earlier in the game, but for Mourinho, it was vindication for the transcendental negativity of his tactics as he took Inter to their first European Cup win since 1965. It wasn’t a great game but the tension alone made it one of the defining games of the year.

Germany 4-1 England (27/06/10)

This was the day when the death knoll for England’s ‘Golden Generation’ rang loudly. The media hyperbole and self-promotion that saturated the minds of English football fans prior to the World Cup dissipated instantly as England’s vastly overrated, overpaid selection of individuals were slaughtered by a young German side.

Joachim Lӧw’s side exploited Capello’s lumbering 4-4-2 with a fine display of counter-attacking football that exhibited Alan Hansen’s two favourite words: pace and precision. The fact remains that England plays a prehistoric style of football, incompatible to the possession-based style that international football requires. The players lack the technical ability to play the ball on the ground, a truth hidden at club level by their foreign counterparts.  There was rightly outrage at Lampard’s disallowed goal, but it should be directed at FIFA rather than the Uruguayan officials.

The governing body made a profit of around £3bn in South Africa, yet still refuses to use video technology in the world’s biggest sporting competition. But FIFA’s moral and ethical corruption doesn’t detract from the fact that England were totally inferior to their opponents even if the goal was awarded. Unless there is a change in national mindset, England will continue to produce mediocre results at national competitions.

Ghana 1-1 Uruguay (2-4 pens aet) (02/07/2010)

The defining image of this World Cup was Luis Suarez celebrating Asamoah Gyan’s last minute penalty miss, moments after he had been sent off for deliberately handling a goal-bound shot. His country had profited from his act of cheating to prevent Ghana from being the first African side to reach the semi-final. Arguments concerning the importance of morals amid commercial pressure rose as the validity of the Victorian notion of sportsmanship was questioned.

Also under the spotlight was the current rule of handling on the goal-line resulting in a penalty and a red card rather than a goal and a red card. Away from the drama of the denouement, there were also brilliant goals from Sulley Muntari and Diego Forlan. Asamoah Gyan did show mental fortitude in stroking the opening penalty of the shoot-out into the top corner moments after missing, but it was in vain as misses by his team-mates saw Uruguay’s Sebastian Abreu dink home the cheekiest of winners in the most tense of moments.

Chelsea 2 – 4 Manchester City (27/02/2010)

England’s Brave John Terry has certainly had better days. The media attention was on the ‘will he, won’t he’ handshake issue with Wayne Bridge, after Terry’s alleged infidelities with his then-friend’s partner. City players were wearing ‘Team Bridge’ shirts in a public display of solidarity while the Stamford Bridge crowd booed their ex-player. It was a pantomime atmosphere with morals thrown out of the window.

Away from the possible completion of one of the most superficial representations of mutual respect, Terry had personally given the club’s much maligned reserve ‘keeper Henrique Hilario a vote of confidence. Hilario naturally failed to live up to this. To tell the truth, the first 40 minutes wasn’t great and seemed to indicate a typical Chelsea procession to victory. A comedy of errors followed from the normally solid Chelsea defence, as Mikel, Carvalho, Terry and Hilario were outfoxed by a clearance and the persistence of Carlos Tevez.

Then Hilario was beaten too easily by Bellamy from a tight angle, before Belletti was dismissed for being the last man (as Tevez dispatched the spot-kick past Hilario). Meanwhile Ballack collected a pair of yellow cards, before Bellamy scored a fourth and Lampard got a consolation.

Bayern Munich 1-2 Mainz 05 (25/09/2010)

Beating Bayern Munich on their home patch during Oktoberfest is always enjoyable. Mainz 05 travelled to the Bundesliga champions only on the day of the game (due to a lack of hotel rooms being available) and arrived late due to traffic but the poor preparation didn’t stop them from performing like ’10 love children of Ivica Olic and Dirk Kuyt’ in their defensive duties as the Guardian’s Raphael Honigstein put it.

They topped the league after the win at Bayern with six wins in six games with fast, technical football played in a highly tactical manner. Led by midfield playmaker Lewis Holtby, the German U21 captain (who happens to have an English father but has his heart set on playing for Germany), Mainz opened the scoring as Holtby crossed low for Allagui to back-heel the ball into the far corner. Bayern’s strikers had yet to score a goal this season and had star wingers Robben and Ribery injured, but the Bavarians still hit the post through Klose and forced good saves out of ‘keeper Wetklo.

Their equaliser came through the generosity of Bo Svensson, who inadvertently headed into his net from 20m after a mix-up with his goalkeeper. But this exciting game was ended by a fantastic half-volley on the turn by Adam Szalai, despite late attempts by Van Bommel and Van Buyten to level the score. The result increased the affection of the neutral for this young Mainz team, already led by promising coach Thomas Tuchel (37) and with a relatively low annual wage bill of £14.5m.

Roma 2-1 Inter Milan (27/03/2010)

Since taking over Roma, Claudio Ranieri had made his side more solid and less flamboyant than its previous incarnation under Luciano Spalletti. Over the course of the season, Roma had grown, having closed a 13 point gap since the previous meeting between the two sides in November 2009. They were on a 20 game unbeaten run and had the momentum to defeat Jose Mourinho’s Inter at home for the first time since 2004.

The tension was palpable as the game kicked off. Roma’s opener came in the 17^th minute as the normally reliable Julio Cesar failed to gather Nicolas Burdisso’s header across goal, leading to Daniele De Rossi to stab home from close range. Inter replied as Walter Samuel headed against the bar before Diego Milito scored an equaliser (in which the referee failed to spot three players in offside positions during the build-up). Mourinho had thrown on more strikers as Inter asserted their dominance on the second half.

But against the run of play, Luca Toni gathered a wayward shot from Taddei to slot home past Cesar just six minutes after the Inter equaliser. There was also a late penalty appeal for Roma rejected while Inter hit the woodwork once again right at the end, but Roma held on for the win. Inter remained a point ahead despite this defeat and did eventually go on to win the treble, but this game showed how close Roma pushed them in Serie A.

Getafe 4-3 Sevilla (25/04/2010)

This was essentially a chance for revenge for Getafe. They had been knocked cold by Sevilla, who denied them a place in the Copa Del Rey final, which caused a dip in form of four games without a win. Getafe started with intent, hitting the woodwork, scoring through Adrian, and hitting the woodwork twice more.

Then the plan seemed to go off the rails as Sevilla scored through Luis Fabiano and Fredi Kanoute in their first two shots on goal, before Fabiano clipped the bar with a fine free-kick. Pedro Leon equalised for Getafe for make it 2-2, before Brazil striker Fabiano restored Sevilla’s unlikely lead with a wonderfully calm finish, sidestepping two challenges to lash the ball into the net from close range. Manu equalised after a fine one-two, and Getafe’s task of capturing revenge looked more likely, especially after Kanoute was dismissed for a second yellow.

Then in the 93^rd minute, Getafe won a penalty as Dani Parejo rode one challenge in the box but was brought down by the second. In what was a wildly entertaining game, there was bound to be one last twist as Dani Parejo slotted home the winner. And there was – the referee ordered for the penalty to be retaken as Pedro Leon was spotted encroaching. Parejo had to show a cool head, this time sending the keeper the wrong way and finally confirming the victory after a rollercoaster ride of a game, which had twelve cards shown, stunning goals and plenty of drama.

It is a well known fact that some of the greatest amounts of natural resources on the planet lie within the geographical boundaries of Russia and Qatar. It is also common knowledge that neither of these nations has ever hosted a World Cup. They present FIFA and its sponsors a clear opportunity to exploit new markets and continue the world football governing body’s rampant commercialism in the Blatter era. When you combine financial possibilities with bikini-clad models (as Russia did in their final presentation at the FIFA ExCo hotel in Zurich), it is no surprise that Russia were chosen as the hosts of the 2018 World Cup and Qatar as the 2022 hosts.

England’s bid team are left in a problematic place. The Chief Executive Andy Anson criticised the timing of the BBC Panorama investigation, while the bid team essentially denounced any accusations of corruption directed towards FIFA as false. Any moral or ethical high ground was lost when the notion of a free press was lambasted. Despite, being one of the strongest bids in terms of the independent technical report, England accrued only two votes from the twenty-two Executive committee members.

After the disappointing outcome and first round bidding exit, Anson called for FIFA to reform the bidding process. Sadly, his opinion lacks any credibility and smacks of rank hypocrisy, given the uncomfortable amount of sycophancy directed to FIFA President Sepp Blatter and his followers prior to the final announcement. Where the English bid failed was that it failed to wholly relinquish its morals and buy completely into Blatters’ agenda that FIFA is essentially a force of good for humanity.

It was reported that Blatter had lectured the executive committee members about the ‘evils of the media’ prior to the final decision, while FIFA member Marios Lefkaritis said those who thought the Sunday Times investigation had no part to play in England’s 2018 bid failure were ‘either stupid or naive’. More strangely is the fact that although FIFA acted on the results of the undercover investigation by suspending Amos Amadu and Reynald Teimarii, they still condemned the media focus on their members.

This practically confirms the patronage system most suspect of FIFA’s politics. The cynic (and realist) stance in this instance would be to look back on Blatters hopes of being the first FIFA president to bring the World Cup to Africa, Eastern Europe and the Middle East. They have now come true and his legacy is sealed. Furthermore, they won’t be any problem with an interfering domestic media, with outlets basically state-controlled in both Russia and Qatar.

Perhaps, this was another issue on the minds of the twenty-two egoists on the executive committee, scared of the possible intrusion into their business affairs if the 2018 World Cup was awarded to England. One must fault their logic, for the likelihood is that all the English tabloids would submit to eight years of sycophancy, whereas now, there will be eight years of forensic investigations and ill-feeling towards FIFA.

The controversy surrounding the bidding process reflected FIFA’s attempt to remain above the law. It was reported that one of the requests made the English bid was for all imports and exports (including currencies like euros, dollars and pounds) concerning FIFA not to be taxed. Such a troubling request is one the coalition government may have been unwilling to acquiesce (though you can never be sure with them!) The FIFA demand that national governments do not interfere with the football matters in their respective countries is another questionable rule that essentially covers FIFA officials from external corruption charges and means they are only held accountable by FIFA’s internal disciplinary committee. Therefore it was a baffling exercise splashed with irony to see current and former world leaders like David Cameron and Bill Clinton take part in this pathetic charade when really they shouldn’t be interfering in football matters.

There are huge issues concerning Russia and Qatar’s bids, given that both came under scrutiny in FIFA’s technical reports. Russia’s football society is one where racism is rife, but naturally, racism ‘is not an operational matter’ for FIFA. Maybe they should pass that memo onto the African qualifiers, given such despicable behaviour was most recently exhibited at a Lokomotiv Moscow game in the form of a banner with the words ‘Thank You West Brom’, accompanied with the obligatory banana with racist connotations in reference to the out-going transfer of Nigerian striker Peter Odemwingie.

The infrastructure will definitely be in place in time, given the reported $50 billion spending budget though one also questions the logistics of holding a World Cup tournament in a nation with nine time zones. There is no question Russia will hold a successful World Cup commercially, while the social problems could also be broken down, as Blatter suggests through the ‘healing power’ of football.

Qatar, meanwhile, could struggle to cope with the population flux that comes with hosting a World Cup, given its tiny population relative to previous hosts. The computer-generated images of the prospective stadiums look awe-inspiring but could become ‘White Elephants’ in the post-World Cup years, given most of their capacities (bar the ones in Doha and Al-Rayyan) are likely to exceed the populations of the towns in which they are to be built.

Furthermore, if Israel manages to qualify there could be strong tension, for the two nations broke off all diplomatic relations recently. With FIFA, the epitome of Western ideology via its scrupulous money-making machine, there could be a culture clash, especially in terms of the mass advertising FIFA’s sponsors require. Though Qatar is one of the more liberal Middle East states, mass advertising of Budweiser may not go down too well.

Accusations of corruption and oil money are now likely to fly for the next eight years, and FIFA definitely deserve to be held accountable, but this seems very unlikely, given that all nations play the ‘sycophancy’ game, with sport a powerful political tool for most governments. It explains why the list of honours awarded to Sepp Blatter (on his Wikipedia page – now locked due to vandalism, in case you were wondering) is so long.

But one thing that is unacceptable is the advocation of blatant stereotypes concerning Russia and Qatar, given that it has xenophobic undertones. This is already starting, with criticisms of Qatar including religion, women and speculation on the likelihood of terrorist attacks. This was particularly evident in one media outlet as (on the 3^rd of December) The Daily Mirror front page described the Gulf state as a ‘medieval kingdom with no freedom of speech’, while attacking Russia as a ‘mafia state rotten to the core with corruption’ (perhaps trying to exploit fears expressed after the recent Wikileaks release).

There are valid criticisms of Blatter and FIFA and the selection of these two nations as hosts, but English frustrations must not be converted into xenophobic attacks, or else we will lose whatever moral high ground we can still claim.

The sixth annual Battle of Ideas festival was held at the Royal College of Art last weekend, as hundreds of intellectuals gathered to debate various issues concerning world society from the ownership of Greek artefacts to that of football clubs. One that caught the eye was the question of cheating in sport as several personalities, including The Times’ Matthew Syed, tackled this notion from a plethora of perspectives – social, historical, cultural etc.

Cheating seems to be embedded in human culture. One of the first mentions of cheating was in Homer’s Iliad as Menelaus accused Antilochus of cheating in a chariot race at the funeral games of Patroklos. It seems to have been around for the entirety of recorded history. The sports that dominate the back pages of newspapers these days were nearly all created during the height of the British Empire. The term ‘sportsmanship’, a Victorian term, is a gendered notion that seems to suggest strong patriarchal values of having a ‘stiff upper lip’ and playing fairly.

But the classical notion of sport as a civilising act has been long dead according to Amol Rajan, deputy comment editor for the Independent. He reflected on what he calls the traditional ‘Shearer defence’ with reference to the now infamous Luis Suarez handball that prevented a winning goal in the final minutes of extra-time of the World Cup quarter-final versus Ghana. The BBC’s banal ‘pundit’ Alan Shearer said at the time that anyone would have done it at the time – a piece of ‘analysis’ that rung intellectually and ethically hollow, according to Rajan. Is hyper-competitiveness so natural to us that we will attempt to win by any means necessary?  Can Suarez’s actions be defended because it was an instinctive act of cheating and not a premeditated action?

After all, he was sent off in accordance to the rules - Rules, which do not allow retrospective punishment or allow deliberate handballs on the goal-line to be awarded with a goal rather than a penalty that could be missed. But that is an issue with the governing bodies of such sports who write the rules or ‘laws’, if you’re referring to cricket. There will always be instances of brinksmanship in relation to the rules until retrospective punishment via video technology is introduced.

Dr. Debanjan Chakrabarti provided the perspective of the fan and the amateur sportsman. He noticed that cheating and deliberate breaking of the rules was ‘far more common in the amateur game than in the professional one, but worse when an amateur plays a professional’. One can testify to this. In a five-a-side game last year, this writer’s team had a clear goal-scoring opportunity wiped out by a deliberate handball by the opposition goalkeeper, who had rushed out several feet past his area. The goalkeeper also happened to be an executive committee member of the five-a-side society, who offered a free-kick, when the rules state a red card should be awarded.

Given that the games are self-regulated, and that we were winning, it was not so significant. But when the authority deliberately bends the rules in the game it is supposed to be running with impartiality, it typifies the hypocrisy that is imbued in the British psyche about playing the game ‘fairly’. The tabloids saturate their sport campaigns with this Victorian ideology, often with xenophobic undertones. An example of this was the Daily Mail’s campaign against diving after then-Arsenal striker Eduardo’s dive against Celtic.

The middle-market tabloid often displays nationalist tendencies and this was once again evident as only foreign players were ‘named and shamed’. The star-fish dives of Steven Gerrard or the comically inept tumbles by Ashley Young and Wayne Rooney were conveniently ignored to suit the paper’s agenda. This propaganda eventually is converted into belief, at least in the minds of the moronic English players, who believe that they possess the traits apparently attributed to an Englishman of being ‘honest, passionate and brave’ and consequently believe that they do not cheat.

In other cultures, gamesmanship is commonly accepted as the norm and deceiving the referee is acceptable. You are congratulated for fooling the officials with a dive, and the referee, not the cheating player, is the one who is lambasted. This unspoken convention with regards to the rules is a common sight in Spain’s La Liga along with leagues where the Latin culture is the predominant one. 

Spain’s national team is currently the best in the world, having won the 2010 World Cup in South Africa, but despite their obvious technical superiority, they still felt the need to take every possible advantage, with players like Sergio Busquets and Fernando Torres exaggerating contact from the lightest of challenges. It could be argued that they received their karmic retribution at the hands of Nigel De Jong and Mark Van Bommel in the final, but would they feel their victory was tainted by frequent acts of cheating?

Not a chance. But it was their talent that won out in the end, for as Matthew Syed suggests, “There is no real correlation between success and bending the rules”. Syed, a triple Commonwealth table-tennis champion, provided an anecdote concerning a former coach of his, who said one had to ‘play nasty’ (and by any means necessary) to win – a total myth. So to say that sport is a branch of social Darwinism is wide of the mark.

Syed mentioned that “social disapproval is an important tool in stopping cheating” but conceded that this is unlikely to happen because of the partisanship that runs throughout sport, with fans likely to boo an opposition player for an act of cheating but unwilling to condemn their own in a similar situation. Sadly, given that we are all flawed beings, there is never likely to be a combined sporting society voicing its disapproval against cheating, simply because there is no moral imperative in sport.

Society imposes the role of the ‘role model’ on the sportsman. We expect these athletes to act as highly moral beings in every aspect of their lives, more so, because of the celebrity status placed upon them by saturated media coverage. The financial rewards are now so great that we cannot expect sportsmen and women to play sport just for its value, because the rewards are essentially the incentives to cheat. It’s a depressing state of affairs and Amol Rajan’s idealistic criticism of Alan Shearer seems Victorian in itself.

So would anyone have done what Luis Suarez did, or is human society still moral enough to prove Alan bleedin’ Shearer wrong?

Other than Arsene Wenger, no other manager has a greater influence on the philosophy and identity of his team’s style of play – this is Zdenek Zeman. He is the coach with a strong attacking philosophy, yet he works in a country where catenaccio was founded. He has an honours degree in physical education and is the son of a doctor but has chain-smoked for most of his life. Such contrasts have defined Zeman’s career. His style is Italian football’s version of Wengerball – but they call it Zemanlandia.

Zeman’s unlikely start in Italy came about because of political upheaval in his native Czechoslovakia. In the dead of the night of the 20^th August 1968, the Warsaw Pact sent hundreds of thousands of soldiers across the Czechoslovakian border to halt the liberalization reforms attempted by Alexander Dubček’s government. The USSR foreign policy of halting any move towards capitalism by a socialist neighbouring country was in full flow as 500 Czechoslovaks were wounded and a 108 more killed.

At the time, the young Zeman was in Italy, visiting his uncle Cestmír Vycapálek in Sicily. It was eventually decided that prospects were bleak for Zeman in Czechslovakia so he went back to live with his uncle. Zeman had studied physical education in Prague, while playing volleyball and handball as a youth international. But sport in Italy meant only one thing – football.

At the time, Italian football did not permit sides to play foreigners. So Zeman coached various amateur sides while studying to complete his degree at the University of Palermo, despite speaking extremely limited Italian. It was enough to land him a coaching role with Palermo’s youth academy. The potential was starting to emerge despite the limitations of his new job:

“We had nothing. No pitch, no balls, no kit…we bought those cheap rubber balls that always got holes in them. Nevertheless, we worked hard. In nine years at Palermo, 60 players went on to become professionals. Sixty…”

Zeman graduated from University in 1975, and obtained his coaching license from Coverciano in 1979, where his classmates included one Arrigo Saachi. Saachi wrote a thesis on aggressive zones, high defensive lines and pressing – the blueprints of his great AC Milan side. Zeman, on the other hand, focussed on the short, triangular passing game that became his trademark at Foggia.

Zeman’s hard work got him his first managerial role in 1983 with Licata, newcomers who had only joined the professional ranks a year earlier. Naturally, Zeman won the Serie C2 title with a side of youth team products. It wasn’t the players or the results that caught the eye, but the attacking tactics in a country with a strong defensive mentality. It was the makings of the modern 4-3-3. Football writer Gabriele Marcotti said of the formation:

“At a time when almost every side in Italy played with two man-markers and a  sweeper, Zeman devised a back four that marked zonally, with defenders lining up in a half-moon shape, the full-backs a few steps ahead of the two stoppers. The three-man midfield featured a deep-lying playmaker, whose main task was to receive the ball and get rid of it as quickly as possible, deciding in a split-second  which way to build the play.

The other two midfielders, who sat either side, had clearly defined jobs. Their priority was to communicate with the full-backs when they progressed up the flanks, but either could burst into the box to give more manpower or sprint into a wing position. The front three was not a traditional combination of target man and wingers. All three were genuine strikers, and the wide men were charged with dragging full-backs out of position or flooding the box.”

After Licata, there were a few years of club-hopping, but not without its results. Zeman had his first stint at Foggia in the season of 1986-87 but was fired before the season’s conclusion - this was followed by a seven-match spell at Parma. It was at Messina in 1988-89, where the 23 goals of Salvatore Schillaci led the side to an 8^th place finish. The striker’s six-goal haul at Italia 90 was something perhaps only Zeman could have foreseen.

Pasquale Casillo, the Neopolitan chairman of Foggia, had regretted his rash decision to fire Zeman previously, and so re-hired him in the summer of ’89 along with Peppino Pavone, a director of sport with a keen scouting eye. The side were newly promoted to Serie B, and Zeman got them promoted to Serie A in just his second season. They finished 6 points clear at the top and scored 15 more goals than any other side.

This was followed by an easy 9^th place finish in Serie A, with his front line of Beppe Signori, Ciccio Baiano and Roberto Rambaudi scoring 36 goals. They had the second-best attack in Italy, scoring 58 goals, with only Capello’s Milan scoring more. Zeman’s dazzling style was epitomised by the fact that they also conceded 58 goals. They called it Foggia dei Miracoli (the Miracle of Foggia).

With the help of Pavone, Zeman acquired eventual Foggia legends in Luigi di Biagio, Igor Shalimov, José Antonio Chamot, Dan Petrescu and Igor Kolyvanov along with the trio of aforementioned strikers. Zeman improved these players greatly through his training sessions based on ice hockey, where three or four players repeat variations of passing and movement based on game situations.

The length and intensity of Zeman’s training his famous, and with fitness such an important aspect of football, naturally Zeman doesn’t employ a specialist. He prefers to conduct every aspect of training himself, much like how Arsene Wenger operates at Arsenal. Due to such training methods, Zeman managed to bring levels out of players that they didn’t know they had.

For example, Beppe Signori was moved from left midfield to striker. He then proceeded to score 14 in his first year at Foggia, before hitting 26 in his debut season at Lazio. Before Zdenek Zeman, Signori struggled to score more than five in a season. If teams and players were willing to accept the philosophy of Zeman, it seemed they could only profit from his management.

Then, it seemed to prove a point, Foggia sold six starters in 1992 after two campaigns finishing mid-table comfortably. Zeman signed a number of players from the lower leagues and guided the team to safety in the following two seasons. The club was beset with financial problems as Zeman left in 1994 for Lazio to reunite with former pupil Beppe Signori.

There he took the Roman club to 2^nd and 3^rd placed finishes with attacking football once again. He also handed first-team opportunities to a young Alessandro Nesta. Supporters protested against his sacking midway through the 1996/97 season, and their pain was to be amplified as Zeman took a job at bitter rivals AS Roma. He managed to finish 4^th and 5^th in two seasons before he was replaced with Fabio Capello in 1999.

Zeman is also credited with the development of Francesco Totti at Roma, by placing him on a fitness regime to improve his physique and stamina. The improvements were evident as Totti scored 13 in his first year under Zeman’s tutelage, a stark contrast to the 5 goals he managed in the previous campaign.

After Roma, it was expected he would join another big Italian side, but Zeman took the nomadic route – in Turkey with Fenerbahce. That lasted a mere three months before short stints at Napoli and Salernitana.

There was an unsuccessful reunion with Casillo and Pavone at Avellino in 2003 before another high at Lecce in 2004/05 where he led the team on a rollercoaster of a season. They missed out on being Serie A’s top-scorers by one goal but the attacking style of play meant they only secured their safety on the final day of the season. But Zeman rejects criticism that his side cannot defend:

“They say my teams can’t defend. That isn’t true. At Lazio one season, we conceded the fewest goals in Serie A. But it’s equally true that the players I like would rather attack than defend. I encourage that, because attacking is positive and more difficult than simply defending and destroying.”

Zeman has made many enemies throughout his time in Italy – including Luciano Moggi, the former Juventus sporting director (now banned for life because of corruption). Zeman claimed there was strong pharmaceutical abuse by Juventus throughout the 90s, but was later proven to be incorrect by the Court of Arbitration for Sport. His nose for corruption was not far off, with both Juventus and Milan eventually implicated in the 2006 Calciopoli scandal. Such an outspoken attitude has been given as a reason as to why Zeman hasn’t coached one of the big Northern clubs, although Inter owner Massimo Moratti admitted he had considered the Czech coach as Jose Mourinho’s replacement.

In the summer of 2010, Pasquale Casillo reacquired Foggia, reuniting Pavone and Zeman after seven years. Memories of the great Foggia side of the past have been stirred as Foggia fans start to dream of this triumvirate leading them back to the glory days. But football has changed greatly, with increasing commercialism, so it would be unrealistic to hope for a Foggia renaissance, but stranger things have happened.

At the time of writing, Foggia lies 3^rd in Lega Pro 1 – Girona B (formerly Serie C1). The sense of adventure is still there. After all, they’ve already lost 5-3 and drawn 4-4, scoring twice in each of their three victories so far. Zemanlandia is back where it belongs.