Bleacher Report - Articles by Steven Ho

A History Lesson for Those Who Think £30m Is Too Much for Carlos Tevez

Steven Ho — Fri, 01 May 2009 12:04:24 -0400

Despite being the best player on the pitch and having a blistering first 45 minutes against Arsenal, Carlos Tevez left the pitch for Dimitar Berbatov on the hour mark against Arsenal in the Champions League on Wednesday.

Applauding the crowd, he left the pitch suggestively shaking his head, and has since come out saying that his future looks almost certain to be away from Old Trafford:

"Yes it's true I see myself more leaving United than staying here," he admitted.

"I need continuity in the team to offer my best. If this doesn't happen I believe this will be my last year."

The £30m price tag hanging over Tevez seems to be the obstacle preventing United from signing him. But is it really too much for a player of Tevez's proven quality?

A reminder of Tevez's history might provide some perspective as to what United will be actually be purchasing for £30m:

Tevez was a winner with his very first club, Boca Juniors, arguably one of the best teams in the world, playing in an Argentine league that arguably has been exporting the best players in the world, to all leagues (English, Spanish, Italian, German, etc).

Not only did Tevez help them win the domestic championship but they also won three international cups with him—the Intercontinental in 2003, the Libertadores 2003 (Champions League for S. America), where he also won the MVP, and Copa Sudamericana in 2004.

Then he goes to Corinthians in Brazil, a team that was not one of the better teams there at the time. And yet Tevez also manages to win trophies with them, and earns best player of year.

Keep in mind that this is an Argentinian player going to Brazil, in an unfavorable move publicly. The Brazilian president even expressed his displeasure of Tevez coming over in a one of the biggest deals in South American club history.

Despite that, Tevez worked his way into becoming a fan favorite, team captain, and star of the team. He ended up winning the fan favorite award in 2005.

Imagine that, for an Argentinian player to do this in Brazil is masterful. It's hard to explain the magnitude of this.

He also won South American Footballer of Year in 2003, 2004, 2005. You cannot disregard the high level of football in Argentina and Brazil, and many would put them up against the best any day.

The point is, this is not a player coming from the MLS, he has been succeeding in proven leagues. Even Maradona only won the South American Footballer of the Year award twice in his time, and Pele only once.

No, I'm not saying Tevez is better than those two, but hopefully it'll help people appreciate how much of an achievement it is that Tevez managed to win the award not only THREE times, but three years in a row.

After Corinthians, Tevez finds himself at West Ham, where the coach decides to not really play him at first. When the coach finally did, Tevez single-handedly kept them from getting relegated.

He then transferred to Man United and is a big part of them winning everything they won last year, which is no secret. And yet since Berbatov's arrival at the beginning of the season Ferguson is limiting his playing time.

Tevez is proven, and continues to prove himself every year on the pitch, and with every team he touches. I know it's never about what a player has done in the past, and it's about what-have-you-done-for-me-lately, as in most sports, but let's be honest here: Tevez has not been getting his fair share this year, and every time he does get a chance, like against Arsenal on Wednesday, he comes through like the champion and winning player that he is.

Does £30m still sound too much?

p.s. By the way, there's a petition going round for United fans to show how much they want the club to sign Tevez.

If you think this article is good or the content message worth spreading feel free to pass it on to your friends.

My Reaction to the United-Tottenham Match

Steven Ho — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 14:57:39 -0400

Needless to say, but great comeback from United.

First of all, the penalty. It's not as shocking as it's been made out to be by some people. It was probably the wrong decision, but it's not as clear cut as it's been made out and you can understand how Howard made the mistake.

It's not as if Gomes clearly deflected the ball's path, which would've made it obvious that he made contact with the ball. From Howard's angle it looked like Carrick got to the ball first (which he did) and then Gomes tripped him.

The reason why the decision has been highlighted and blown up so much is clearly because of it's implication to the match (and probably the league) overall, not because of the decision itself.

The real point that needs reminding is how silly it is that, at this level of professional football, matches are not decided between two football teams as it should be, but between two teams and a referee. The referee has become as important to the outcome of a match as any player on the pitch. Can you ever imagine this being so in, say, Tennis?

The penalty changed the game, no doubt about it, but it was actually Tottenham's abysmal defending that was responsible for most of United goals, rather than outstanding play from United. Corluka's tactical positioning in particular, for Tottenham, was very lethargic and contributed significantly to conceding two of the goals.

United showed the determination of champions though, so in my eyes they earned the victory, despite having major help from Tottenham.

A special mention must go to Carlos Tevez, who was inspirational, and yet again proved to everybody what a great player he is, especially in regards to linking up play. Some people will continue to underrate him, but I think it says a lot that nearly every United fan wants him to stay.

Also, Rooney showed real consistent quality again throughout the match. This season he's really stepped up a level, and from someone who has always thought he's very, very overrated I've been impressed with his improvement, especially in regards to his decision making.

The fact that he played on the left wing yesterday and yet still managed to produce a great performance is evidence that he's become a lot better in terms of tactical awareness.

For me, Rooney is now finally showing signs of becoming a truly top class player and hopefully he will go on to fulfill the hype that surrounds him, both for United and England.

And, finally, well done to Ronaldo, for scoring when it matters. His two goals were pretty simple, and yet again he was nowhere near outstanding for the rest of the match, but combined with the recent matches against Aston Villa and Porto, he's starting to develop a great habit of scoring when his team really needs him, which is a major improvement of before.

Liverpool fans must be devastated, and cries of United being "the comeback kings" is a bit of an insult considering THAT match against Chelsea, but the title race could still change with one match and it's probable that there are still twists to come.

Bring on the Champions League and next weekend!

Cristiano Ronaldo Chokes Yet Again: Is Anybody REALLY Surprised?

Steven Ho — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 16:24:12 -0400

It's the first knockout round of the Champions League in 2005. Man United are at home, playing against AC Milan. The score is 0-0, and tellingly there is a cry blasting around the stadium: "Ruud! Ruud! Ruud!"

The fans are calling for Cristiano Ronaldo to be replaced with Ruud Van Nistelrooy. Ronaldo is being easily marked out of the game by Milan's defense. A couple of hopeful long range shots is the best he can produce.

In the 63rd minute, the crowd get their wish and he is subbed for Nistelrooy.

Cristiano Ronaldo doesn't deliver in yet another big game.

Same Old Story

Milan eventually won the game 1-0 and progressed to the quarterfinals. Alex Ferguson, Ronaldo's manager, later labelled Ronaldo's performance as "immature."

And after four years, a Fifa World Player of The Year award, a Ballon D'or, and 43 goals in 52 games, for Ronaldo some things haven't changed.

Portgual played Sweden last Saturday in what was described by Ronaldo himself as a "must win" game. Before the game, all hopes were pinned on him. As the current official best player in the world, he was expected to make the difference.

During the game, though, Ronaldo missed a host of chances, including a free header from 3 yards in the dying minutes of the game.

The score ended 0-0, and has left Portugal's World Cup 2010 qualification in jeopardy.

Four years on from that game against Milan, and Ronaldo doesn't deliver when it really matters, yet again.

Here Come the Excuses

Predictably, Ronaldo defenders have played it down, moaning that while his finishing was poor, so was the finishing of the rest of the team.

This strikes me as just avoiding the fact that he didn't produce.

Ronaldo was expected to make the difference. Deflecting the responsibility to other players is cowardly and besides the point. Ronaldo, the individual, did not play well or make decisive contributions. It doesn't matter how well or bad the other players played.

Ronaldo defenders used the same deflection tactic after the recent match against Liverpool, one of United's biggest game this season so far, where players like Steven Gerrard and Fernando Torres (who finished third to Ronaldo in last year's Fifa World Player of The Year votes) did produce.

And they used the same tactic again after the following week against Fulham, where he missed another free header from 5 yards.

And again after the recent friendly against Brazil, where his team lost 6-2 and he didn't score one goal.

And last summer when he completely flopped in Euro 2008.

And last April 2008 in the semifinals of the Champions League against Barcelona, where a 20-year-old Lionel Messi was the best player on the pitch, and completely outshone Ronaldo.

And in 2007 in the semis against AC Milan, where that time Kaka outshone him.

And in 2006 where he got knocked out of the World Cup by Zinedine Zidane's France.

And earlier in 2006 where he missed the golden chance to score to prevent United being knocked out of the Champions League at the group stages by Benifca.

And in 2005 in the first knockout round of the Champions League against AC Milan again, where he was a no-show and was taken off after cries for his substitution from his own fans.

And in the Euro 2004 final, where he couldn't produce against Greece.

These games I've listed are not just random games, cherry picked for an agenda. Look carefully and you'll realise that they are a near exhaustive list of all the truly biggest games of each season that Ronaldo has played for United.

All throughout Ronaldo's career there has been a refusal by some to simply admit Ronaldo's ineptitude.

Instead there's just been excuses after excuses.

Isn't everybody tired yet of hearing "it's just a one-off game," or "it's someone else's fault," or "he was marked out of the game" (is this an excuse or an acknowledgement), or hear them point to other goals he's scored in other matches?

Should We Be Surprised?

The very best players force the issue at the right times. They do it against the best. They shine when it matters most. That's what makes them the best. Kaka in 2007, Messi in 2008, Gerrard and Torres two weeks ago. Those are the calibre of players Ronaldo's supposed to be equal to. Those are the performances that he's purported to have eclipsed.

Alex Ferguson once said that he saw Ronaldo as a combination of Pele, Diego Maradona, and George Best. Ronaldo, never one to hide his arrogance, has himeslf been reported to say that he thinks he's the "first, second, and third best player in the world."

Yet Ronaldo has shown time and time again that he is invariably incapable of giving great performances, of forcing the issue, of delivering when it matters most, and in situations when his team needs him the most.

That's why after the Sweden match finished I was not the slightest bit surprised that Ronaldo choked against an Ibrahimovich-less Sweden side.

And considering his career so far, should anybody be?

Update: as usual, a lot of people (mostly Ronaldo fans) have evidently shown that they either haven't read the article or they can't understand the argument, as nearly all their replies can be addressed using this paragraph in the article:

"How many more times are we gonna hear that it's just a one-off game, or that it's someone else's fault, or that he was marked out of the game (is this an excuse or an acknowledgement), or hear them point to all the other goals he's scored in other matches? More importantly, how many more times are people going to believe it?"

Future commenters, I know you're smarter than that. Please think before posting.

Bosingwa, The F.A, The Linesman, and Mike Riley: The Truth

Steven Ho — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 14:34:33 -0500

"An eye for an eye ends up making the whole world blind." - Mahatma Gandhi.

A lot of confusion has been circulated surrounding exactly how Jose Bosingwa has not been punished for his astonishing attack against Yossi Benayoun in last Sunday's match against Liverpool.

This short article aims to clear it all up and hopefully convince people that the F.A is not being 'inconsistent,' that the linesman was NOT at fault, and that Mike Riley is the real culprit—along with Bosingwa, of course.

For those who missed the incident, here's a video of it. As you will see, Bosingwa clearly and deliberately attacked Benayoun, putting a boot into his lower back, most probably out of frustration of losing Chelsea's biggest game of the season so far.

The blame has been spread across four main parties, which are individually addressed below:

The Linesman

First up, Mo Matadar, the linesman—or assistant referee, as they are supposed to be called nowadays. Poor guy. He did nothing wrong in Sunday's incident and yet has been chastised by nearly everybody.

"The linesman was right next to Benayoun when the challenge came in and (yet) he waved his flag for a goal kick, completely ignoring what had just taken place".

"The FA cannot charge Bosingwa because the assistant referee saw it and let it go."

"I think another thing that needs to be looked at is the eye-sight of the linesman. How did he not see Bosingwa's attack?"

All of the above are unfortunately completely untrue.

Have a look at the incident again, focusing on the Mo this time. He waves his flag frantically the instant after Bosingwa knocks Benayoun over.

To be completely honest, this should be enough evidence for the common sense to kick in and tell oneself that he did recognise the foul.

But if you need more proof, you only need to look at the following diagram to see what Mo's actions really meant:

Uploaded with plasq's Skitch!

So, in other words: Mo Matadar did not simply ignore the incident and wave for a goal kick. He clearly recognised the violent conduct and waved his flag frantically to call the attention of the referee. He did his job.

The Truth: referee Mike Riley overruled him. Therefore he should not be subjected to blame.

Apparently, he has been demoted to officiating in a League Two match for his next game. I don't know whether he's actually been demoted or whether it was just his next fixture, but it's a shamble the way he has been misreported.

(However, if you do want to see an amazingly short sighted linesman, jump across to here.)

The F.A.

Now I'm not normally one to defend the F.A., but in this case I think they've been hard done by. The general consensus is that they've simply ignored the incident, and are being inconsistent after charging Shaun Wright Phillips for violent conduct after a video review.

"Amazingly, after an apparent review of the incident, it was decided that no further action would be taken due to an obscure rule."

"Wright-Phillips deserves to be charged as he retaliated and in the laws of the game, he deserved a red card, but then surely so does Chelsea's Bosingwa?"

"Why can Lampard have his red card rescinded? The referee saw that and he gave a red card."

"[The message the F.A are sending out] is that an intentional kick with studs into the back of a player is perfectly acceptable behaviour."

If there's one thing I would guarantee with my life, it would be that the F.A. does not condone Bosingwa's tackle. It's merely a loophole that has allowed Bosingwa to get away with no punishment.

An F.A. statement was released, in response to Bosingwa decision, which stated: "Under the FIFA Laws of the Game, The F.A. is prohibited from taking disciplinary action when incidents are seen at the time by the match officials."

As we've established above, the linesman did see the incident. A referee has to file a post match report—and, indeed, Mike Riley confirmed in his post match report that the linesman did see the incident.

Thus there can be no other conclusions besides Mike Riley, the referee, to everyone's astonishment, overruled the decision.

The F.A. did not review the incident and then decide it was okay. The F.A. could not review the incident. It's an important distinction to make: it's not they didn't want to do anything about it, they couldn't.

And what about Wright Phillips and Frank Lampard?

The reason Shaun Wright Phillips was later charged with violent conduct is because in his match the referee, Martin Atkinson, and his officials did not see the incident. Therefore it was technically valid for a review.

"Having now watched video footage of the incident, Atkinson has informed The FA that, had he seen it at the time, he would have shown Wright-Phillips a red card for violent conduct," the FA said in a statement on Wednesday.

Mike Riley did see Lampard's incident but the key is in the F.A quote above. They can't take "disciplinary action" if an incident is seen in the game by the referees. But players are allowed to appeal their red cards, and get them rescinded if there was a mistake, which is not classified as 'disciplinary' action, and thus is why Lampard got his one rescinded.

The Truth: What has happened is technically correct; no laws have been broken and thus the decision is correct.

That is not to say that the rule is correct, just that the decision and outcome is technically valid.

Indeed it's imperative that the rule must be reviewed so that this doesn't happen again. The rule is designed to give full trust and responsibility to the referee, to not second guess his decisions (which is understandable in some sense; if they decide to overrule him on one they could review every one of his decisions in a match) but this is clearly a loophole.

For now though, it's unfair to say that they are simply ignoring the incident and being inconsistent with their own laws.

(If we take a step back, the larger problem of Bosingwa's let-off is that it just reinforces players unsaid belief that they can get away with anything on the pitch nowadays.

If players like Bosingwa are not even scared of the punishments handed out then what deterrents are red cards and petty fines?

This may be an extreme example but the same principle applies to diving—nearly every player commits it because they know that they are likely to get away with, at worst, a yellow card and a few boos, which is an insignificant cost when the reward is likely to be a penalty to win a match, or even a World Cup.)

Mike Riley & Jose Bosingwa

Surprisingly little blame has been placed on the referee and the player who actually committed the foul: Mike Riley and Jose Bosingwa, respectively.

Both were equally stupid in their actions. Bosingwa, for what must be one of the most outrageous show of immaturity that I've ever seen on a football pitch, and Mike Riley, who needs to go to Specsavers (mild adult content).

If we must direct rational blame, rather than rising above it, then we must direct it only at two people: Mike Riley and Jose Bosingwa.

Jose Bosingwa's integrity, in particular, must be criticized. After the match, he apologised but amazingly claimed it was an accident!

"I apologise for what I did and it was never my intention to hurt him."

That was no accident. Whilst I doubt that he actually wanted to cause physical bodily harm to Benayoun, he certainly meant to kick him down.

Scolari's post match interview gave insight to Pinnochio's mind.

He revealed that he asked Bonsingwa about the incident after the match, to which Bosingwa apparently replied that he thought the referee had stopped the game and the player (Benayoun) was not giving the ball back.... which implies that he kicked him in the back in order to get the ball back.

Hm.

Well it's obvious to anyone with their eyes open that this wasn't the case, but if you need a logical argument: if he was trying to get the ball back, why didn't he actually go and get the ball after he kicked the player down, instead of just casually jogging away from the incident like nothing happened? The answer is, of course, that he wasn't trying to get the ball back.

All in all a disappointing performance all round from Bosingwa, who also allowed Fábio Aurélio to put in the cross which lead to Torres' goal unchallenged, which put Liverpool 1-0 up.

Please remember to rate all article and if you like my writing or views please consider becoming a fan.

Frank Lampard To Mike Riley: I Forgive You

Steven Ho — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 15:28:25 -0500

Amid all of the controversy surrounding his red card, I must say I was struck by how well Frank Lampard dealt with the whole situation.

Consider the circumstances: Sunday's away match against Liverpool was Chelsea's biggest game of the season so far. On the hour, with the scores blank, referee Mike Riley decides to send him off for what was a completely fair challenge. Liverpool ends up winning 2-0 and has arguably put Chelsea out of the title race.

I'm wiling to venture that 90 percent or more of today's "professional" players would've gone berserk at the referee if they were on the short end of that decision.

Instead, Lampard just walked off the pitch; albeit in a state of shock, but at least he didn't aggravate the situation further or intimidate the referee.

Today, after it was announced that his red card had been rescinded (meaning he will be available for Chelsea's next three games), his reaction was equally admirable. He is honest yet respectful of Mike Riley and indeed referees on the whole.

"I presumed it would be rescinded anyway," Lampard told BBC Radio Five Live. "It was obviously a mistake."

"We all make mistakes—footballers make mistakes. I don't want to have a dig at referees because they do a very hard job and I respect them."

He's clearly a bigger man than I am. I probably would've gone at least a little berserk like 90 percent of players would.

Considering the probable implications of the decision, in respect to the outcome of the league, I'd argue that if he'd berated the referee he would've been justified.

But he didn't. Which is why Frank Lampard is an outstanding example of a professional footballer and someone I admire greatly.

Isn't it great when great players also turn out to be great men?

Watch Lampard's reaction here.

Why Dropping Didier Drogba Against Southend Is the Right Decision

Steven Ho — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 10:16:32 -0500

After their capitulation against Man United, Chelsea's first chance to redeem themselves comes in the form of a F.A. Cup third round replay match against Southend tonight.

And Didier Drogba will not be playing.

The Right Decision

Dropping Drogba is the right decision and I'm glad that Scolari isn't too stubborn to realise it now rather than later. Since his return from injury, Drogba has been calling for himself to be put back into the lineup, but when he's been given the chance he hasn't taken it.

His performance against Man United on Sunday was probably the worst performance Drogba has ever put on in his career. He literally didn't do one thing right in the whole match.

Going back to Anelka is the right solution. I've publicly voiced my doubts about Anelka, but I never thought that Drogba would play this bad on his return.

So whilst Anelka may not be the one, later on in the season, to score against the toughest opposition Chelsea have more than enough great players like Lampard, Deco, and Ballack to rely on making the difference (although the latter two had a very disappointing game too on Sunday).

It's Up To You Now

Scolari is clearly a strong man, not afraid to make big decisions, and it's a good sign for Chelsea fans everywhere that he's recognised the problem and seems to be taking drastic measures to rectify it. It shows a good sign that he's a good manager.

But now, like Scolari said himself, it all depends on how the Chelsea players react to the changes. They looked so despondent on Sunday, really devoid of any energy or inspiration. Even after they were 2-0 down there was no sense of urgency. I've never seen a Chelsea team over the last 5 years play so poorly under pressure.

There's almost no doubt in my mind that the team morale isn't very high. But it can still change, with a few good results, and if they regain their early confidence and drive then they'll definitely still be in contention for all the competitions they are still in.

P.S.: I hope this doesn't sound cocky, but I predicted the problems under pressure (in big games), the defensive problems (especially aerially), Anelka not performing against the best teams (did you see him when he came on—he was playing as a midfielder rather than making runs behind the defense!), and also Obi Mikel (really poor defending and made some errors which could've made the scoreline even greater than it was for Man U).

I even semi-predicted the Drogba thing—saying that it wasn't a guarantee for him to come back and play well, and enhance the team—although I wholly admit that I never expect him to come back in such rotten form.

2008/2009: The Season So Far: Dimitar Berbatov and Carlos Tevez

Steven Ho — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 15:29:14 -0500

In response to Matt S' article, where he questions whether Tevez is worth £32 Million, I made this comment:

"He may be third choice for Alex Ferguson but in my opinion he should be ranked as at least second choice. So far, Berbatov hasn't done anything at all special to indicate that he's going to outperform the Tevez of last season. Tevez, on the other hand, has done well when he's been in the side and scored some important goals... yet again.

He's always shown he can produce the goods when it matters—a very, very rare quality indeed, so the answer to the question is yes, I would definitely pay 32m for him."

Nathan Lowe, who was also commenting on the article, replied to my comment by confidently issuing a challenge:

"Now, Steve, do I have to go back the last 10 matches and tell you every goal that Berbatov was intrinsically involved in the build-up? What about the game-winner against Middlesborough that he scored?

F*** man, you're really gonna make me do this? I have the MOTD highlights. Don't test me.

Reply to this and I'll take an hour to spout all the evidence. Take care."

Challenge accepted.

And since it's now more than half way through the season, as well as accepting Nathan's challenge, it also seems like a good time to review Berbatov and Tevez's performances so far.

Firstly...

In the matches Tevez has played, generally he's done from good to pretty well. And, considering the pressure he's under to fight for his place, he's done extremely well; when he has been given the chance.

In the Carling Cup, where he has been first choice striker, he scored a pressure penalty in the 1-0 win against QPR, and then scored four goals against Blackburn as well as making an assist.

The key thing to note is that the four goals were of his own making too: he battled his way to win a header for his first goal; earned and dispatched a penalty for his second; played a perfect one-two with Anderson, to end a sumptuous move by United, to score his third; and then did this for his fourth.

Tevez has proven that he's still the man for scoring important goals too.

In the first big game of the season, Man Utd v Liverpool, it was, again, Tevez who scored United's only goal in a 2-1 defeat (1:25).

And, more recently, against Stoke, he scored the crucial goal for United in a 1-0 win (6:35). This is arguably his most important goal this season, for if he didn't score that goal United would've been 10 points behind the league leaders rather than only 7, with two games in hand.

On The Other Hand...

Berbatov is slowly improving his effectiveness for United. I certainly don't think he's done bad, but he certainly hasn't been outstanding either.

His first game for United, back in September, was in the 2-1 defeat against Liverpool (the same match where Tevez scored the only goal for United) and, in it, he had very little influence overall to the game.

A week later, in the game Ronaldo announced his comeback with another pathetic dive, he played in the 1-1 draw away to Chelsea. Berbatov main contribution was the shot that directly lead to Ji Sung Park's opening goal. However, for a player of his hype, you probably would've expected him to do better than hit it straight at the keeper. Especially considering the time and space he had.

In the match against Arsenal, in early November, Berbatov was more involved in the game but again had little impact. To a more stricter viewer, you might also say that it was Berbatov's poor clearing header from a corner that directly lead to Arsenal's opening goal (5:55).

In the Manchester Derby, another big match, his only meaningful contribution was a free header inside the box (2:03), which Joe Hart had to stretch to save but, in truth, lacked any real power.

In the Sunderland match, back in early December, United won because of a goal at the death by Nemanja Vidic. However, earlier in that match, Berbatov had a fantastic opportunity to score, another free header inside the box (5:43), but instead put it over the bar. I may be highlighting one miss but it was those kind of chances that Tevez took with both hands last season.

So when it comes to those moments later on in the season, I've yet to be convinced that Berbatov will be the one producing the goods.

Against Tottenham, a week later, where the pressure was on Berabtov for obvious reasons, he underperformed again. The only moment worth mentioning is, early in the second half, he made one semi-threatening run with the ball where he approached the box. Unfortunately, when he got there, he lacked the skill to get away a shot (5:00) or the intelligence to play a simple through ball to Ronaldo who was completely free.

As a comparison, in the same match, Tevez made a great run down the wing into the box, showing good strength and skill, at pace, but unlike Berbatov, he also got a dangerous shot away.

I also noticed that United's dangerous headers in the Tottenham's match were not by Berbatov, but by defenders Vidic (6:13) and Ferdinand (6:46). Berbatov was in the box when the crosses came in—why wasn't he on the end of it?

You could say that the crosses simply fell to the Vidic and Ferdinand, rather than Berbatov. But he's the leading striker. And as a £30m leading striker I would be expecting him, rather than the defenders, to be the one getting at the end of those crosses. By the way, one cross did come Berbatov's way in that match—but he missed his kick (6:40).

Come December we started to see some improvements, but there was still some doubt.

Stoke on Boxing Day. Most United fans will probably remember Berbatov coming on as a second half substitute and crossing the ball for Tevez to score (6:35). I admit, at first glance it did look like he meant to cross the ball to Tevez. But if you consider the position he got himself in (7 yards from goal, at the edge of the 6 yard box) and the fact that his eyes were on the ball all the time (he didn't once look up at Tevez's run into the box) then you'll realise that it's much more likely that he was going for a shot rather than a cross.

But, like I said earlier, he has begun to improve his effectiveness.

Although his cross for Tevez was actually a miss-kick, I don't deny one bit that he played a major part in the goal against Stoke. And, of course, he scored the only and winning goal for United in their last league match, against Middlesborough (7:16).

His confidence is visibly growing too. He may not have scored, or played a major part in the goals scored, in the last FA cup match against Southampton, but he did play some really nice through balls. He also kept the ball well under pressure, and I would say that his overall performance was one of his best so far.

Don't Test Me

However, unlike my friend Nathan claimed, Berbatov's improvement has only been visible in the last three games. Not the last 10.

However, I could be completely wrong. Maybe I'm not seeing things correctly. So go on mate...test me.

You have one hour.

p.s a word of advice: you might wanna look back (link to bbc website) a bit further than 10 matches, because I analysed all 17 matches that Berbatov played in(discounting the ones in the World Club Cup). And except from the ones he scored plus that great bit of skill against West Ham, I did not see Berbatov as the major reason for the goals in those games.

p.p.s here's a starting point: BBC Sport | Football | Man Utd | Results

Update: Interesting poll results. Thanks to those who voted.

I also just wanted to highlight this fantastic comment from Danny below, which really brings to light what an underrated player Tevez is.

"There are some great opinions here and hope i can provide some insight on Tevez.. i'm honest in saying that i have not followed Dimitar Berbatovs career, but can give great insight on Tevez. True, 30+M is a lot for any player, but that is what the market is for players of this type and when you look at what other guys are getting, Tevez truly does deserve that kind of money.

I will say this again, as stated in another post, as most people reading this only have followed Tevez during his time in England.. I feel like we need to take a look at the quality of player we're talking about here. Let's go back a bit.. he won with Boca Juniors, arguably one of the best teams in the world, playing in an Argentine league that arguably has been exporting the best players in the world, to all leagues (English, Spanigh, Italian, German, etc)... not only did they win the championship but they won 3 international cups with Tevez (Intercontinental 2003, Libertadores 2003 won MVP (champions cup for americas), Copa sudamericana 2004)

Then he goes to Corinthians in Brazil, a team that was not one of the better teams there at the time, and wins with them, gets best p[layer of year. He wins South American Footballer of Year in 2003, 2004, 2005. You can not disregard the high level of football in Argentina and Brazil, and i will put them up agains the best any day. this is not a player coming from the MLS, he has been succeeding in proven leagues.

Then he lands at West Ham, where the coach decides to not really play him, and when he finally did, Tevez single handedly kept them from dropping down to B division. He goes to ManU and is a big part of them winning everything they won last year, it's no secret. And now Fergie is limiting his time and not because he is unfit, that's a lie.

Tevez is proven, and continues to prove himself every year on the pitch, and with every team he touches. I know there's a negative sentiment towards Argentinain players in England because they cant get over the Hang of God goal, tough luck, blame the ref for missing the call, not the player. dont be so blind to the type of player he is. It's no question why since he has been in Europe, Tevez has been coveted by tons of teams in Italy, Spain, and others in England.

I know it's never about what a player has done in the past, and its about what-have-you-done-for-me-lately, as in most sports, but let's be honest here, Tevez has not been getting his fair share this year, and everytime he does get a chance he comes through like the champion and winning player that he is.

also, you have to understand something insane. this is an argentinian player going to brazil, in an unfavorable move publicly. the brazilian president even expressed his displeasure of tevez coming over in a one of the biggest deals in south american club history. tevez worked his way into becoming a fan favorite, team captain, and star of the team. he ended up winning the fan favorite award in 2005, imagine that, for an argentinian player to do this in brazil is masterful. it's hard to explain the magnitude of this."

Is Alex Ferguson Lying to Manchester United Fans about Carlos Tevez?

Steven Ho — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 05:40:12 -0500

A few days ago, Carlos Tevez came out publicly to address his pending contract situation with Manchester United in a live interview with Argentinian radio station Radio del Plata.

Essentially, it seems he just wanted to let fans know that he has received no offers from United so far, and that the reason the situation has not been resolved yet is not because of his "crazy demands," as had been reported.

The most interesting part, though, was when he talked about United's response to the situation:

“I don’t like that they [United] are playing with our fans, who show their love to me in each match," said Tevez. "I didn’t like him [Sir Alex Ferguson] saying I didn’t like the offer I was made because neither my agent nor me were given one. I don’t know anything on my future."

Now, we should take into account that these quotes were translated from a live interview (which I haven't been able to locate online), and that there have already been statements that he's been misquoted. So, right now, we can't be absolutely sure that the quotes are as they seem.

But if it was true, I wouldn't be surprised.

In the past I've been suspicious of Ferguson using the press to twist fans' opinions of players that he wants to get rid of. Jaap Stam, David Beckham, Roy Keane, Dwight Yorke, and most recently Ruud van Nistelrooy were all fan-favourites who were known for giving their all to the club. Yet as soon as the manager wanted them out they faced public accusations and were painted as villains.

On the other hand, if Ferguson wants a player to stay he will do everything he can to defend that player's actions, no matter how obvious it is that the player wants to leave and disrupting it is for the team.

Considering Ferguson's status at the club, most fans will believe almost everything he says. And that's always been the case.

But if Tevez does end up leaving the club and the pattern repeats itself yet again, then surely the integrity of Ferguson's words should be placed under doubt.

Who do you believe? Tevez or Sir Alex?

Chelsea: The Problems

Steven Ho — Sun, 04 Jan 2009 07:20:25 -0500

The pressure is on. A few bad results for Chelsea and now the wisdom of their manager, Luiz Phiipe Scolari, is under serious scrutiny. In the league, they've failed to capitalize on several occasions after their rivals dropped seemingly precious points. They've qualified for the knockout stages in Europe but in a much less convincing fashion than expected, considering their scintillating form domestically coupled with a 4-0 thrashing over Bordeaux in their initial European Champions League match.

For me, the first signs of a potential problem was when they surprisingly could only draw 1-1 at home against a Manchester United struggling for form back in late September. Since that match, Chelsea have had three other big tests—Arsenal, Liverpool, Roma—where they've also underachieved. And now, more recently it's starting to affect their performances against so called "lesser teams" as well, managing to only draw against West Ham, Everton, Southend, and Fulham.

DEFENSIVE WORRIES

I first expressed my concerns after the draw against United, where I mentioned observations relating to their defence and attack. One of the things that surprised me was how sloppy Chelsea's defense were at times against United. Sloppy. A term that I don't remember associating with Chelsea's defense under Mourinho's era.

Especially aerially, where they used to dominate, Chelsea seemed fragile; unorganised. That was only one match but it seems to have been a recurring feature in their matches ever since. Watching their games, there are definitely more panic situations, where they scramble to get the ball clear, than there used to be. In their most recent match, against Southend in the F.A. Cup, they again conceded a goal after first heading a poor "clearance" (it went backwards TOWARDS goal) and then allowed the goalscorer to head the ball completely unchallenged, despite being surrounded by three Chelsea players.

Whilst the attacking side of Chelsea has been brilliant so far, the more hesitant and uneasy they feel at the back, the more that the attacking side of the game will diminish in fear of conceding a goal, like the one at Southend.

Chelsea have had one of the best defenses for the last few years, so why all of a sudden this season are they conceding such sloppy goals? The Terry-Carvalho partnership, which has been the bedrock of Chelsea's defence, has been severely disrupted this season so far, due to injuries to both players and is probably a very likely explanation for the defensive concerns.

However, could it also be related to the manager's prior experience? Brazil and Portugal, the two teams that Scolari managed prior to his appointment at Chelsea, arguably owe their success under his tenure more to the fact that they had an fantastic array of attacking talent than their defensive organisation. An enduring example was in the World Cup 2002 when, literally straight after kick off, the two Brazilian full backs (Roberto Carlos and Cafu) bombed straight down the wing as if they were playing in the attacking winger's position!

This is not to suggest that Scolari doesn't value defense. From what I've read, when Scolari took over as Brazil coach his immediate agenda was to sort the Brazilian defence. So maybe he's placing the same emphasis on defense at Chelsea.

There's no way to be sure. But if he is, based on the matches they've played so far, I'm not so sure he can execute it as well as Mourinho could and did. Time will tell. I hope they do because if they could get back their defense of the last few years and couple that with the new Brazilian style attack they'd truly be a fearsome team.

THE ANELKA-DROGBA DILEMMA

Another concern I had after watching them draw against United was to do with Nicolas Anelka.

I think it's fair to say that so far this season Anelka has exceeded everybody's expectations in terms of goals scored. But in the United match and several other big games he's been all to easily neutralized. Look closer at his goals this season and you will notice that he's been the end-point man at most of Chelsea's TEAM attacks, and his finishes have all been relatively simple. Against the bigger teams, where he's only been getting one or two half chances in a game, his finishing has been poor and arguably costly.

Now that Drogba's returned from injury, of course, there's an interesting dilemma for Scolari. Whilst Anelka has not performed well in the big games so far, he's been doing his job of scoring goals and you can see that as his confidence grows his finishing becomes more clinical (compare his hat trick against Sunderland to his two goals against West Brom) which suggests that he has the potential to reach another level. By re-introducing Drogba to the team, Scolari brings in a striker who is, on the whole, a better striker than Anelka but risks denting Anelka's confidence and thus stunting his growth into a much better player.

Also, by no means is the reintroduction of Drogba a guarantee for success. When a player comes back to the team from injury with the expectation to do well, he often fails to do so. Whether it's to do with the added pressure of expectation, or the fact that he's still recovering from his injury, or whether it's a change and thus disruption of the team's usual play, there's a lot that can, and often does, go wrong. Drogba certainly hasn't been at his deadliest since his return. In his last match in the FA Cup against Southend, he produced some really poor finishes that were the sign of a player far from the top of his game.

Whilst Chelsea's passing style and talented individuals means that the threat can come from anywhere, not just the strikers, in the bigger games later on in the season I'm still not sure that Anelka will be able to make the key difference. And if Drogba can't recall his best form in time, then they'll be relying on their star midfielders such as Frank Lampard to produce the goods when it really matters.

HAVE A LITTLE FAITH

I suggested that Scolari's faith in Anelka might've costed him some matches at the expense of developing Anelka's ability, but it's not only Anelka that seems to warrant Scolari's faith and also cost Chelsea results. Some have recognised this and suggested that Deco or Ballack are the ones who deserve to be cut, but I don't agree. Whilst Ballack has been disappointing in his time at Chelsea, and Deco has somewhat faded recently, they've shown time and time again that they are world class players who can produce at the highest level. Their B game is usually on par with most players A games. Instead, I believe that it's players like Essien and Jon Obi Mikel who need to be reviewed.

Both of these players are direct replacements for the defensive midfielder/holding midfielder role once so successfully covered by Claude Makelele, who left in the summer for P.S.G.

Essien may be a controversial pick for some and, granted, has been injured all season so far. But as usual when a few results go awry people immediately look to the players who are not playing as a solution, and some believe that Essien will be the key to Chelsea's revival. But there are several reasons why I don't see Essien as the reason or a solution for Chelsea's recent struggles.

First of all, he was missing for most of the first couple of months when Chelsea were playing absolutely fantastic. In fact, the first league match they played was against Portsmouth, and they won 4-0 with Essien out of the team. The two following games were against Wigan and Tottenham where they could only scrape a 1-0 win and a 1-1 draw respectively, with Essien IN the team. The next match Essien was injured and without him in the team they started to record significant win margins again (Man City 1-3 Chelsea, Chelsea 4-0 Bordeaux, Portsmouth 0-4 Chelsea etc) which continued for around two months.

Of course Essien might've just been unlucky to play in the two matches that Chelsea could only manage a one goal win and a draw, but considering that he didn't play great in those two matches I think that the hard evidence so far points to Essien NOT being the major missing link that everyone is expecting him to be.

Second reason why I don't see Essien as the key is because he doesn't solve the two main problems I've mentioned so far, of performing in big games and plugging the defensive hole. Essien's poor performance in the Champions League Final last season was an exemplary example of how poor he can be defensively in a big game. Although he was playing as right back, it doesn't excuse the fact that he was at fault for the goal and that he was generally poor defensively. In fact, he was struggling so bad that Joe Cole, an attacking midfielder, later came into the right back position and dealt with Ronaldo far more effectively than Essien had done throughout the whole match.

More recently though, Jon Obi Mikel was the clear culprit in Chelsea's 3-1 away defeat against Roma. Chelsea dominated play and chances in that match, and in fact played pretty well without scoring, but three mistakes by Mikel ensured that Chelsea were always on the back foot, and made it almost impossible to recover.

The first goal that they conceded in that game may have ultimately been down to miscommunication between Terry and Lampard, but it originated from a cheap freekick inside their own half that Deco was forced to concede after Mikel played a very poor return pass to him. Before that, Roma hardly managed to mount an attack as Chelsea powered several shots at Roma's keeper.

For the second goal, just as Chelsea came out of the second half looking for an equalizer, Mikel first got too easily beat by a Roma player, then as the attack swiftly progressed he got caught jogging casually whilst ball watching and didn't follow the player that he was supposed to mark (Vucinic) who went on to score the goal.

And just as Chelsea increased the intensity of their attacks to try and give themselves a chance to get back into the game, Mikel's poor touch and slack attitude once again made him lose the ball in a dangerous position, and then after having caught up with Vucinic's run, made a rash and poorly judged attempt at a sliding tackle which missed and instead allowed Vucinic to finish the rest of his run and score under no pressure whatsoever.

John Terry, being the captain that he is, went on to salvage a consolation goal and Drogba (not Anelka, who hardly made a significant contribution to the whole match) came close to scoring but was caught offside, but by then there was too much to do.

Before the Roma match, Chelsea had only conceded one goal in their previous NINE matches, and the three goals that Roma scored were pretty much the only three chances that they had in the entire match.

However you put it, Mikel's technical deficiency and lack of intelligence was almost entirely to blame for that defeat. Of course it's a team game, but at the top level the smallest mistakes tends to get punished and Mikel made three fatal ones.

Having said all that, I think Scolari knows this already. Like I said above he's clearly a manager who likes to nurture his players, and that means allowing them to make mistakes in order to grow; an approach which I fully respect and sort of admire.

But the more bad results they experience, the more fear will creep into their play. It soon becomes demoralizing to know that you can play so well and yet still not win. It becomes this perpetual cycle that's hard to break. And considering their recent run of form, I think that's what we're starting to see at Chelsea.

The Rooney-Stoke Elbow Debate: What Were You Doing Linesman?

Steven Ho — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 07:12:00 -0500

Without dismissing Rooney's personal idiocy, I'm surprised the linesman hasn't been put under more scrutiny. The incident, being as vigorous and as wild as it was, was not only blatantly obvious from afar (which also questions Chris Foy's integrity as a referee) but it happened literally two yards from the linesman!

Why didn't he raise his flag? There's several possibilities that I can think of: 1) He thought it wasn't a foul, since there was no contact. This seems to be the general consensus in the aftermath. 2) Bias towards United players. 3) He simply missed it.

Addressing the last issue first, I invite you to watch the incident again, this time focusing on the linesman. In the video, you can see his eyes are clearly fixed on the incident at hand.

So he saw it. And ignored it. Did he conclude that it wasn't a foul, because Rooney didn't make contact? This seems to be the prevalent explanation for the linesman's inaction.

If he did, then I'd say it was the wrong conclusion.

Rooney may not have made contact with Adoulaye Faye but the intent was clearly there for all to see, and the consequences would likely have been bloody. When a player has a "high foot" or shows studs in a tackle there doesn't need to be any contact for the referee to call it a foul, because there's a high risk of injury in those sort of challenges i.e. it's dangerous play.

It should not have been any different in Rooney's case.

And whether he should've received a red card for it? Do you remember another high profile case involving Roy Keane and Alan Shearer where, again, contact was not made, but the intent and high risk of injury if contact was made, was very clear. Was it wrong to give Keane a red card because he didn't make contact?

There has been a long standing belief in football that the bigger teams, especially United, are given biased decisions from referees, especially in the big moments i.e. penalty decisions.

Personally I've never subscribed to that particular belief. Not that I think that the majority of the decisions in the past were correct; I just think that, in general, penalty decisions are not clear cut anyway. I suppose I like to assume that referees have no vested interest in the outcome of a match, and will always try to be as fair and impartial as they could possibly be.

But even I did believe that referees were being biased it's hard to discern the truth about a referee simply based on what one observe in a match. Unless decisions have been persistently wrong over a period of years, it'd be unfair to make an uninformed judgement based on one incident. However, I have to admit, coupled with the Ronaldo incident in the same match, which was also just as clear to the eye as Rooney's and also went unpunished, grants me a pertinent suspicion at the very least.

And with the Respect campaign clearly not working, the question that comes to mind is: are managers' pre and post match bullying of referees really having an impact on a their match decisions?

The more that referees have to think twice about decisions and more specifically the implications after it, the more ambivalent they'll feel, the more doubt will be cast into their mind, and in the split moment that they have to make a crucial decision, the more they'll be inclined to choose the easier, more favourable option.

What We All Should Wish for This Christmas

Steven Ho — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 01:35:09 -0500

Have you had a look at the league tables recently?

No?

Here:

Have a look carefully. They're averaging three goals a game!

Well, Chelsea have not quite managed it. Barcelona have, but Chelsea have conceded half the number of goals that Barcelona have so far. So that balances things up in my eyes.

Without a shadow of a doubt, for anyone who's able to rise above their bias and appreciate damn good football, these are THE two best teams in Europe right now.

They're playing the best football, with some of the best players getting back to their best form (Lampard, Eto'o, Messi deserving a special mention), and they're both scoring some of the best team goals that I've seen in a long time.

So along with peace, health, happiness, and one of those new Macbooks, I'd like to add one more thing to my Christmas wish list Santa:

Please, oh please, let there be another Chelsea-Barcelona encounter this season.

Snippet Thoughts on The Weekend's Action in The English Premier League

Steven Ho — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 02:51:50 -0400

Here were some of my observations and thoughts on the weekend's action, for the matches that I saw.

Portsmouth 2-0 Tottenham

Juande is a good manager. You don't win the UEFA cup twice in your first two seasons at a club if you're a rubbish manager. His response to his situation has shown he's an intelligent guy. Give him time. I think he'll prove to be a great manager for Tottenham one day but he needs support from the fans.

Arsenal 1-2 Hull

This is why we all love football. Another reminder that money does not guarantee success.

Manchester United 2-0 Bolton

Defense looked slightly dubious at times; creeky. Needs to be a bit more organised and prepared.

Rooney's goal—dummy was smart, the finish was exquisite. Top class. I don't think as highly of Rooney as most people seem to do, but I'm pleased to concede that he is really good at those types of shots/situation/goals.

Ronaldo's penalty? ARGH! Only two games back, and he's already cheating again.

I can't comprehend why there was more focus on the referee, Rob Styles, than on Ronaldo. The way I see it, if the player doesn't dive, this doesn't happen. A professional sportsman, who has so many kids copying his actions, manipulating a referee, just isn't right.

I can already hear the retorts: "Duh, diving is part of the game!" and "He didn't dive! Look, he didn't appeal to the referee!".

First of all, what?! Come on, think! There should be no place in any sport for blatant cheating!

Secondly, watch carefully how Samuel does not even make contact with Ronaldo's left leg before Ronaldo starts falling, how he deliberately leaves his right leg trailing to forge contact with Samuel, and how he actually begins wincing the moment he makes contacts with his trailing right leg!

And finally, why would he appeal? He's got nothing to appeal for—the referee's given the penalty straight away!

The fact is, Ronaldo's reputation helped him, not hindered him!

Some media sources have said that some Bolton players noted that "even Ronaldo said he didn't want a penalty!". If that's correct, then why did he look to the referee straight after he hits the ground (again, just watch how his head is focused downwards all the way during his fall, and then the moment he's finished his 'landing', he flicks his head straight up to the ref! Please don't tell me, after watching that clip, that he wasn't trying to dive. I reckon that after he saw some of his own players saying that it wasn't a penalty, he perceptively 'followed the crowd' and just said what they did. And that makes me hate him even more.

Scholes—Not as lethal as he once was. Two chances that the old Scholes would've buried.

Ferdinand—Has anybody noticed that he's attacking more now? He's had two good chances to score in the last two matches, after he made surging runs in each of them. This type of behavior from a defender is indicative of an extremely confident defender who is becoming more of a leader, someone who takes into his own hands the destiny of the match he is playing in.

Paolo Maldini is the best example of that type of defender.When a defender is at the top of their game, they tend to do this. My theory is that it's because they're so solid at the back that they have the freedom to boost attack. Whilst I think that there might be some cracks in the defense as a whole, Ferdinand's behavior is a good sign.

Tevez is becoming more of United's playmaker every game. He's such an intelligent player. He reminds me of Teddy Sheringham.

Ronaldo played pretty rubbish in the game, I thought. Not much impact on the game as a whole, considering the possession we had.

Overall performance was ok. Possession of the ball was great; it means we have control over the game. We're creating chances but not scoring most of them. We'll need to start being more lethal. If not, we're not gonna keep struggling.

Stoke 0-2 Chelsea

Nicolas Anelka—dropped for Drogba. Was I right? When he did come on, missed crucial chance again. Even when he scored it was only ok; not the best of strikes, keeper got a hand to the ball and so probably should've saved it.

What a goal the first one was! The build up play was outstanding, with Lampard's pass earning a special mention. Chelsea are showing the best team goals, which indicates that they have the best team play so far. It's a different style from Arsenal, famed for their team goals. Chelsea's style has more directness, Arsenal more intricacy. Arsenal v Chelsea is gonna be a match to watch!

Chelsea's defense, like Man United's, still looks a bit shaky. They used to clear balls if not with ease then at least with authority. Their defense used to be the personification of a rock—all trouble just bounced right back the way they came. But recently, they're looking panicky in their box. A natural consequence of Scolari's appointment?

Aston Villa 2-1 Sunderland

What a great free kick from Andy Reid. So close!

Roy Keane looked damn cool in his James Bond suit. I always thought he'd be more of a track suit kind of guy.

Carew's goal—I remember Ronaldo and Henry scoring a similar goal some time in the last few seasons. I also remember how much it was raved about by the commentators at the time. If you watch the video in the link, you'll notice that the commentator (if edit please include the name) didn't even mention that it was a back heel! Not only that, but it was really well timed. I think Carew is only an ok striker, but come on, let's give credit where credit's due.

Fulham 1-2 West Ham

Mark Schwarzer—Oh dear.

By the way, did anyone also here the commentator pronounce his name as Schwaaaartzer? I always pronounced it as Schwartzer, same as Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Am I wrong?

Regarding West Ham's great recent form, I think what we're seeing is the "New Manager Syndrome" happening again. This is where a new manager comes in, simply but powerfully boosts morale through his very appointment, and players start enjoying their football again, thus higher chance of winning.

I love how, in his after match interview, Zola proclaimed that the players "will not told off for losing the ball, as long as they're trying to play good football."

Wow.

Not only is that refreshing, it's a complete new approach that I haven't seen before (I'm big on possession as I feel it indicates control).

I think he's gonna be a great manager.

Andy Johnson's first tackle was definitely intentional. The vicious challenge could've broken the guy's leg—just listen to that scream! You could tell he was frustrated, cos the did another dangerous, this time stud showing, tackle that led to him getting sent off.

That's all for this weekend. Unfortunately I didn't catch the Merseyside derby.

What Makes a Legend?

Steven Ho — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 16:06:59 -0400

"He's a legend."

That phrase used to mean something. "Legend" used to be reserved only for the special few who truly earned the status. Nowadays, it feels like it's thrown around to anyone. Apparently, there are legends everywhere.

The title of "legend" has become devalued. It has become overused. And it has become confused. There's not one clear definition of a "legend"; there are many, most of which are subjective.

Put simply, nobody knows what the heck constitutes a legend anymore.

So let's try to give the status back some of the significance it once had. Let us make absolutely clear, once again, what makes a legend.

Two Types of Legends

I'll admit, at first, it was really hard to find a consistent set of requirements for what makes a legend. Whenever I thought I'd finally nailed down the qualities that made up a legend, I'd think of a player to shatter those requirements.

But then I realised that the answer lies in the question itself. After thinking about all of the commonly mentioned legends (Bergkamp, Maradona, Henry, Pele etc), I realised that there's not just one type of legend, but two.

There are club or country legends, and there are football legends (from now on I'll just replace club or country with just club for sake of typing)

To really answer the question, it's important to understand the subtle difference between the two types of legends.

Club Legends are legends at club or country level. They're what many people think of nowadays when they're talking about a "legend".

Not all club legends need to have won titles at their club. Robbie Fowler is undoubtedly a legend at Liverpool, but he never won a major trophy with them.

Not many club legends need to have been exceptionally loyal too. Carlos Tevez is now a legend at West Ham, after single-handedly saving them from relegation. But he was only at the club for a season. Roberto Baggio played for several clubs in his career. So did Romario, Zico, Ruud Gullit, and Gheorghe Hagi; all legends at club level.

Some club legends may have had great character, but some were rotten. Rivaldo is a huge Brazilian legend, but everyone remembers his fake collapse against Turkey.

But the key thing that ALL club Legends needed to do was achieve something special at their club, or for their country.

That something special could range from being one of the most talented players ever at that club or country, to being influential in winning a major title not won in many years or for the first time, to being one of the club or country's top goalscorer, all the way to making the most appearances ever at a club.

As long as it was something special.

For example, the following players are club legends because they did special things at their club or country. Thierry Henry became Arsenal's top goalscorer of all time. Eric Cantona inspired United to their first Premiership trophy for 25 years. Through his brilliance, Roberto Baggio led Italy to the 1994 World Cup Final. Romario is one of Brazil's most prolific strikers. Paolo Maldini lifted the European Champions League five times with AC Milan. Bobby Charlton helped Manchester United to their first ever Champions League (then, European Cup) victory. Ryan Giggs has made the most appearances in the history of Man United. Alan Shearer is Newcastle United's record goalscorer.

These players are legends in their own right. For me, they epitomize a club legend.

Legends of Football

But club legends are not what we used to call legends. When I asked "What makes a legend?", I was actually asking about what makes the old type of legend: the legends of football.

Football legends are not just legends on club level. They have legendary status at an even greater level—at football level.

Franz Beckenbauer, Johan Cruyff, Diego Maradona, Pele, Michel Platini, Ronaldo (you know which one), and Zinedine Zidane are football legends.

They are elevated from club legends, because not only did they achieve special things at their club or country, they also became the greatest contributors to football.

They reached a technical level that would become the standard for future generations. They introduced new ideas and concepts never known before to the game. They became one of the greatest ever in their position; whether that was defender, midfielder, or goalscorer.

They epitomized a style of football or player. They achieved unmatchable things in football. Most of them were also great men, the pinnacle of a professional sportsman.

But, above all, they are the very few (and there should only be a very few) legends who had the greatest of ability, changing the game simply through their brilliance.

And, at least in my eyes, that's what it takes to be called a legend of football.

P.S. That's why Cristiano Ronaldo is not a football legend, unless he is going to be a legend for his contribution to diving in football. I wouldn't even call him a club legend yet, because whilst he may have achieved at the club, his character and loyalty are so unbelievably, that it brings him down from that status.

This article was inspired by the question posed by Stefan Vasilev's article, "What Does it Take to be Called a Legend of Football?"

Chelsea's New Shirt Naming Convention: Huh?

Steven Ho — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 06:39:07 -0400

Hmmm... so Chelsea played great yesterday night in their first match of this season's Champions League. They produced an impressive performance in their 4-0 win over Bordeaux, scoring some wonderful goals in the process. Yep, yep, yep. That's the most important thing. Well done Chelsea FC.

However, at one point in yesterday's game something suddenly caught my attention. I ever-so-slightly tilted my head sideways, squinted my eyes to focus more clearly, and slowly leaned my head towards the tv. My thought at that exact moment was this:

Huh? Are the names on Chelsea's shirt all spelled in lowercase?!

To me, it just looks weird. Some will take the position that it promotes bad grammar to the young children (and some adults) watching. I'm not too concerned about that. Any degree of teaching to a child should overcome that.

It's more the attempt of the shirt designers to seem cool that itched my article-writing fingers (coupled with this wonderfully hilarious shirt article). It just reeks of someone trying to be different and cool and unique, but not quite pulling it off.

Before writing this article, my intention was to propose some logical reasoning for why it's irked me to the point of writing an article about it. But, for the life of me, I can't seem to find an explanation for why I feel that way! I dunno...seeing their names all in lowercase just seems...ODD, to my eyes.

Doesn't it look odd to you too?

Roger Federer Passes Novak Djokovic Test in US Open Semi-final

Steven Ho — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 10:57:22 -0400

Yes! I was worried about this match.

Roger Federer, now world No. 2, proved a point to his doubters and more importantly to himself by winning in four sets against a spirited Novak Djokovic.

Federer took the first set after breaking Djokovic early on. The world No. 3 battled to earn the second, but Federer eventually came through 6-3, 5-7, 7-5, 6-2.

It was Federer's first major test since his crushing defeat to Nadal at this year's Wimbledon final. And he knew it.

"This was a big match, I knew it from when I saw the draw. He's been playing very well on hard courts for the last couple of years," Federer remarked after the match.

"It was important to stay grounded because I knew the match could change, like it did in the second set.

"I think it broke his will when I won the third set, and then I knew if I played well, I could win in four sets."

This win has reignited my faith in the Fed Express and just highlights to me that he's still got that champion quality about him—beating some of your toughest opponents even when you're not playing at your best.

Performing under pressure. That's what it's all about.

Andy Murray Achieves Fourth In World Rankings: Well Done, Mate

Steven Ho — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 10:48:27 -0400

Continuing his best year so far, Andy Murray has guaranteed he will rise to fourth in the world rankings, after his win against Juan Martin del Potro in the US Open quarter-finals.

He will go on to meet the current world No. 1, Rafael Nadal, in a career first Grand Slam semi-final.

Murray's reaction to his promoted ranking was one of nonchalance, and with a first Grand Slam trophy still a possibility, he was rightly so. Murray has bigger fish to fry right now. As he put it, "Winning is what really, really counts."

All in A Day's Work

However, let's not hastily dismiss what is a truly honourable achievement, for any sportsman. What Murray has done is no mean feat and should be recognised as a career milestone.

Now I've not really followed Murray's career, but, from an outsider's point of view, it seems as though he's done very well here.

I mean, reaching a career first semi-final and becoming fourth best in the world isn't bad for a day's work, is it?

British expectations are also so high when it comes to Tennis, and it was none more apparent than during the Tim Henman era.

Despite being a consistent top 20 player and reaching six Grand Slam semi-finals, four of which was at the biggest of them all, Wimbledon, he is commonly seen as a disappointment.

Now as far as I know, there is no law that says that a country should have a top 20 tennis player, let alone a top five player.

Despite the wealth in this country (which some people oddly use as an excuse for Great Britain's lack of success), it has proven to be more than difficult to become a success at professional tennis—another example of how money doesn't guarantee success.

All We Need In Life is A Little Perspective

And so, I think we need to apply a little perspective here. Let me put this in plain terms: Andy Murray is officially recognised as the fourth-best player.... in the world.

In the world.

Out of 6 billion of us, he is fourth. See? Perspective.

Talk About Pressure

In doing so, Murray has gone a long way to matching the legacies of Tim Henman and Greg Rusedski, whose career highs are also fourth.

But what surprises me the most is that I never expected him to do so well, especially considering the pressure left by Tim Henman's retirement.

Despite what you may think of Henman's lack of Grand Slam titles, Murray solely shoulders a nation's hopes and expectations. The highest level in any sport is all about pressure, and the weight of pressure Murray bears is heavier than most.

Congratulations

So really, I just wanted to say, Andy, many congratulations on your milestone achievement. I have respect for anybody who achieves such a worthy goal under the highest pressure.

As a tennis fan living in the UK, it's exciting to know that there is a native player worthy of challenging the best. Keep it up.