2013-05-25T19:47:10-04:00 Kevin Graham http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/author/index.php?author=kevin-graham Copyright 2008, HuffingtonPost.com, Inc. HuffingtonPost Blogger Feed for Kevin Graham Good old fashioned elbow grease. tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.3250898 2013-05-10T05:15:34-04:00 2013-05-10T07:49:47-04:00

Kevin Graham http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-graham/
At the start of the season I waxed lyrical (The Moyes Masterplan) about the qualities of the man, and the outstanding job he did with Everton.

The retirement of Sir Alex Ferguson obviously leaves a massive void in the dug out at Old Trafford. There's so much you can write about Ferguson and what he has achieved, but I think it's enough for me to simply say he has got Manchester United to the pinnacle of British football and kept them there for 20 years, evolving the team on the pitch so that they have never felt the pain that all other successful teams feel when they lose the nucleus of a great side.

Moyes has maintained a more modest level of success at Goodison Park on a much more modest budget, and has rarely failed to evolve the Everton team beyond the loss of key players. The development of Everton's players, fattened up for sale at a hefty premium - Rooney, Rodwell, Arteta, Lescott, Pienaar etc - has ensured that Bill Kenwright has been able to pay the bills during Moyes' tenure, but the loss of such players hasn't been followed by a slump in the team's fortunes.

So it would appear on the face of things that Moyes is well qualified to take over Fergie's mantle and sustain the relentless pursuit of trophies at Old Trafford. I certainly can't find reason to criticise the decision to appoint Moyes. But the brand that is Manchester United is very, very different to anything Moyes has experienced and perhaps more importantly, so too is the challenge that lies ahead on the pitch.

Moyes is an intelligent guy, and I believe he has the strength of character, intellect and most of all, ability to command respect, to adjust to becoming the flag bearer for arguably the biggest football business on the planet. Few, if any, other candidates for the role would be better for that role. Ok, he hasn't got the CV of a Mourinho or a Capello, but his character is one coveted by a club that believes in development, sustainability and the diligent pursuit of excellence. The shoe fits in terms of his profile.

It's the challenge on the pitch that presents a step into the unknown.

Moyes has achieved success at Everton by preparing his side meticulously and squeezing every last drop out of the orange - the team unit is always incredibly disciplined, motivated and efficient. Set pieces at both ends of the pitch are executed with a higher rate of success than probably any other side in the country. Anywhere that science and technical preparation can lend a hand, Everton benefit - Moyes is clearly outstanding at getting bang for his buck out of the players both individually and as a team unit. But the step up from trying to be best of the rest is a big one. To be the best of the best, the Champions League clubs and also in the Champions League itself, efficiency is simply not enough. Developing a team capable of creating chances in open play is not something we've seen Moyes achieve at Everton.

Nurturing a style that can unlock the door at the very highest level is not easy. The margins for error in the global elite are paper thin. The speed at which a pass is delivered or a chance is engineered is a split second quicker and Moyes will need to evolve as a manager and a coach to keep United at the very top. I would argue that despite their dominance in domestic football, Moyes inherits a side that is dropping further and further behind Europe's elite. The golden generation of Scholes, Giggs, Beckham and the Nevilles amongst others has been ever present during Ferguson's golden years. With Giggs and Scholes coming to the very end of their careers, Moyes has to rebuild the development path that has resulted in the brand of football United play - well balanced, attractive passing football.

I'm not for one minute suggesting he can't do that - he is after all one of the few managers at the very top who can do it all when it comes to management and coaching, and this is probably one of the reasons why he has been so successful, and certainly one of the reasons why he is so well respected by players and those in the game.

So how will Moyes fare in this, most high profile of roles? Who knows! Well qualified he most certainly is, but without the aid of a crystal ball, I certainly won't be making any predictions.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2628687 2013-02-06T05:39:07-05:00 2013-04-08T05:12:01-04:00

Kevin Graham http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-graham/
Quite apart from being qualified to run a football club, many owners these days seem devoid of basic common sense. For Fawaz Al Hasawi to replace Sean O'Driscoll with McLeish in the first place, he should surely have considered and planned for a massive transition in footballing terms because of the contrasting styles of the two managers. McLeish inherited a Sean O'Driscoll team, with the onus being on patience and ensuring every player on the pitch was comfortable to receive and distribute the ball. McLeish is a manager who plays the percentages, gets the ball forward quickly and asks little of his defenders in terms of ball retention. As such, the type of player McLeish inherited wasn't befitting of his intended style of play, and so the prospects of getting results quickly were slim. Given McLeish wasn't provided with much in the way of resources to go and make wholesale changes in the January transfer window, the chances of challenging for promotion were very slim. This is common sense stuff.

For every Steve Gibson or Huw Jenkins, there is a "new" football club owner who seems destined to make a right pig's ear of the job. We used to like to criticise the likes of Ron Noades and Doug Ellis but some of their successors have put into perspective how lucky fans of Palace and Villa were to have such people in charge.

To my mind, a Chairman should be an astute business leader, with either a deep understanding of footballing culture or people around him who provide that insight. Business leadership is about common sense. Making key decisions about the people in that business should be based on some fairly simple criteria that ultimately qualify that person to achieve the goals you set out. There was always going to be some collateral damage, and the culture and style that Mcleish wished to create was always going to take time to develop. Longer than 40 days anyway.

I say all this assuming that the goal for the football club is always to achieve success, gain promotion to the next level and or win trophies. But who knows what goes on behind closed doors, what agendas are hidden from view and who really makes the decisions? I know it's easy with the benefit of hindsight to criticise decisions but Forest really seem to be making decisions based on flawed logic. Rather like the appointments of Mark Hughes at QPR and Henning Berg at Blackburn, I just don't see how they arrived at the decision to sack O'Driscoll and appoint Mcleish.

Management is a precarious profession but also a well rewarded one. I can see why Dean Hoyle replaced Lee Clark with Simon Grayson last season at Huddersfield, and why Milan Mandaric replaced Gary Megson with Dave Jones. Though harsh decisions, they ultimately proved to be the right ones. Hoyle has shown his ruthless streak again this year by sacking Grayson, the man who got him back up into the Championship. This may prove to be another astute decision if he gets the right man in to consolidate at that level and build the foundations for further progress.

I'm generally opposed to the short termism in football these days - it stops managers and coaches doing their job properly as their true vocation should surely be to develop a team over a period of time long enough to create a playing culture that gets results which is impossible to do in my opinion in a period less than 6 months. There are however managers out there who are capable of getting results in the short term, usually classed as motivators rather than coaches. Martin O'Neill, Sam Allardyce and Harry Redknapp have all done this in recent years. Maybe Al Hasawi thought Mcleish would be this sort of manager.

It's not just at the top level I see evidence of poor leadership from club Chairmen and directors when it comes to football decisions. It may be another level all together, but I see far too many poor appointments in non-league football, certainly below Conference level, where managers get jobs because of their standing in the game and connections, but usually come in and take the same approach as their predecessors, and with similar results as a consequence. I've been to games this season where managers and coaches stand and scream at their players and the referee, using seriously excessive bad language, and usually simply to berate them rather than coach them. Many club Chairmen seem to be afraid to appoint managers and coaches with different methods purely because they won't take the risk. It's much easier to escape blame if you've gone for the tried and tested but still failed than it is to stick your neck out and try something new.

Regarding the bad language, I have been guilty of this in the past and probably will be again but I am very mindful of the need to change this about myself - the game has moved on, I don't need to swear excessively to command respect and perhaps most importantly, the game's image will never change if this continues. Parents wanting to involve their kids in sport will often choose other sports if they pop down to their local side and hear excessive bad language for the entire 90 mins. Those who saw (and listened to me!) play, may chuckle when they read this but we all need to play our part.

So rather like the business world, football continues to show that great leaders are few and far between, and common sense really isn't that common after all.

Mick McCarthy clearly knew what he was doing when he turned the Forest job down prior to O'Driscoll's appointment. Most managers are not necessarily in a position to be so picky, but he's earned the right to be able to choose when and if a job, or perhaps more importantly, a chairman is right for him.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2470848 2013-01-14T07:09:47-05:00 2013-03-16T05:12:02-04:00

Kevin Graham http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-graham/
That said, I can make an exception for Vincent Kompany's red card yesterday - it presents the opportunity for players to learn about decision making and technique from a high profile example.

My view is that Mike Dean made a correct decision. Refereeing the game, to a degree, is about interpretation, and Dean took the view that Kompany's tackle was reckless and potentially dangerous - I happen to agree. I accept that other people may disagree but I'd rather not focus on the referee. The player is the one who ultimately controls what happens in that phase of play and the one who gives the referee a decision to make as a result of his actions.

If I look at the footage again, there is absolutely no need for Kompany to make that challenge. There are defending players covering the area behind him so Jack Wilshere poses no immediate goal scoring threat. If he did, you could argue that if he didn't make that challenge, Wilshere's momentum would take him past Kompany and into the penalty area with only the goalkeeper to beat, so perhaps Kompany would have had to make the challenge to prevent a goalscoring opportunity. Even then, the risk of a red card is high as he would therefore have been the last man.

Kompany limits his options by getting too square on. His feet get planted side by side and the only way to get the leverage required to make a challenge that meets and potentially stops Wilshere's momentum is to jump forward, probably leading with his right leg which is naturally the stronger. This probably means both feet leaving the ground and certainly studs being raised. If you watch carefully, Wilshere loses control because his trailing leg slips. If that hadn't happened and he had made a challenge with his right leg, Kompany's studs would have probably clashed with Wilshere's inner ankle or another part of his foot or leg, resulting in some sort of injury to Wilshere (take a look at the following clip from YouTube to see a similar incident - defender's body shape is all wrong and really shouldn't make the challenge as a result - also featuring Arsenal and Mike Dean http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=Qwev_SUdQVQ&NR=1).

The speed at which Wilshere is running with the ball is considerable, so I accept that Kompany did not have a lot of time to decide on how best to defend the situation. However, the fundamental technical failing Kompany demonstrates is that he is simply too square on. Defenders when face with an attacker with the ball should always adjust their body so that one foot is further ahead than the other, resulting in a 'side on' body position. This allows the defender to adjust his position quicker. That in turn means that he can 'jockey' or hold up his opponent, ie face up to the attacker and travel backwards, using nimble feet and side steps, holding up or delaying the attacker's progress by doing so. This puts doubt in the attacker's mind and if he's not confident he can use speed or skill to beat the defender, will often turn back or play the ball sideways, allowing the defender's team more time to organise the defensive unit. A right footed defender, as Kompany is, should ideally try to place his left foot ahead of his right and open up the right side of his body but you can also lead with the right and still 'channel' the attacker into an area where more of your defensive team colleagues are, even if it is on your weaker side.

If a challenge has to be made, defenders have more chance of winning the ball legally if the challenge is made from the side of the attacker, perhaps if it looks like momentum is going to carry the ball and the man past the defender.

Even better, by getting side on and 'jockeying' the attacking player, the chances of that attacker taking a bad touch which allows the defender to step across and win possession whilst staying on his feet increase considerably.

I rate Kompany as probably the most consistent and perhaps the best centre back in the Premiership. He's an incredible leader, great in the air, reads the game fantastically and is as brave a man as you'll find on the football pitch. That bravery combined with his will to win means that Kompany never shirks a challenge.

I can relate to that. I was not great on the ball but tried to lead by example and never shirked a challenge myself. The sight of me winning a crunching 'fifty fifty' in the middle of the park probably inspired my team and if I saw the chance to go in, I did so singlemindedly. I played at a time when the game, though changing, was still played in such a manner that big challenges where two opponents flew in were just seen as part of the game. If I ended up getting there late, I invariably hurt my opponent though it was never my intention to do so, and on more than one occasion, such challenges basically led to mass confrontations. I never backed down, ever, and I thought that was the right way to play. Then again, the last game I played in English non-league football ended with me breaking my leg in such a challenge where I got the ball and my opponent got me.

Now, I realise that such challenges actually gain you very little - the ball and where it ends up being immaterial to the outcome of the physical challenge. As a coach now, I'd rather players stood up and ensured their opponents had to earn the right to go passed them rather than being gifted an attacking opportunity because my player is on his backside and therefore out of the game.

There is still a need for a tackle in the right area, made as a result of the defender's body shape being correct and therefore ensuring execution of that tackle is made from a solid base so that the chances of winning the ball cleanly are greater. I still want players to dominate their opponents if a physical challenge is required.

However, the game has changed and players need to weigh up the pros and cons of every decision they make on the pitch. Kompany has been sent off before in very similar circumstances. Both he and Roberto Mancini need to look at the reasons why this has happened again.

It's important to state also that I don't believe Kompany ever goes in to a challenge aiming to hurt his opponent - his desire to simply win the ball is clearly all consuming.

I have to commend Kompany on his comments about the referee, who he refused to criticise acknowledging just how difficult Mike Dean's job is. Kompany's a great leader and example to others, and I'm sure is professional enough to look at the footage again and realise he can do better next time.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2437526 2013-01-09T04:23:38-05:00 2013-03-10T05:12:01-04:00

Kevin Graham http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-graham/
Everyone loves an underdog - they were expected to bow out gracefully against Arsenal but refused to go quietly. Phil Parkinson has received the plaudits on behalf of a deserving group of players who are clearly relishing the challenge of pitting themselves against highly paid superstars on a regular basis. I am surprised Parkinson hasn't achieved more as a manager - I had him down as a potential Premiership manager back when he did such an impressive job with Colchester United. His subsequent roles at Hull and Charlton yielded very little and it's taken him quite some time to improve Bradford's fortunes.

I think their cup runs this year will prove too much for them to achieve promotion from League 2 - they've already played more than 40 games and are still in two cups. Such a schedule would test the resources of clubs with much larger playing squad's. Regardless, Bradford's star is in the ascendancy under Parkinson.

The constant analysis of the game these days means we are all guilty of a bit too much navel gazing at times. To understand the reasons for Bradford's success against Premiership team under Parkinson, you don't have to look too deep beneath the surface - the key success factors are really quite straightforward:

1) Early delivery from wide areas

Bradford's major attacking threat arises when their wide players deliver early balls into the box. Wide players like Zavon Hines, Blair Turgott and Will Atkinson all did this - they didn't try too hard to beat their opponent, aiming simply to get the ball out of their feet and get the ball into the box where James Hanson and Nahki Wells consistently managed to evade defenders. The wide man doesn't need to pick a specific man out - he should be able to trust his team mates to arrive in dangerous areas if they know the ball is going to be delivered there early. The quicker this happens, the less time opposing defenders have to organise and cover. This doesn't only apply to open play, but to set pieces where possession is recycled, or second phase ball as it is also referred to. This was perfectly demonstrated by Gary Jones and his delivery into the box for Bradford's second goal.

2) Single minded desire to attack set pieces

How many times do you see seemingly aimless balls delivered into the box from set pieces when attacking players seem to go through the motions of making a predictable run into an area and challenge but don't really look like getting on the end of it? Parkinson clearly won't accept this from his players. Every attacking player makes a movement towards the ball or towards the area it is delivered into that is dynamic and threatening - they attack the ball like every opportunity really matters, and they threatened from numerous set pieces as a result. Carl McHugh's outstanding header for the third goal was a great example of this.

3) Let them have the ball in their own half

Bradford have conceded a lot of possession against all three of the Premiership sides they've beaten in the competition so far - this is natural against sides with more gifted players and Parkinson clearly has a plan to negate this. If Bradford don't win the ball back within a couple of seconds of losing possession, the whole team drops back to defend in their own half. Two banks of four quickly form, and with Hanson and Wells in front of them look very compact, denying the opposition space to receive the ball in areas that can hurt Bradford. As a result, Villa last night rarely played the ball into players' feet giving them time to turn and run at Bradford's defenders - they always had to go back to their own goal. They had a little joy in the opening 15 minutes of the game when Bradford's players were still adjusting and finding their distances ie adjusting their shape to ensure they covered the key attacking areas in their half of the pitch, but once they had adjusted, the only joy for Villa came either from an aerial ball to Christian Benteke for him to flick on or when Bradford themselves lost possession in their own half and gave Villa the chance to attack before the defensive unit had re-grouped. This tactic also means players don't expend as much energy pressing the opposition which is critical if you want to bridge the gap against a team with better technical players than you. Remaining organised and concentrating on that organisation is tough if you've been chasing the ball all over the pitch for 89 minutes. The opposition can't score against you if the ball is in their half of the pitch.

4) Hold the ball up top

Both Hanson and Wells understood the need to retain possession when they received the ball - they didn't give the ball up cheaply. This allowed their team mates to get forward and support, and their team to retain possession for more than one or two passes in each phase of possession - that's the platform you need to get attacking options in position to do some damage.

5) Buy time when you're under pressure

Bradford looked like old pros last night, despite the fact they, like Villa, have a a lot of young and inexperienced players. When they needed a break, their youngsters showed maturity beyond their years, often protecting the ball and drawing a foul from over eager Villa players and thereby allowing their team to rest and re-organise again. Paul Lambert will no doubt have been frustrated by his own players' naivety when this did happen, whilst Parkinson and his assistant Steve Parkin will no doubt have taken great pleasure as their coaching and management instructions were executed extremely well.

None of that is rocket science, which is perhaps why I'm surprised that Villa failed to deal with the way Parkinson had his side set up. Bradford obviously work very hard on executing the basics on the training ground. Of course, they also worked extremely hard and showed immense character - they clearly believed that they had a chance but appreciated that they needed to show more hunger, more desire and more spirit to overcome their Premiership opponents. They also had a bit of luck - Matt Duke had a great game in goal for them and when the ball broke in their penalty area, it usually fell kindly for Bradford. The one exception should have resulted in a goal for Darren Bent but didn't. Matches hinge on moments like that so Bradford will no doubt realise that if Bent has scored from a yard out with an open goal, their prospects of getting to Wembley would have diminished considerably.

It was a great performance from Bradford. They'll need one more stellar performance in two weeks' time if they are to achieve the unthinkable and become the first team from the fourth tier of English football to get to a League Cup final in more than half a century.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.2275132 2012-12-11T04:28:56-05:00 2013-02-09T05:12:01-05:00

Kevin Graham http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-graham/
I don't talk in quite as reverent terms about Wenger, but I admire his achievements greatly, and the methods he brought with him when he moved to English football back in 1996. His influence on the whole club - not just on football related matters - is well chronicled and he will undoubtedly go down as one of the greatest and most successful managers of all time. However, memories of his tenure will, I fear, become ever more tainted if he does not vacate the position he has made his own, and soon.

The growing frustration amongst fans is understandable as Arsenal's performances continue to be inconsistent at best. Fans' opinions matter to some degree but they are not entrusted with the club's fortunes. I don't know what the Arsenal board of directors' criteria for success are - there's a common belief that financial stability and sustainability are perhaps more important to them than success on the pitch and trophies in the cabinet. For me, the two go hand in hand. So, I'm going to assume that success on the pitch is the critical success factor, and I'm going to put myself in the position of sole decision maker for the football club and assess the Wenger's suitability. I think you know where this is going.

Success in football is only achieved if you can find a balance. Over-reliance on one ingredient, belief or tactic might sometimes bring short term success but never a sustained period of success. And so it is with Wenger - his belief in playing attractive, passing football and choosing individuals who demonstrate technical excellence but lack demonstrable character, work ethic and a selfless team ethic is as strong as ever, unlike the resolve of his team who look largely disjointed. If they were a boxer, they'd be on the ropes without the ability to cover up and defend.

When Wenger took over at Highbury, he inherited great players who were great characters - his team was full of leaders. I'm convinced that some of Wenger's best foreign signings developed a competitive instinct and strength of character because they shared a dressing room with the likes of Adams, Keown, Wright, Bergkamp and others who were winners. That tough as teak, engrained mentality enabled them to grind out results when points would otherwise have been dropped. Yes, Wenger's footballing philosophy on the pitch and scientific methods off it turned a tough streetwise unit into an even better side who could retain possession for longer, attack at pace through the midfield and create many more chances from open play than his predecessors managed, but that simply put the finishing touches to an already highly effective team. He achieved a great balance - a vital mix of ingredients that made his side truly great.

Arsenal haven't won a trophy since 2004 - since then countless players have pulled on an Arsenal shirt with perhaps only two leaders emerging. Neither Cesc Fabregas or Robin Van Persie are archetypal leaders - their attacking brilliance has enabled them to lead by example but all outstanding creative players need the confidence to go and play with freedom, and that is only really afforded by the knowledge that their team mates create a solid defensive base so that they can focus on what they do best.

I may be doing "Le Professeur" a big disservice here but I think he genuinely feels that you don't need characters like Tony Adams or Kevin Richardson if you have defensive players who are comfortable in possession and able to play in a fluid system. Furthermore, his insistence on sticking to these beliefs seems to have become more entrenched with every season that passes. His critics have often advocated the need for Wenger to sign players like John Terry, Gary Cahill, Brede Hangeland, Scott Parker or Nigel de Jong - players who would not only add their own personal robust, defensive style to the mix but also bring much needed leadership and organisational qualities. Simply by signing Gary Cahill, giving him the captain's armband and making him the pillar around which to build a solid foundation, Wenger could have paved the way for players like Vermaelen, Gibbs and Ramsay to develop their true potential. The influence of a couple of leaders would I'm sure do wonders for the rest of the squad, and that is where Wenger's side really looks woefully short of an immensely important ingredient - he's failed to bring in leaders. One consequence could be that the club's best young players do not develop as they should. Jack Wilshere is a star who may find his career never delivers what his immense ability should if he has to carry the burden of responsibility for his team mates, many of whom display unacceptable immaturity and really don't pull their weight as part of a team unit.

The addition of Steve Bould as Pat Rice's replacement at Wenger's side is perhaps a belated acknowledgement that Wenger has failed to develop an effective defensive unit. The balance of the defensive unit never looks right - despite many football pundits highlighting Bould inspired improvements in that area. I just don't see Wenger placing importance on this areas when he plans the next stage of the team's development.

You see I think the belief that football is all about technical excellence has too much influence on today's game. The development of English players in their formative years undoubtedly needs to focus a lot more on this - we are light years behind other countries on that front. Team performance relies on much more than that, and I don't see enough evidence that Wenger acknowledges that.

So Arsenal will still score plenty of goals, still make us all purr with their brilliant attacking flair and will probably even put together a run that sees them somewhere in and around the Champions' League places again. Maybe that's enough for Arsenal's board - it wouldn't be for me.

They don't have the right characters to be a consistent winning force in the Premier League, they make too many mistakes and are simply not good enough at denying the opposition attacking options. Wenger will not change his ways and Arsenal will remain an also ran behind the two Manchester clubs.

They'll still play very attractive football, still have a nice stadium and still have money in the bank. And like many Arsenal fans, my mate will still find it very hard to do anything but believe in Wenger.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.2116011 2012-11-12T19:00:00-05:00 2013-01-12T05:12:01-05:00

Kevin Graham http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-graham/
I assume many of you reading this are fans of Premier League clubs, or like myself, former Premier League clubs. As such, I also assume that your awareness of football outside the Premier League/Championship is limited. Coverage of the FA Cup first round proper and the inevitable headlines that non-league clubs attract if they account for league opposition gives the footballing world a rare glimpse of non-league football and all that it entails. That's why I love this time of year.

I am a proud Middlesbrough fan - there weren't many young lads growing up in Guernsey with a Boro shirt and the name Wilkinson on the back. In fact, there was only one, and he had to explain to his mates where in the world Middlesbrough was and who this Paul Wilkinson fella was. Despite my love for the Boro, my interest in football as presented in today's media has been waning for quite some time. As a gaffer and former player, you'd think I'd be an avid spectator every Sunday afternoon or Tuesday night but the truth is that given the choice of watching something like The Apprentice on one channel or Champions League coverage on the other, Lord Sugar normally wins. I do watch football on the television from time to time.

I was captivated by Celtic's victory over Barcelona last week. The Bhoys' victory was some spectacle, both for the sheer drama on show at Celtic Park, but also as a tactical demonstration of attack versus defence. Celtic's compact unit camped in front of their penalty area was a great example of a well drilled, fit, disciplined and hard working team executing a plan to deny their opponents' undeniable attacking threat the space in advanced areas that a team needs to score goals. That's the reason I watch the game on television these days - to analyse the technical side of the game and learn from what I see. As for entertainment and pure escapism, football doesn't really do it for me in the same way that watching my Rocky box set or even the X Factor on a Saturday night does. I still love the game and my passion for it is stronger than ever in some ways, I just don't enjoy watching the soap opera of football I often see these days.

There is a growing band of football fans who prefer to focus on football closer to what I consider to be the game's roots and more connected with their respective local communities. Non-League football is growing from strength to strength in every way imaginable. Whilst news of the latest professional club in financial ruin is fresh in the mind, a lot of non-league clubs are benefiting from higher crowds and more media attention as a result of growing resentment towards football at the highest level. Inflated players' wages, inflated ticket prices, inflated egos on and off the pitch - the game at the elite level is a long way removed from the fans and even players who initially established football as the people's game. I hear some of you saying that it's just change, and that change happens in every walk of life. I just don't like the values or lack thereof that top level football represents in this day and age.

The Non-League Paper, the Non-League Show on the BBC radio, Premier Sports TV and numerous clubs run TV stations, podcasts and websites have all done their bit to promote and grow awareness of the game outside the top four divisions in England. Last weekend's results demonstrated what many of us have known for some time - that top non-league teams are capable of beating football league opposition. And not just because they parked the bus and got lucky on a cow patch for a pitch - some of the so called shocks of FA Cup first round saw non-league sides comprehensively outplay league opposition.

I am, of course, biased. Having not been good enough to make a living from the game, I played non-league football for a number of years across the north of England. Whilst doing so, I developed a great affinity with the people involved in the game. Not so much the players - though I've stayed in touch with a few lads, many of the faces you see in the dressing room are there one minute and gone the next - but the volunteers who helped run the clubs, some of the club directors, the supporters who travelled away on the bus week in week out and also the coaches/managers I worked with. As one of the few players at that level who had never been a full-time footballer, I guess I viewed the game differently in comparison to many of my team mates. I think some of them took the game for granted, seeing it as a very necessary way of supplementing the income they now had to earn in the real world. I was fascinated by the whole experience and felt very lucky to be involved at that level of football so always took the time to talk to the many people who helped make the game at that level what it was. When fans and players/coaching staff mix freely in that way, either in the bar after a game or on the coach to away games, the bond is so much stronger and everyone, fans included, feel a sense of ownership and collective responsibility for the club's fortunes.

When I get the chance to take my young son to a game these days, we are always made to feel welcome at one of the senior non-league clubs in my part of the world, whether that's in the club shop buying a few programmes for his collection, running up and down the terraces when he's bored of watching or in the bar after a game. It all costs me less than £20 for entrance, some food, some old programmes for him and a drink for each of us in the bar after the game. The last time we went to watch the Boro, it cost £14 just for him to get in, and he's only four. The difference between £20 and £50 for a Saturday afternoon at the football is significant, even for those with a reasonable level of disposable income once the mortgage and bills are paid. Ok, the product is very different and the standard of football is undoubtedly superior at the Premier League level, but as an experience that provides entertainment, fan engagement with the club, value for money and some decent football to watch, I'd choose non-league six days out of seven.

Non-league football is not immune to some of the issues that I think put the game in a bad light at the top level. Clubs over spending and ending up in administration or worse, attacking players feigning injury or diving without so much as a defender in sight and even the odd bit of crowd trouble have all been evident in non-league circles this season. I also don't want to detract from the many well run football league clubs who don't pay disproportionate wages to players who don't deserve it yet still struggle to make ends meet - they need every fan they can get too. I'm still a football man at heart and there are many aspects I love about football at the top end of the scale, I just get more enjoyment out of the non-league experience.

The introduction of Non-League Day has seen many Premier League season ticket holders use those season tickets to grant them cheap or free access to try out the non-league experience. Ever more creative and imaginative schemes developed by non-league teams to attract more fans are now available and are providing football fans old and new with the chance to get more bang for their buck in an environment where their contribution is appreciated.

So the next time you decide to pop along to a top game and hand over the best part of £100, you would be well advised to stop for a moment to consider going local and trying out non league football.

And say hello to Ben if he's in the queue for a pie at half time.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1962155 2012-10-12T14:56:49-04:00 2012-12-12T05:12:01-05:00

Kevin Graham http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-graham/
The advent of the Premier League was soon followed by an influx of continental managers into the domestic game. I'd say that became more apparent after Arsene Wenger's appointment and the subsequent impact he had on British football. His methods and ideals have probably been copied or adapted more than any other manager's in the history of the British game - I think messers Ranieri, Houllier, Gross, Gullit etc. have much to thank Wenger for. I get this - it seems that a young, qualified if not particularly experienced, articulate and polished continental manager may be more desirable to Premiership clubs than a tough, battle hardened British gaffer who speaks his mind. Ok, I'm perhaps painting a picture of two polar opposites here but when clubs are looking for corporate partners and an international fan base, it's clear that the person entrusted with leading that club from a footballing point of view needs to be more aware of the value of good PR than say, Jack Charlton was when he took over at my beloved club Middlesbrough some 40 odd years ago.

Much has been made of the success enjoyed by Scottish managers in the Premiership and rightly so. Whilst Sir Alex and my personal favourite David Moyes have done so much to build that reputation, I'm particularly pleased to see Steve Clarke progress from the position of right hand man and make such an impressive start as a manager in his own right. Of all the British Premiership managers, he is perhaps most similar to his continental peers. Perhaps lacking the polish and media profile of his old team mate at Stamford Bridge, Robert Di Matteo, his experience of working with top European players and coaches at Chelsea and Liverpool provides credibility at this level, and must make him more qualified than the likes of Di Matteo and Laudrup when it comes to exposure and experience of elite European football. It's early days for Clarke as a manager and I'm sure top chairmen will reserve judgement until he has at least a year of management under his belt, but I wouldn't blame the very biggest clubs if they had Clarke's name down on a short list when succession planning is required.

Of the remaining British managers, I can't hide my admiration for the job Tony Pulis has done at Stoke. Rather like Neil Warnock, Pulis seems to relish the combined role of pantomime villain and underdog rolled into one. To have established a club like Stoke in the Premiership is, for me, on a par with the job that maybe Harry Redknapp did at Spurs or Alan Pardew continues to do at Newcastle. It sometimes feels like Pulis has been teleported from the 80s, and I'm sure he would have looked right at home in the dug out opposite Ron Atkinson, Billy Mcneill, Graham Taylor or Bruce Rioch during that era. His methods are not admired by all, but what I really like is that he, along with his chairman Peter Coates, has improved the club each year that they've been in the top flight. In doing so, he has fulfilled the modest aspirations of all associated with the football club. Now prepared to invest to a level befitting a top half club that recently enjoyed European football, I don't think they'll ever get ahead of themselves whilst Pulis and Coates are there and that is so refreshing when you consider some of the ridiculous aspirations other clubs have, at times, publicly stated (I'm thinking chicken farmers predominantly there). Pulis' career at clubs like Bristol City, Gillingham and Plymouth hasn't necessarily prepared him specifically for the demands of the Premier League in this day and age but he has adapted to it with such success that he certainly deserves his seat at the table next to some of his more critically acclaimed counterparts.

Being a big non league football fan, I'm delighted to see Brian Mcdermott in the Premiership pitting his wits against some of the world's best. A former manager at clubs as famous as Slough Town and Woking, his calm approach and dignified manner make many warm to him. He's done a fantastic job at Reading but clearly faces a tough challenge, rather like Chris Hughton at Norwich. Regardless of how this season pans out, both Mcdermott and Hughton have, for me, better prospects for the future than the likes of Mark Hughes or Sam Allardyce. I'm not a big fan of either and I'd go so far as to say that their teams are just as likely to go down as Reading or Norwich are from what I've seen. Whilst respected, experienced managers, I really feel that Hughes and Allardyce are in a phase in their respective careers where they struggle to adapt to the demands of Premiership management today.

It might be a bold statement, but I'd rather see someone like Keith Hill or Nigel Clough given the chance to manage a modest club in the top flight. Though very different in their styles and backgrounds, I'm a huge admirer of what they've both achieved. Fans of Premiership clubs might argue that experience at the top and all the demands that go with elite football management may not, at face value at least, be suited to a character like Hill who appears to be so down to earth he could be mistaken for a supporter sat on the bus riding to a game. Perhaps it would be a step too far for two managers who are used to working to a tight budget and picking players from obscurity before developing them into established Championship footballers, but I think they are incredibly talented and astute managers.

I go back to the likes of David Moyes and Tony Pulis on this one though - they both worked at unfashionable football league clubs before they arrived and largely mastered the art of managing in the Premiership. For every fashionable, scarf wearing continental manager in the Premiership, I'd like to see at least one British ex-centre half, pumping his fist and bellowing at his players to squeeze that bit more out of them. Yes, this might be the reason why our national side cannot string two passes together - I know! (and how else would I ever make it to the promised land of the Premiership!).

All that considered, Steve Clarke may well be the hybrid model manager of the future in the British game - at ease with continental methods but also capable of capturing the very best of British footballing culture.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1940505 2012-10-04T15:45:03-04:00 2012-12-04T05:12:01-05:00

Kevin Graham http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-graham/
Even at cash strapped sides outside the elite group of clubs in Italy, he won trophies and delivered success, achieving rewards for both Fiorentina and Lazio above and beyond what was expected at the time. Three Italian league titles on the bounce at Inter Milan followed, proving that he had the managerial capability to win under the pressure of Milanese expectation.

His time at Manchester City has delivered exactly what was expected - the FA Cup and Champions' League football in his first full season and then the Premiership title the year after.

Ok - he hasn't delivered Champions' League success at any of the above, yet, but this is a pretty impressive CV should he need to start searching for his next job.

Despite all this, I am pretty uninspired by Mancini the manager. It's too easy to criticise him by saying that anyone, given the resources at his disposal, could have won the Premiership last year. Given the quality of the English top flight, it is not just a case of buying 20 top players and win by default. He did however catch all 3 of his nearest rivals at Old Trafford, The Emirates and Stamford Bridge on a particularly bad year by recent standards.

I don't think he's bought badly in comparison with managers at other top clubs - even Sir Alex has been known to buy the odd flop. I just don't think he's built the nucleus of a side that is set for a dynasty littered with trophies, and given the resources at his disposal, that's got to be the aim. I don't think he knows what his best side is, and I don't think he's done enough to establish truly world class partnerships in key areas of the pitch. This isn't the result of an intentional squad rotation policy for me, he just hasn't achieved the right balance. Over reliant on Yaya Toure this season, the midfield lacks fluency and aside from the big Ivorian's massive strides turning defence into attack, I can't see attacking options that can expose opposing teams in transition - they let teams get back in numbers when they lose possession.

This is probably a result of Mancini's insistence on conservatism - he will win his way and that means keeping things tight and relying on world class strikers to take chances as and when they present themselves. I've got no problem with that but he needs to do more given the privileged position he holds.

Mancini's body language and communication from the sideline leave a lot to be desired for me. Cool, calm and collected when his side is in the ascendancy, when things go wrong I think he shows his hand far too much, struggling to keep a lid on his emotions and his reactions to certain situations would have me rubbing my hands if I was in the opposing dugout. When a player makes a serious mistake, perhaps that leads to the opposition scoring, Mancini seems to go ballistic at that one man in some sort of frenzy, and I've seen him embark on a long argument with players where both parties scream at each other from 50 or 60 yards away.

In charge he may be - he goes to great lengths to let us all know that in post match interviews once the dust has settled - and I know different players require different methods of man management to ensure they get the manager's point, but it always smacks of over reaction and frantic desparation to pin the blame on one man in full view of millions watching. The concession of a goal is rarely ever one man's fault, even if that one man has made a serious mistake, so there will be questions to answer of defensive cover or other individuals' reaction to danger once the post match analysis is complete.

I also thought Joe Hart's comments recently after the Real Madrid match were spot on - I like to see senior players who are performing well reinforce the need to retain high standards. He didn't slag his team mates off, but he did say that they all had to accept that conceding two very late goals was not good enough for a side that should be considered one of the best club sides in the world. For Mancini to berate Hart publicly for giving that interview suggests a lack of unity in the camp or maybe insecuirty on his part.

Whether it's a terrible mistake on the pitch or an error of judgement off it, the inner sanctum of the dressing room or the privacy of the gaffer's office are the places to assert your authority and expectations.

I'd never suggest Mancini was tactically naive as some have done recently, but I'm not convinced he is the man who should be entrusted with the fortunes, and fortune, of the blue half of Manchester.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1822296 2012-08-24T19:00:00-04:00 2012-10-24T05:12:11-04:00

Kevin Graham http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-graham/
The sense of team is palpable at Goodison Park - no focus on superstars is evident. That's not to say they don't have some very good players in their squad. Baines, Jagielka, Fellaini, Jelavic and Pienaar all fall into the category just below the Rooneys, Lampards, Ferdinands and Tevezs of this day and age in terms of media attention but are more consistent in their contribution and therefore arguably more valuable at a club where Moyes demands that no weak link exists in the unit he puts out on the pitch.

The highly acclaimed Glaswegian - in a clear sign that he is still yearning to better both his personal performance and that of his team - had the players in a few days earlier than most other Premier League clubs this summer, and had a gruelling fitness programme completed well before those other clubs so that he could focus on futher developing the team and the momentum gained during the now annual charge up the table after last Christmas.

This might not work at every club - it's a strategy that works at clubs with limited resources, at least in comparison to the likes of the two Manchester clubs. I think that means that most clubs outside the top four or five should learn from it. This approach develops a more cohesive unit, players have a deeper understanding of their roles and how they support their team mates around them, and the defensive unit in particular gives very little away as a result. Most managers will tell you the defensive work is the easier part of the game to get working, but scoring goals and creating a pattern that creates chances is not so easy - and if you had a criticism of Moyes it would be that Everton don't score enough goals.

Rather like Dave Brailsford's focus on marginal gains in team cycling, Moyes makes sure that whilst he may not have a Ronaldo or a Messi to call upon when attacking inspiration is required, the meticulous planning and execution of set pieces means he has at least one very effective method of creating and scoring goals if all else fails. Being able to score goals when you're not at your most fluent as an attacking force is critically important at all levels of football.

In addition, Moyes continues to prove himself an astute judge when assessing potential recruits in the transfer market. Jelavic's acquisition last season was a great example of this - he's a player who can contribute to the team's performance on and off the ball and is also an instinctive finisher who will get at least 15 goals a season, and will soon be joined by Moyes' latest recruit, Kevin Miralles.

I get the feeling that's the last piece of business Moyes will do this year. His squad is a little light but that reflects financial conditions he has to work under at Goodison Park. Moyes seems to relish the challenge of working to a tight budget.

Everton can finish in the top 4 this year but only if Everton do not suffer too many injuries. Either way, Everton fans can rest assured that Moyes will deliver a final league position above many teams who have spent condierably more money than will. In Moyes they most certainly do trust.

If Everton are settled, focussed and already operating as a well drilled unit, QPR look like a mad house to me at the moment. They appear content to continue buying players to add to what is already a large and expensively assembled squad. Their bench for the 5-0 defeat at home to Swansea included the likes of Zamora, Johnson and Wright-Phillips. They have just agreed a deal to take Michael Dawson to Loftus Road and are also reported to be interested in picking up Ricardo Carvalho on loan from Real Madrid. I like Dawson and think Carvalho might be a good partner for him as I think their styles compliment each other - Dawson can be likened to Carvalho's former central defensive partner John Terry and may prove to be the leader that QPR need. Regardless of that, Mark Hughes seems to have a large squad, full of relatively ordinary and inconsistent players. Their collective understanding as a team unit is conspicuous by its absence and even if Hughes gets Carvalho to partner Dawson, it will take time him to work out what his best 11 is and even longer for those players to develop the kind of understanding Moyes has nurtured at Everton.

Hughes as a manager fails to impress me. He should be under a lot of pressure to get QPR performing as he has received considerable financial backing from his chairman, Tony Fernandes. Though we're only one game into the season and I usually prefer to reserve judgement until I've seen teams settle a bit, I'm not sure QPR have the right mix. There appears to be too much focus on getting players into the club rather than getting the ones they already have on the books performing. Every club is different but I get the feeling that QPR's constant state of flux will be there undoing this year.

Unlike Brendan Rodgers at Liverpool and Andre Villas-Boas at Tottenham - they both have big budgets at big clubs and appear to have been given carte blanche to re-develop their squads in order to achieve more, even if that doesn't happen this season - sides currently viewed as mid table or below have to be realistic about their aspirations in what is an incredibly competitive league. They also can't afford to take 10 games of the season to work out the right mix in terms of players and style of play. Consolidation and a lengthy tenure in the Premier League appears more likely if sides tweak their playing squad and establish a playing style or DNA that works for them over more than just one season. Stoke, Swansea and West Brom are great examples of of this, despite their vastly contrasting styles.

Moyes and the culture he has created at Everton remains the benchmark for clubs outside the usual Champions' League contenders - his continued pursuit of improvement may even deliver Champions' League football to Goodison Park next season, which, given the constraints under which he operates, would be some achievement.


NB I feel the need to communicate my disgust at Blackburn Rovers as a football club at the moment. Shebby Singh's comments Steve Kean's prospects in a fans' forum were laughable and incredibly unprofessional, proving to me that the people in charge of the club are clueless. Kean may not be the best manager out there and fans are entitled to their opinion but football clubs, like businesses, need strong leadership from people who understand their product - it's sadly lacking at Ewood Park.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1654974 2012-07-06T16:08:38-04:00 2012-09-05T05:12:07-04:00

Kevin Graham http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-graham/
I thought the Euros was a fantastic tournament, full of exciting games games for the most part and won by one of the greatest teams ever. I admire collective achievement more than individual achievement. As such, I am full of admiration for Spain, a team with 8 or 9 truly world class players who seem to achieve more because they complement each other's natural ability and work ethic. I believe this is why they will go down in history as one of the greatest two teams ever to play the game.

The other member of that elite duet is, by general consensus, the Brazilian World Cup winning side of 1970. The fact that Pele, the game's greatest ambassador, and a player deemed by many to be the greatest that ever played the game, played such a major part in that success may make that Brazilian team's memory more special than that of Del Bosque's current Spanish team, which has no stand out player because they have so many outstanding players who contribute consistently to their success.

Either way, there is no room in this Spanish side of selfish players with big egos. When I use those words, only one player springs into my mind. Cristiano Ronaldo.

A player referred to by many as the world's best, I see Ronaldo as having one major step to take in his sporting development before he can be considered great. His journey, under the influence of the two most successful managers of this era, from the fragile yet gifted young winger Alex Ferguson bought from Sporting Lisbon to the much more complete, hugely powerful specimen we see today under Jose Mourinho at Real Madrid, has been very exciting to watch. His physical attributes, ability to score goals and create goals for others, aerial capability and work rate off the ball make him a joy to watch. That is, unless he come up against the world's best defenders and best defensive units, when it really matters. Yes he looked impressive in the wins over Holland and the Czech Republic, but he wasn't faced by the most effective defensive units on show at the championships in those games.

When it really mattered in the semi final against Spain, Ronaldo had chances to give Portugal a lead they may have held on to. Not many, and not chances that were tap ins by any stretch of the imagination, but they were opportunities for him to take his profile and achievements to the next level and he bottled it. In addition, when Spain were on the ropes and were there for the taking, Portugal's skipper disappeared when they needed him most. Highly critical? Absolutely. Harsh? Maybe, but you'll have to work hard to convince me otherwise. I think he's a flat track bully - perhaps the best we've ever seen when sticking the knife in on teams that have shipped a couple of goals and are praying for the final whistle.

And so to that likeness I referred to.

There's a highly talented young fella who has just reached his first Wimbledon final and who will carry the hopes of a nation (or 4 nations - delete as appropriate) when he steps onto Centre Court on Sunday afternoon.

Hugely talented, and capable of being the world's best? Devastating when putting good but not great opposition to the sword? Moody, sulky, and in need of a kick up the backside every now and then?

Check, check and check.

I'll be more than happy to belt out "Flower of Scotland" if Andy Murray can take that final step into the realms of greatness on Sunday. After all, my ginger hair would suggest I've more in common with Murray than I do with Ronaldo.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1611278 2012-06-20T05:01:43-04:00 2012-08-19T05:12:08-04:00

Kevin Graham http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-graham/
The new England manager clearly values the need to build from solid foundations. England's back five have been excellent so far, probably rivalled only by Germany and their quarter final opponents Italy in that department. Apart from Steven Gerrard, who has arguably been the player of the tournament so far, the remainder of the team have yet to demonstrate any attacking fluency and confidence in our ability to get forward is conspicuous by its absence. If Hodgson had managed to achieve this at the expense of the team's ability to defend as a unit, we might be out of the tournament now.

I have reservations over the quality of players Hodgson has at his disposal - as the tournament progresses, you need more than one player to win you games. The midfield has been well organised but the ability to develop attacking play is limited at best. Ashley Young's end product has been very poor, James Milner is a hard working but very limited player on such an elevated stage of world football and Scott Parker, though inspirational in his ability to block and throw his body on the line when required, looks a yard too slow and does not have the ability to either make telling forward passes or drive into areas and look like scoring goals himself.

If England are going to score goals, it seems sensible to suggest that getting good quality ball in from wide areas is something we should perhaps try to do a little more of. Hodgson's insistence on defending deep as a team has been a successful tactic, but I'd like to see the full backs encouraged to get forward more, as both Ashley Cole and Glen Johnson have the potential to be a real threat in the opposition's half of the pitch.

England have not had one player caught offside in three games - an incredible statistic for me. It shows just how deep we have played as a team, and also how little threat we have posed opposition when our midfielders have driven forward with the ball - the time when opposing defenders have to close space and invariably leave areas for forwards to run into. We have to have possession of the ball higher up the pitch with enough bodies there to provide options so we keep it when it's up there.

As such, it may be worth considering playing Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain in the centre of the park instead of Parker and playing the wide midfielders in slightly narrower positions to provide room for the full backs to get forward and also to provide more cover to allow Oxlade-Chamberlain and Gerrard to get forward more. Wayne Rooney does not play on the shoulder of the centre halves so needs at least one midfielder to get forward and interchange with. Danny Welbeck's pace should also be utilised a little more positively by asking him to stretch the opposition's defence and run into the channels more, which in turn will create more space in the hole for Rooney and any advancing midfielders to expose.

All that said, perhaps given the lack of quality available to him, Hodgson may be well served to stick to what's been successful so far and take his chances by keeping the opposition at bay and hoping to score from a set piece or a counter attack. The Italians have made it to the latter stages and even the finals of major tournaments in recent years by employing similar tactics.

We shouldn't lose sight of the fact that Spain may well have exited the competition had it not been for one Iker Casillas point-blank save from Ivan Rakitic's header deep into the second half of their game, or that Germany were put under considerable pressure by Denmark in the second half of their final game on Monday when one goal could have seen them go out of the tournament. England qualified with points to spare and despite Ukraine's admirable attacking intent, never really looked like losing the game. Though Germany and Spain have clearly been the best teams in the tournament so far, you could argue that England "managed" their way through the group stage whilst still learning about their options in what is a redevelopment phase for this group of players. Hodgson I'm sure would have picked sides with winning games first and foremost in his mind, but he clearly hasn't settled on his favoured attacking formation yet, so I remain optimistic that we'll get better both in this tournament and in the upcoming World Cup qualifying campaign.

For all England's attacking limitations, the England fans in Donetsk were the ones who were singing and dancing when the final whistle blew, and for a country that thrives on the feel good factor created when their team progress to the latter stages of a major tournament, that's what really matters.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1538941 2012-05-23T09:14:12-04:00 2012-07-23T05:12:05-04:00

Kevin Graham http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-graham/
With Liverpool, Aston Villa and West Brom all seeking new managers already - I'm sure they won't be the only Premier League clubs with a vacancy at the top this summer - speculation is rife.

If we've learnt anything since King Kenny's departure from Anfield, it's that the club's fans are, on the whole, slightly detached from reality. That's natural, they were the dominant force in English and arguably European football for a generation. The boot room culture at Anfield is respected the world over, and they are indeed a special football club. But they are now and have been for some time, also rans in the Premier League. I reckon they're league position at the end of the season was about right - in the same league expectations wise as Newcastle and Everton. Yes they have a massive and loyal fan base, and a fabulous history and heritage, but if you were considering a job offer to take up the Anfield hot seat, how would you weigh up the opportunity?

They have one truly world class player, who is only fit to play 15 games a season and has a year, maybe two, left at the top. Luis Suarez is clearly a top, top footballer too, and perhaps he could be deemed in the world class bracket too. They have a another five or six players with real potential but who are in danger of spending too long in an under-performing side to really develop into top class, consistent footballers with instincts for success eg Downing, Carroll, Enrique, Kuyt, Johnson etc. I would add Reina to that group now, he's regressed from being a world class keeper to one who looks fragile far too frequently. That leaves a group of young players who are like rabbits in the headlights - Shelvey, Spearing, Kelly and Henderson particularly, who are struggling to find their feet in an ever changing team with very little in the way of senior influence to help them. Jamie Carragher - for me the man who has given them sufficient steel at times in the last decade to bring them any success they have enjoyed and a leader of men who should go down as one of the best ever at Anfield - is now struggling with the effects of age. Craig Bellamy aside, the remainder of the squad are simply not good enough.

This squad still has potential, but they've chopped and changed so much that some of the players need to move on in order for the team to settle and prosper. So funds are required to build a side, but those funds are probably not going to be available. The hangover from last year's spending spree is a painful one. £40m on Carroll may in time look almost acceptable - he is showing signs of life and I think he may have a good tournament this summer in Poland and the Ukraine but for £40m, you need the finished article and they didn't get that in Carroll. £20m on Henderson was just an ambitious punt - hard working with a great attitude for the game, Henderson is by all accounts a model pro, but he doesn't have the ability to justify that kind of fee. He may have a decent career ahead of him but it will be hard work and application that get him that, not a natural gift that sets him apart as a creative influence or constant attacking threat. Add to that the £20m expense of Downing who has been largely anonymous in the last season, and you have a very expensive trip to the shops with not a lot to show for it.

So the new manager won't have pots of money to rebuild with, the value of his side is probably half of what was actually paid for it and some wily trading in the transfer market will therefore be difficult as the assets aren't worth what the books might have them valued at.

Add to this the expectation of both fans and the club's owners, FSG, and you have a daunting prospect for the next incumbent.

The situation is similar for Aston Villa. A big fan base and a famous history does not make it easy for modern managers at the club. The fans' expectations and influence at the club are too much at times. Rather like Roy Hodgson at Liverpool, Alex Mcleish was on a hiding to nothing because the fans didn't want him there. With little in the way of funds to work with, the new manager at Villa Park is going to struggle to reach the safety of mid table and a long, hard season looks on the cards which would inevitably lead to more dissatisfaction from the clubs' fans. It's a rut that's hard to get out of when the competition in the Premier League is so intense.

I find it hard to understand why fans have so much influence on managerial choice, but I do accept that their views are so much more relevant at a club like Liverpool that has such a strong footballing heritage - it's more a way of life for the Liverpool family, and I get that. Even still, those fans are not best placed to judge, particularly because they think they deserve to get one of the top managers in world football. Aside from the obvious challenge some may relish and the honour of being at the helm of a world famous club, I don't see much to attract the leading candidates. The likes of Mourinho and Guardiola wouldn't, I suspect, dream of taking the role given the limitations of the club in its current state. Whoever comes in needs to lay down the DNA of an entirely new team - there's probably no instant fix here.

When I hear Liverpool fans saying that Brendan Rodgers, Roberto Martinez and Andres Villas-Boas are not good enough, I have to chuckle to myself, particularly given that Roy Hodgson was held in similar regard by those fans and he has been entrusted with the role of England manager. They are exactly the type of managers who can take the club forward, and if the Liverpool fans would just back them wholeheartedly, I am adamant that they would do no worse than King Kenny did this year whilst also building the foundations to push the club back into the promised land of the Champions League.

At Villa Park, they too need some stability, and an appointment that has the backing of the whole club. It appears that Ole Gunnar Solskjaer will not be that man, so they need to be realistic about the names they can attract. My preference there would be Ian Holloway if they could prise him away from Blackpool. Give him a season to bed in a team and I'm certain he could motivate both players and fans - not only is he a fantastic character to lead the club who, by virtue of his personality alone, will attract positive focus on the club, but he has proved at Blackpool that he can build a team, watch it succeed, and then build another team after the initial project has run it's course. They play great football, which Villa fans appear to have an appetite for after the rather dreary fare on show under Mcleish, and I think he is capable of ensuring there is some defensive backbone to complement the attacking style and stop them conceding too many. Obviously Paul Lambert merits serious consideration but I'm not sure there's enough to tempt him from his current surroundings, though Norwich will have a tough job emulating the successes of their first season in the Premier League. So that's Villa sorted, but what about the Liverpool hot seat?

Appointing Jamie Carragher, a man revered by Liverpool fans almost as much as his manager until recently was back at the end of his playing career, might allow the club to rebuild with a little less pressure to achieve the instant gratification that trophies and Champions' League qualification would bring. Given that this would be in keeping with the club's traditions and he is one of their own, it would be a popular appointment. He is clearly a guy with the potential to manage, is an excellent leader and has played a role in developing some of Liverpool's younger players at a difficult time for the club results wise. Maybe the owners of the football club may see that as too similar a strategy to the one employed when appointing Dalglish, but if messers Martinez, Villas-Boas and Rodgers decide its too risky a proposition to take on, I'd favour Carragher over any continental manager such as Van Gaal, Klinsmann or Capello.

On my own management fortunes, I'm delighted to say we beat Jersey a couple of weeks ago down at Springfield Stadium on what was a great day for everyone involved in Guernsey football. You can see the highlights on Channel Television. And no, I won't be applying for any other jobs this summer!]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1459970 2012-04-30T15:45:52-04:00 2012-06-30T05:12:02-04:00

Kevin Graham http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-graham/
Despite his experience in sweeping dirt under the carpet, his initial reaction - the plea of innocence - was the wrong one if he wished to regain some semblance of credibility with the football loving British public. Once he'd seen the video replay of the incident when he raised his knee into Alexis Sanchez's backside (to playground cries of "dead leg!" from a few of my acquaintances on Twitter), he realised he was backed into a corner with no room to wriggle. The post match interview with Sky Sports' Geoff Shreeves was largely apologetic as a result, though there was a brief plea for mitigation, on the grounds he was only trying to protect himself from Sanchez who was, apparently, "running in behind" Terry. Unless my eyes were mistaken, Sanchez was stood in front of Terry relatively motionless and there was certainly no physical threat to Terry evident. Apart from that ridiculous notion, his interview with Shreeves was sensibly articulated, trying to divert the focus of attention from his indiscretion to the heroic efforts of his team mates and the fact that the achievement was just reward for everyone involved with Chelsea Football Club. No doubt that will remain the party line, and I expect Terry will now be shielded from the media in an attempt to take the sting out of the situation.

Terry clearly has a dark side that he struggles to contain despite, I suspect, having been urged to remain on the straight and narrow by trusted advisors and having had the support of a highly astute public relations team. Terry's behaviour was ultimately the primary reason for Fabio Capello's resignation. Love Capello or hate him, with the exception of the 2010 World Cup finals in South Africa, his managerial record suggests he was worthy of that position. I don't think anyone can seriously suggest the current situation with Stuart Pearce as Caretaker England Manager and confusion reigning over whether or not he will remain so for the European Championships which start in just over 6 weeks' time is preferable to Capello having remained in the hot seat. That's not all Terry's fault but the situation arose because of him and his inability to behave in a manner befitting a footballing role model, a position that goes with the territory whether he wanted it or not. His affair with mother of his former club team mate Wayne Bridge's child and allegations of racial abuse towards QPR's Anton Ferdinand just add to a profile that is tainted by far too many suggestions of seriously bad behaviour.

So the moral judgement on Terry is damning, but what about judgement purely and simply based on his performances on the pitch? The last year, possibly even the last two, have highlighted weaknesses in Terry's game and it appeared that a slow, continued decline in his performances was inevitable as father time started to catch up with Terry. This was also perhaps amplified by the emergence of younger, more athletic pretenders to his crown like Phil Jones and Chris Smalling. A distinct lack of pace appeared to be his achilles heel and the rot started to set as Chelsea's performances also suffered - no coincidence.

But Terry, the man who crosses the white line, has demonstrated the kind of resilience that winners find in the face of adversity and criticism. Time and again he led from the front as Chelsea, if not keeping pace with Manchester United, maintained their position as one of England's top 4, despite showing precious little in the way of cohesive attacking flair. Terry's performances have at times relied on old fashioned grit and a willingness to block the opposition's attacking play by whatever means necessary, but he has improved technically with age. His instincts for reading the game have improved so that he arrives in areas where the opposition look to attack before his attacking opponents do. He stays on his feet much more these days and only goes to ground when absolutely necessary. Not content with being a typically robust centre back of a very English nature ie a bloodied Terry Butcher or a fist pumping Tony Adams, his willingness to get on the ball and pass it out of defence or even receive it whilst under pressure and look to play has developed under the influence of the likes of Andre Villas-Boas. This may not be unusual in an era when the top English sides have gradually looked to emulate their continental rivals by demanding that even the most robust of defenders look to provide more when in possession than a Peter Kay-esque "have it" whack towards the opponents' goal. However, it's clear that Terry's ability to pass the ball out of defence with either foot and the accuracy of that passing has helped Chelsea to retain possession for longer periods and add more fluency to their attacks.

In addition to his improved personal performances, he has also maintained and developed his qualities as a leader. When Terry plays, Chelsea look organised and hungry. When he doesn't, a cohesive defensive shape is rarely evident, and some of Chelsea's less driven stars can often be observed taking a breather or neglecting their responsibilities without their leader there to remind them of their duties. In the same way that Manchester United's most impressive spells as a defensive unit occur when Nemanja Vidic plays, providing the more robust edge to complement Rio Ferdinand's undoubted ability as a ball playing centre back, Chelsea too are a very different proposition with Mr Terry in the side.

So, I'm clearly gonna pick JT first on the team sheet right?

Based solely on his performances on the pitch, almost definitely. But what about the impact his bad behaviour has on the team? How does a young kid coming into the Chelsea first team feel about sitting next to his captain who's about to go to court yet again and be on the front instead of the back pages of tomorrow's papers? How did one of Terry's more experienced England team mates feel about the fact the married Terry was more than just a little cosy with the mother of his child? How does a team mate who perhaps suffers racial abuse from opposition fans feel about the support his skipper can provide him in his hour of need?
Let's be clear, all this and much more has gone on behind the closed doors of top football clubs for years and will continue to do so. Let's not kid ourselves or get too precious about that.
The key question though is, do the positives outweigh the negatives and therefore justify Terry's inclusion as captain of his club, and even more pertinent for non-Chelsea fans, his country. As a manager, sometimes you might wish to have a player in your side but decide against bringing him to the club because he upsets the balance in the dressing room to the extent that focus on football and achieving success as a team is diluted because of "noise" around that player.

Even considering all that, I might still have felt Terry could justify the decision to give him the armband for club and country, until Tuesday. That was the straw that broke the camel's back for me. His team mates pulled saved his bacon and pulled together for the cause in heroic fashion at the Nou Camp after a mindless act from their skipper. If they'd gone on to lose, the finger would quite rightly have been pointed at him. Maybe it actually galvanised Chelsea to play better without him, I don't know.

His rush of blood wasn't just that - it was evidence that a more sinister character lies beneath, a character that Terry has largely managed to keep hidden when he's crossed the white line. The mindless decision to try and "do" Alexis Sanchez on Tuesday was not a decision, it was instinct. And if he can't stop himself in a Champions' League semi final against Barcelona, then I can't believe it won't happen again, perhaps in an England shirt.

Footballers are like ships passing in the night as one very experienced team mate of mine once said. Great teams can have players who don't even like each other within their ranks, but when one rotten apple has responsibility for leading the side, maybe its just not worth the hassle.
I rate the player, I really do. But the man himself is not someone I think Chelsea or England can trust. I hope he proves me wrong.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1424614 2012-04-16T19:00:00-04:00 2012-06-16T05:12:01-04:00

Kevin Graham http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-graham/
Remember Rivaldo having the ball kicked at his thigh by a Turkish opponent in the 2002 World Cup as he was about to take a corner kick? By falling over holding his face in an attempt to make what was only a little petulance look like a violent assault, he managed to get the guy sent off. I just can't defend behaviour like that - it gives those who like to have a pop at the game far too much ammunition.

Andy Carroll's dive against Newcastle made fools of us all. I want to win as much as anyone does, and I've learned over the years that a little gamesmanship can help you get the result you want. I don't think there's anything wrong with appealing for a decision from the referee in an attempt to influence his decision, or taking the ball into the corner to waste time if you are looking to defend a one goal lead in injury time. I do think falling over like Carroll did is entirely wrong. There was at least six inches of daylight between Carroll and Tim Krul when the contact was supposed to occur - the boy should be embarrassed.

The never ending choice of football on the television, and perhaps more importantly, the never ending analysis of that football, has led to a generation of footballers and football fans who seem to think that this sort of behaviour is just part of the modern game. I went to watch a youth cup final a couple of weeks ago and I was amazed at what I saw. The most talented players on the pitch were too busy trying to imitate the antics of the players they see on television every week to think about helping their team win the game.

I couldn't help think that the coaches must have, on some level, felt that such behaviour was acceptable - there was after all no sign of them trying to discourage it. One of the star players was sent off after badgering the referee and using some pretty blue language for long enough to warrant the receipt of a red card. Instead of giving the little shit a dressing down, the coaches seemed to want to remonstrate with the referee for taking that course of action. If youth coaches take this sort of approach, its pretty clear what the future holds.

I'm probably coming across whiter than white on all this - I can assure you I'm not. I understand what's on the line at Premiership level with all the money involved in the game, or even what reaching a big cup final can mean to a group of young players. I've used foul language in the heat of the moment and I've committed fouls in a rather cynical fashion where I've "taken a yellow" for the team because I've felt the attacking threat at that moment could have led to us conceding a goal. As a player and as a coach I want to win at almost any cost.

There is a line - I don't even know where it is, but someone needs to identify it and punish people who cross it. Rivaldo's disgusting behaviour should have led to a long ban for a player who, at the time, was one of the world's best. The measly fine he had to pay didn't do nearly enough to underline just how damaging such behaviour was and still is to the game, particularly as it came at the biggest footballing event in the world with billions watching on television. Judgement on borderline decisions will at times fail to uncover the truth. A player who is really good at conning referees is hard to stop. When a tricky attacker comes together with a cumbersome centre half in the area, its hard to spot a proactive attempt to get the legs tangled and often looks like a clumsy challenge by the defender (yes, I was a centre half and yes, I'm still bitter about the odd occasions when this happened to poor little innocent me). So its not always easy to spot, penalise and punish if the player is adept at disguising his attempt to cheat.

But if television has something to answer for because it helped create this culture, it can surely be used in a positive way to highlight clear examples of players cheating and the evidence then used to punish the offending player, and maybe his team while we're at it so that this behaviour is cut out of the game quickly.

The honesty and integrity I see in both codes of rugby and the respect their referees are afforded is admirable. I'm not about to convert to egg chasing, watching or worshipping, but I will say this. The values of football have been compromised to such an extent that if I was given a choice between the two sports to use as a means of helping my son learn about life through sport, I wouldn't be holding the beautiful game up as the example to follow.

There is one great white hope for the beautiful game though, in the form of the little fella widely acknowledged as the world's best player at present - Lionel Messi. As he stated in his excellent recent interview with Sky Sports' John Fendley, " when I can keep running, I try to do that". No elaborate dives or prima donna behaviour on show from this little master.

Thankfully, it appears that Messi is the role model of choice for the next generation of British footballers, and not Andy Carroll.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1386562 2012-03-28T18:14:31-04:00 2012-05-28T05:12:02-04:00

Kevin Graham http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-graham/
Grant Holt's performances for Norwich City have been one of the highlights of the season for me, and I don't think I'm alone in thinking that. Whilst talk of England call ups is perhaps just a step too far for the Norwich skipper - I think Kevin Davies' brief flirtation with the international game hasn't helped Holt's cause as the gamble to play an "old fashioned" English centre forward didn't work in that instance - his performances and goals this year have caught the eye of many who had dismissed him as a journeyman pro simply not good enough for Premiership football at the start of the season.

Holt is a classic target man. Great with his back to goal, physically very imposing and a massive aerial threat, Holt could be compared to the likes of Bob Latchford, Mark Hateley, Niall Quinn and John Fashanu. I struggled to think of players easily there - this type of player is verging on the extinct in today's game. Alan Shearer, though a better player than Holt and one of international repute, was probably the most recent of that breed at the top level of English football. Today's coaches clearly look to develop smaller, more mobile forwards, but Holt has proved that big can be beautiful, at least in the eyes of Norwich City fans.

Holt's technique when finishing in and around the box is excellent, and he has adapted to the pace of the Premiership quickly, rarely taking too long in possession to release it when the ball is played into him and improving his conversion ratio when chances do come his way. Twelve Premiership goals so far mean he is the second highest English goal scorer at present, and is ahead of the likes of Adebayor, Bent and Balotelli in the goalscoring chart. When you consider Norwich, though they've fared impressively in exalted surroundings, are no more than a mid table outfit, that's a terrific return. So maybe there is still a place, at least in the English game, for a big, old school centre forward.

I think there are two reasons for Holt's success. First, Norwich play great passing football and move the ball into the final third of the pitch with accuracy so Holt, Steve Morrison and Simeon Jackson get good service to work off. Holt and Morrison (another player plucked out of non league football) provide a perfect foil for that type of football because they have the ability to use the ball intelligently when it is played forward, as well as causing a lot of problems for the opposition's defence with their physicality and work rate, which bring me on to the second and most prominent reason. Holt really, really wants it. He plays every game like its his last.

Having arrived in the Premiership via such outposts as Barrow in Furness, Workington, Singapore and Perth, Australia, his arrival at the top level occurred because he has made the most of his footballing attributes. Even when he did make it into the ranks of full time, football league surroundings, he has had to move back down the leagues, been farmed out on loan and dealt with his fair share of set backs. There was no five year contract on the table for Holt as a teenager - he was working in a factory. He's had to fight tooth and nail every inch of the way and has become accustomed to dealing with critics suggesting he's not quick, mobile or technically gifted enough to deal with stepping up a level, something he has done gradually rather than in one giant step. He's learned, adapted and then succeeded at every level. The work rate and aggression which comes so naturally to him had to be complemented with better movement off the ball, quicker feet, more subtlety and most definitely more clinical finishing if he was to keep progressing.

I played against Holt twice (for Whitby Town against Halifax Town and then Barrow) and if I'm honest, he was the type of player I liked to play against. Being of limited ability and limited pace, I was happy to get involved in a battle and he was certainly game. He was no big time charlie - every other forward I played against had a chip on their shoulder and a bit too much lip for me - he just went at it hammer and tongs with anyone in the vicinity, ran all day long and never gave up or switched off. His touch wasn't bad but if I'm honest, I thought he'd maybe make a modest career out of the game in the bottom rung of league football or maybe the conference and then gradually drop down the non league pyramid. He didn't cause me the kind of problems that some of the smaller, quicker and more mobile strikers in the Unibond Premier league did. He definitely seemed like a decent lad who would dish it out but could take it too without either crying to the referee or vowing to make it his mission in life to "mess me up" ( only one centre forward I played against was seriously scary enough to make me think he could and would do just that given half a chance!).

Whilst the Unibond Premier league back then was the pinnacle of my career, it was from that modest level that Holt then embarked on a journey that would ultimately take him five steps up the footballing ladder to the promised land of the Premiership at the age of 30 and prove he had a lot more left in his locker than the centre half marking him back then would ever have. I'm delighted for him, and I value everything that Holt stands for. He's a proper man - brave, honest, hard working and a real team player. The fact that he has continued to improve technically to the extent he is now being considered as having an outside chance of making the England squad for this summer's European Championships proves that with the right attitude, you don't have to be blessed with the natural talent of a Zinedine Zidane or Lionel Messi to play at the very top of the game. There is no hope for me but there's a lesson in there somewhere for today's young players, and maybe even the not so young.]]>