The 200 best players in the world: 55 - 51

At last I reach the top 50.

Unfortunately as announced earlier I didn't have any much time to update the list during August and the time I have now as I've also said I want to use instead (transfer window closed and all) writing some fashionable late team reports/previews on what's still the new season.

So definitely not a massive Serie A preview team by team report like last year but rather do several interesting (mostly top I guess) teams from different leagues. Mainly Italy, England, Spain and Germany.

Right now there is an international break of course (where I'm personally looking forward to talented Belgium against Germany tomorrow) and I think it's a good time then to try and squeeze as many club previews in as possible (which as these things go could end up being not many at all - we shall see) before the leagues get started again and/or I get tired of it, where I'll then immediately will seek to continue and (finally) finish the list.

Right now I have to say though that the new season is a lot more interesting for me than the good old list anyway (I hardly even do changes any more either which is a massive change from earlier) which hopefully will also result in some decent productivity.

Which teams will be first? I have no idea!

Good suggestions are welcome.

Introduction to the list

200 - 101 (and every writeup+honorary mentions)

100 - 95
100: Jose Bosingwa - Chelsea - Portugal
99: André-Pierre Gignac - Toulouse - France
98: Andrés Guardado - Deportivo La Coruna - Mexico
97: Ricardo Carvalho - Chelsea - Portugal and Rio Ferdinand - Manchester United - England
96: John Terry - Chelsea - England
95: Mark Van Bommel - Bayern München - The Netherlands
94-83
94: Alejandro "Chori" Dominguez - Valencia - Argentina
93: Claudio Marchisio - Juventus - Italy
92: Michael Carrick - Manchester United - England
91: Darren Fletcher - Manchester United - Scotland
90: Miralem Pjanic - Lyon - Bosnia-Herzegovina
89: Santi Cazorla - Villarreal - Spain
88: Samir Nasri - Arsenal - France
87: Luis Suarez - Ajax - Uruguay
86: Mario Balotelli - Inter - Italy
85: Alberto Gilardino - Fiorentina - Italy
84: James Milner - Aston Villa - England
83: Mikel Arteta - Everton - Spain
82-77
82: Thierry Henry - Barcelona - France
81: Thomas Müller - Bayern München - Germany
80: Ivica Olic - Bayern München - Croatia
79: Branislav Ivanovic - Chelsea - Serbia
78: Nemanja Vidić - Manchester United - Serbia
77: Giorgio Chiellini - Juventus - Italy
76-68
76: Marcos Senna - Villarreal - Spain
75: Lass Diarra - Real Madrid - France
74: Francesco Totti - Roma - Italy
73: Antonio Di Natale - Udinese - Italy
72: Emmanuel Adebayor - Manchester City - Togo
71: Mirko Vucinic - Roma - Montenegro
70: Antonio Valencia - Manchester United - Ecuador
69: David Pizarro - Roma - Chile
68: Dimitar Berbatov - Manchester United - Bulgaria
67-62
67: Juan Manuel Vargas - Fiorentina - Peru
66: Robinho - Manchester City - Brazil
65: Patrice Evra - Manchester United - France
64: Michel Bastos - Lyon - Brazil
63: Seydou Keita - Barcelona - Mali
62: Javier Zanetti - Inter - Argentina
61-56
61: Ashley Cole - Chelsea - England
60: Andrea Pirlo - Milan - Italy
59: Mario Gomez - Bayern München - Germany
58: Karim Benzema - Real Madrid - France
57: Zvjezdan Misimovic - Wolfsburg - Bosnia Herzegovina
56: Rafael Van der Vaart - Real Madrid - The Netherlands

55:

Michael Ballack

Bayer Leverkusen

Midfielder - Germany





One of the best midfielders in the world for the last decade is back at Leverkusen where he got his big breakthrough more than 10 years ago.

Ballack even at his best was never flashy but as effective a player as almost any. His power, stamina combined with intelligence, considerable skills (passing, first touch as well as shooting) plus aerial ability made him able to excel anywhere from commanding play in central midfield to provide bundles of goals in the final third.

With great consistency that was all showcased time and time again in Germany. Whether for Leverkusen, Bayern or the Nationalmannschaft, Ballack was the unquestionable leader and mostly the best player too, and with a big ego to go along with all the ability he was in many ways yet another traditional almost imperious German football Kapitän. Just the way they seem to like them.


Then when Ballack moved to Chelsea as a 29 year old veteran much of the same was expected but never quite materialized itself with the same consistency. First of all there were injuries, second there were other midfielders so excellent that Ballack wasn't the talisman, more like a very good role player in fact, and that one of those midfielders Frank Lampard shared many of Ballack's characteristics while almost never missing a game, meant that Ballack for Chelsea never became the dominant midfielder everyone had grown used to.

It's interesting I think, that at least before physical decline really set in for Ballack, that Chelsea had perhaps the 3 most effective midfielders in the world at their disposal, Lampard, Essien and Ballack but in a classic case of there can only be so many chefs, some saw their roles reduced on a regular basis.

For Essien - at least when he wasn't totally wasted playing defender (ugh) - that wasn't a problem because even though the two-way ability has always been there clear as a bright day, he is of course as everyone knows superb and fully comfortable, indeed one of the very best defensive midfielders in the world, fully fine with being more selective with his powerful forward runs.

For Ballack however, at least in the early Chelsea days, still with so much to offer in and around the box, not being the key part of the attacking game that he always had been, must have been some adjustment.

Maybe you could even say that it was when the adjustment took place naturally, Ballack losing the power to be dominant at the highest level, that he was at his best for Chelsea. Providing the most value. With Essien desperately unlucky with injuries and Mikel with moments of liability never quite taking command of defensive midfield, it was Ballack who with good distribution and intelligent defending (and some attacking too at times) in a deeper role provided much needed consistency from there on the way to his first league title in England, enjoying what I thought was a very good season.

For the national team during World Cup qualification similar took place. Gone was the box to box goalscoring talisman and instead we saw a defensive controlling midfielder fulfilling his role very well. Particularly impressive was his performances in what I think counts as only two or three games in the last four years where I've seen Germany play defensive, the games against Hiddink's Russia, eeking out a couple of close victories.

Injury of course put a stop to that and with an even stronger defensive midfield emergence coming from younger countryman Bastian Schweinsteiger last season, performing brilliantly, it will be interesting if there is still room for the self proclaimed STILL captain on the German national team.

Even if different because the emergence of an actual German number 10 playmaker in Mesut Özil has made the old Ballack role sort of go away, there is of course even a new superb German two-way, box to box player really coming into his own in Sami Khedira (who I now would rank just inside the top 50 I think), so it's not like that position is anything near being a clear pathway back into the team for Ballack either.

At Leverkusen the early perhaps too ambitious signaled intent is not to put a straitjacket on Ballack and play him in his recent holding role but rather wish for the old Ballack being a key player, in attack as well.
There is no doubt Ballack is still skilled and strong but whether he still (maybe in the Bundesliga?) will have the engine for box to box play with real impact definitely remains to be seen.

54:

Aaron Lennon

Tottenham

Winger - England



Still only 23 Lennon began last season sensationally, showing I thought, consistently a higher level than ever before and in full flow fully delivering on the great promise he had shown years earlier.

His great pace and skill with the ball meant games where he was almost unstoppable to the point where was actually one of the best players in the league, game in and game out providing high class differencemaking, and when Tottenham's best player Luka Modric got injured already in August, not least Lennon (while not forgetting the other Spurs players who made the list or Bale the notable) helped carry the team to impressive victories.

Also very impressive to me nowadays is when a winger is comfortable in a 4-4-2 rather than the mostly more modern winger friendly 4-2-3-1.

For Tottenham when it's mostly playing with two outright strikers not helping out defensively to any great effect, it's good to see a smaller not very strong but very much fast and skilled type of player like Lennon mostly very comfortable, working hard, both when his team is in possession and when it's time to defend and cover his wing position making up/playing his part in the two defensive chains of four in the 4-4-2.

A lot of wing type of players would not be comfortable in a 4-4-2 with the defensive requirements of the current day player and in order to line up well defensively without the ball need the extra midfielder (over a striker) for protection and for the team to make up the needed defensive numbers. Contrary to formations with the extra striker on board where it's the opposite with the real danger there of actually taking away from the defensive numbers and potentially, if not very rigid (where it can still be a very effective defensive system) or with strong defensive play in positions where it perhaps isn't common, run the great risk of getting outnumbered when up against the very common five man midfield formations.

I can only really remember one game last season where Lennon in the Spurs 4-4-2 (Redknapp did actually change systems against the likes of Arsenal and Chelsea) were given a runaround by a more flexible system. It was against Manchester United who with a curious almost wingless lineup and a midfield of Giggs, Scholes, Fletcher and Anderson, then Rooney as usual being everywhere, with outnumbering then fully in place made it very easy, for not least Giggs and Scholes with their quality passing, to make the Spurs midfielders resemble, at times, yes headless chickens.

Tottenham of course still do face plenty of 4-4-2s in England and in a battle of those, with their quality (not least superior two-way play from Modric, Palacios and Bale) will mostly prevail, but as already speculated heavily on by many people, what is going to happen in the Champions League when instead mostly up against different systems, not least the 4-4-2-unfriendly 4-2-3-1. That of the extra midfielder.

Of course numbers on their own don't say a whole lot necessarily and everything depends on different player characteristics making up those very numbers but any two of the Defoe/Crouch/Pavluchenko three starting, could make Spurs vulnerable against the typical 4-2-3-1s and it will be very interesting how well they (and Lennon facing this challenge) deals with it.

Ideally a striker upgrade fully able to spearhead a 4-2-3-1 and make the people around him better would have been brought in by now (say Fabiano who instead renewed his contract at Sevilla) but another option could actually be another very good attacking midfielder, one so good that he and what is already in place, will give a lone Spurs striker such good working conditions that the job just might end up being one that can be overcome.

Currently there are rumors of Rafael Van der Vaart in what would be a very late (maybe too late!) transfer deadline deal.

Could formations with both him and Modric + the impressive supporting cast in what has to be said is just a very strong midfield, be so good that one of the aforementioned Spurs striker trio could do, what's not really obvious capabilities when looking at them, a good enough job as a lone striker?

Crouch to me doesn't bring enough goalscoring, let alone when alone, and while I like his play together with a co striker I'm not sure his play working with midfielders is good enough. Defoe certainly brings the goalscoring but teamwork isn't good enough if we're talking the highest level and he just needs someone consistently close to him to find the space near goal that he then is really good at taking advantage of sniper style.

All in all Spurs current best bet might just be Pavluchenko then. I'm not sure that's entirely positive, again someone like Fabiano undoubtedly would have been much better, but he does have the physicality that Defore doesn't and a drive that Crouch can only dream of.
For the completeness that's actually there in the Pavluchenko body he could still just not be quite good enough in all his positive areas when at the highest level, but an excellent midfield might just lift him. Just enough. I definitely think it's worth a try (it's not easy to imagine VdV in a 4-4-2 anyway). At least in the Champions League.



For Lennon (yes back to him) a late December injury put a stop to his excellence and when he eventually came back he never really found the great form again. Including like many others at the World Cup.

I suppose there is a danger that I've been too quick to forget less good Lennon spells, including curiously enough under ex Spurs manager Ramos in systems on paper at least more suited for a modern winger, and that I became more than a bit blinded by a great spell of Lennon magic in the more traditional fast paced British 4-4-2 under Redknapp and his positive impact (in contrast to Ramos) with a more (much more) classic British style of football managing. On and off the field.

This season should tell a lot. Not just whether if Lennon can keep it up, but the club as well on two fronts, and the new physical, mental and tactical challenges that comes with it.

Will be interesting to watch.

53:

Andrei Arshavin

Arsenal

Attacking midfielder/Forward - Russia



An enigmatic player if there ever was one who's incredible attacking talent (control, dribbling, pace, balance, shooting, passing) suggests an even higher ranking but who's actual performances (especially last season) too often could justify a lower one.

He has supreme technical skills and explosive pace. And even if pictures such as the one below would suggest an athlete perhaps not always in the greatest physical shape when compared to others at this level he does have this mysterious often phenomenal but of course also undefinable 'Russia strength' and his balance for an example is very impressive.



But is Arshavin an intelligent man or football player I should say since that is what's more relevant here?



For both Arsenal (before that Zenit) and the Russian national team he would be a part of, even instigate, whether through clever movement delicate touches, passing combinations at such a high level that without to some extent great vision and football intelligence you wouldn't think it possible, yet his decision making at times is horrid and perhaps at best very erratic. He will create a shot for himself when it's the worst option or simply, as has become quite the worrying trend, the wrong kind of shot. For an example the most difficult option always. Like top corner always, MUST
HIT IT!



So to the disappointment of many (including me) after some scintillating displays early in his Arsenal career, last season was too hit and miss from Arshavin.
It's difficult to say if it's mental or tactical. Tactically I think he is someone who needs a good centre-forward in the middle to work with from out left and in key moments of faltering last season Arsenal (and Arshavin) didn't have that with neither Van Persie, or Bendtner for that matter starting, in the 2-0 and 3-0 defeats against Chelsea or the 3-1 defeat to Manchester United. In fact in two of those games it was Arshavin who found himself playing a middle striker role on right top, where he just isn't at his best.

In contrast compare Arsenal's (and Arshavin's I think as well) performances in the earlier 2-1 defeat to Manchester United with Van Persie in the middle and Arshavin to the left, and it was much better in what was a game they could actually have won versus the complete opposite during the course of the 3-1 defeat where they were completely outplayed and outrun.

Signing someone like Marouane Chamakh therefore was a must and with both Bendtner and Van Persie in early season injury trouble, to keep the consistent point collecting going, he is already very needed.

Arshavin is someone who clearly needs good company.



52:

Juan Manuel Mata

Valencia

Winger/Attacking midfielder - Spain



In a long line of young skilled attacking Spanish players to emerge in recent years Mata is good enough to be a standout.

On the wing of course he has plenty of pace, that's just a must, and especially with the ball and the pace his control enables him to maintain with it is impressive.

While Mata has very good technical skills, including dribbling, he first and foremost make the right decisions. That's far from always looking for a dribble, a shot or flashy trickery so he is not one to constantly try to beat his man or go for crosses. Rather he participates very well in attacks and often it's him in the end who with a great run into the box with or without the ball is the recipient of a scoring chance where he is a good finisher.

That's another impressive thing, he is effective both in the wing role and when central whether more as an attacking midfielder or almost second striker at times.
Both places with hard work, skills, movement and exemplary team work, knowing his role and the others.

I have a feeling he is complete enough to maybe even deserve a higher ranking but this season should tell us a lot about how good at 22 years of age that he really is. With Valencia's two biggest stars, Villa and Silva, gone, it's now Mata who looks to become the attacking center piece. Perhaps not even on the wing but in Silva's old more or less free playmaker role with a lot of the attack going through him.
I'm actually not sure Mata has the creativity and excellent passing to do that on the highest level, if I thought that, he should probably be ranked many places higher. Higher than Silva still to come on the list for starters, since Mata is more consistent, versatile, has better teamwork, defensively as well, and it will be very interesting to see if he can rise to the challenge.

No matter if he reaches that next level (this season) or not, Mata is already an excellent skilled versatile intelligent team player who will be great for many years to come. Fully worthy of a very good ranking.


51:

Javier Mascherano

Barcelona

Defensive midfielder - Argentina



Defensive master like few others. Mascherano has great work rate and tackling ability and during his time at Liverpool was a key player in some of the best defensive performances in recent years.

With his excellent defensive qualities but limitations in contributing going forward in almost any way, he in many ways embodied a Liverpool team that especially in the Champions League against good technical sides gained the reputation of maybe the toughest matchup around.

In the Premier League it was often similar, and at least (to some extent) until Xabi Alonso especially in his final year took his play to another level, it was a side you'd often see struggling to get enough going in attack to put away the same smaller sides the other top teams took care of mostly with ease, while against the very top teams you could see Benitez Liverpool compete at a very high level.

It's really no secret what Mascherano does well. He is an enforcer or spoiler if you will who knows every trick in the book (who won't hesitate to use them either) and whether his defensive job, and it is always a defensive job for Mascherano, is tight tactical defending holding together the midfield chains (straight lines Benitez style, notice his obsessive hand gestures signaling this to his players constantly throughout every game) and defending his zone or if it's more aggressive pressure, battling to win the midfield, winning tackles in the process, Mascherano will do as great a job as anyone out there.

What's most impressive about his work is his range of defending I think. Not meant like he gets out of position, that would be as bad for him as it would a centre-back, but in the concentrated area that is central midfield he really does seem to be able to do more defensively in more places more often than perhaps anyone else out there.

On this list in many ways (like on the pitch actually) Mascherano where he ended up (fitting I think right before the top 50) became sort of the ultimate defensive block for the attacking players. Or for that matter the best players with something to offer both defensively and going forward. The one defensive specialist that only the most special players would be able to go past up the list. The one excellent defensive player, providing us with one final defensive stand where even small chinks in the (attacking player's) armor, or a few questionmarks here and there, like with Arshavin and his consistency, would be enough to stop the rise up the list and instead get to be - ranked behind
Mascherano.

The 200 best players in the world: 188

One more before the Champions League games start. More later tonight.

188:

Alberto Aquilani - Liverpool - Italy

Midfielder



Injury problems throughout his career and barely having played yet this season is what keeps him this low.

But he has more than enough ability I feel to still make the list.

Aquilani is a very complete midfielder who while not as good defensively as defensive midfielders per se still is quite good and certainly better than most of the midfielders categorized, like he himself usually is, as attacking.
He is just disciplined when it comes to that part of the game and without being a strong tackler or anything does a good job of defending his zone.

I think for Liverpool, health permitting and possbily Rafa Benitez staying permitting, that there is a good chance, like his predecessor Xabi Alonso did and like other players under Benitez have, that he will make great improvements physically and then we could see a really strong two way player deserving of a far far higher ranking. But again, health permitting!

As okay as he is when it comes to the defensive part of the game, he is still way behind in those areas if you again compare him to someone like Alonso. But there are some other things he does on a similar level and some things he does even better.

First of all he is a good passer. In the short passing game he is generally secure and makes good decisions and he is able to execute deeper more direct passes as well.

Where he is definitely better than someone like Alonso though is in the final third playing in tighter space.
He can make quality runs in and around the penalty area both with and without the ball and has some play making ability there too. Unlike some of the previously ranked players who to some extent are restricted to only being able to do this further back in midfield.
He is of course also well known for having a good shoot from the outside.

I think all in all this reads like a player with enough quality to pass many players yet to come. But again and again bad health really hurts him. Hopefully it will less in the future. Both Liverpool and the Italian national team could of course really use him.

The season so far. Part 1: The big 4 or 5

Time to take an in depth look at what I've watched so far of football this season.

After the very very time consuming Serie A preview I don't think it' a bad idea to start somwhere else entirely. So let's start in Engerland (england engerland)!

Top of the table we find Chelsea who is off to an impressive start.
I already wrote quite a bit about Chelsea after the first few games I watched them play this season and I think it's safe to say they've improved some since then.

In those entries I was quite critical at what I saw as some flaws that could prevent what is an excellent opportunity this year to win the title.
Much of that was some bad often slow passing distribution in central midfield when Mikel was playing the "bottom" of the Ancelotti diamond, and that resulting in the team having more difficulty than they should defending width.
Even against a team like Hull. Against Manchester United in the Charity Shield it's more understandable.

But since then it's mainly been the excellent Essien playing that role and the passing game has been quite fluent and more direct.
The ball gets to the opponent's penalty area mostly with relative ease and that's where I think Chelsea with a number of the players they have are a more dangerous team than possibly anyone in the world.
Quite simply if they consistently get the ball up there, either through someone in the diamond making a run forward, Drogba going a little back irresistibly seeking the ball or through their great fullbacks, they're very hard to stop and in the Premier League it's difficult to see who should actually.

And even when/if the notorious slow Mikel is in midfield (and he is a great physical talent who should get playing time) Ancelotti can still put someone like Deco at the top of the diamond and ensure quality distribution that way. Lampard and Ballack given certain roles can make quality contributions there as well though with a price to pay when it comes to their consistent excellent play in the final third.
A price that Hiddink for an example interestingly enough was willing to pay in some of his use of Ballack.

Now I will still maintain that Ancelotti's team is more vulnerable defensively than what we saw under Mourinho and also when Hiddink had them organized very well towards the end of last season, but the EPL is overall still by large (even with some recent examples and trends signalling some change) a league where it isn't "just" the most well balanced team that ends up winning but a great dominating attack too.

Yeah they give away quite a few quality chances these days but they're creating themselves in abundance and as long as that all important distribution to the final third is working smoothly that will continue, and they'll be a decent favorite over their on paper weaker this season, top four rivals.

Two of those rivals faced each other in one of the more interesting games of the EPL season so far.
Manchester United against Arsenal.

Unfortunately for Arsenal in that game they were missing Fabregas who isn't just their best player but one who much of the play is build around and the only one who can take it to a level high enough where the team can be consistently successful. Without him it's just a different team. Interesting then that if you compare to how they looked against United in some of the games last season, that they looked quite a bit better here.
One clear plus for Arsenal here that they didn't have when they faced eachother in the Champions League and United proved clearly the better team, was the addition of Arshavin who is an elite attacking talent, but alot of it, sadly for fans of the gunners, I'd definitely put down to what it was that United was missing compared to those games last year.
More on that later when we get to Manchester United.

It's positive though for Arsenal that their central midfielders weren't outworked and outrun like they were in some of those games last year and I think both Denilson and Song have shown improvements in their play this season.
Diaby too, eventhough he had his own personal disaster in this particular game looks like a better player than last year.
Something of course which simply is a must for a club like Arsenal heavily counting on young talent. They have to live up to their upside or it's just a waste.

In a way Arsenal have been unlucky or if you're a more mean spirited person you could say simply inadequate for not having more depth. Either way in their two toughest games of the season against the two Manchester teams they've been without first Fabregas against United and then Arshavin against City.

Personally I thought it was a real lack of flexibility to continue with the 4-3-3 against City if the two wide forwards were going to be Diaby and Bendtner.
That's bordering on simply ignoring your player's characteristics over the system. Conventional coaching wisdom would say that it's the players and their characteristics dictating what system to play and not the system the players.
It's nothing new of course, to do it like Wenger did this game. Countless of coaches have done the same and for one match only I'm sure there can be found arguments not to change things around.
Still, as the match showed. As a look at the City team sheet SHOULD show. This was a match against a world class opponent where things had to be optimal. BOTH Diaby and Bendtner on the wings in a 4-3-3 is hardly optimal.
And whether it was there specifically the match was lost or not, the result was City being the overall better balanced team on the day. That showed. On a more positive note, individually in central defense William Gallas and Thomas Vermaelen are playing great, so right there is all the foundation Arsenal need for an excellent central defense partnership.

Overall they "just" need the team to be more consistently well balanced. When Fabregas and Arshavin are both there. When the players for an effective 4-3-3 are all in place, there are few problems and they're a very effective team who can steamroll lesser teams and look great while doing it. On the surface, the greatest outside mighty FC Barcelona even.
Not least it has to be said, since it's a pet peeve of mine, against annoying teams like Wigan who face the big teams well bend over before the game has even begun with their terrible naive tactics.
But all in all like I talked about in an earlier entry on Arsenal I think a version of the 4-3-3 over previous years 4-4-2 IS definitely the right step when trying to create a consistently effective attack and the more they can look for inspiration at Barcelona, and what they've been doing so great, the better too.
Some might say it's bordering on crazy talk but I'd maintain that Arsenal is the only team with a chance to get close to that. And considering just getting close is enough to better almost anyone, it's certainly something that's worth a shot.
The system change was the obvious step one but let's not forget the pieces already in place.
Starting with Fabregas they have the closest thing to Xavi there is. Someone who even does some things better and who is a must for a team aspiring for overwhelming possession against their opponents.
Without a Xavi or Fabregas type of player it just has no chance of being effective with how good team defending has become.Arsenal also arguably have the poor man's Messi in Arshavin. They share quite a few characteristics and it could even be argued, though I think there is a significant gap there, that they have a poor man's Iniesta in someone like Samir Nasri.
They even have a striker in Bendtner who can do the needed non-traditional decent job on one of the wings.
Where it then really falls apart is if someone like Diaby plays there. That is just very un-Barcelona like.

That brings me to the striker. Robbie Van Persie who suprisingly, it seems doesn't see a whole lot of criticism or face many questionmarks.
People love his speed and technique. And that's understandable but let me try and throw in what's not so great if you set the bar very high which it should be for a team trying to beat what at the top of the table are still the toughest league competition in the world.
And if you compare what he is doing to the kind of things that a Samuel Eto'o and now Zlatan Ibrahimovic does for Barcelona. The kind of things that Arsenal would need as well, from their lone central striker in a possession based 4-3-3.

I really question if Van Persie has the physical attributes to be really effective there when it isn't play in transition.
And if he doesn't then it's something that even affects him negatively when it comes to his actual strenghts. Like say, combining nicely with Fabregas or Arshavin and using his acceleration to feed off that. But when playing in the center often in narrow space and no real holes to accelerate into, the physical strenght is needed to even get to that, so to speak.

To his credit, even if I think he has a negative attitude sometimes, he has started to do more traditional striker kind of work, including better movement without the ball, which is essential when not an overly powerful striker, but when playing central on top it's just not quite there yet at a high enough level.
A lot of that I think would be helped and maybe even turned into a strenght if there was more switching positions in the forward line. Not just with Bendtner who can be more a traditional lone center forward but with Arshavin too.
Again the inspiration being Barcelona where Messi is often wildly effective switching with the striker and spending some time central and on top. Van Persie is more dangerous too when he isn't restricted to near the central defenders just outside or just inside the box.

Of course, one very obvious positive I found when I first saw the new Arsenal 4-3-3 with Van Persie playing central instead of Bendtner was that it simply made sense to have Van Persie getting all the good scoring chances Arsenal usually create instead of someone like Bendtner who whether it's fair or not has become quite infamous for some poor finishing.
Van Persie being there instead, that SHOULD mean more goals coming from there! RIGHT?

It's not like Van Persie isn't getting shots at goal either. I heard of one stat (I can't find it myself) that the announcer here mentioned the last time I watched Arsenal, where Van Persie was the player with the most shots on goal out of everyone in the league.

So i ask, with just one goal so far isn't Van Persie that much a superiour finisher anyway, OR is he just not getting the really good, the realistic scoring chances?

Either way, it's obviously a problem and I call for more flexibility in the forward line to try and solve it!

Manchester United have rebounded nicely from their early shock defeat against Burnley.

That very flukish defeat actually lead some doubters going way too far, and on the usually entertaining Guardian Football Weekly podcast one of the contributors (unfortunately I don't remember who it was exactly) even forecasted that United wouldn't finish in the top 4! That's either very bold or very silly more likely.

Like with Arsenal I refuse to hand out too much credit for beating stupid Wigan, but while ignoring the controversy, as someone who usually root against United I was very annoyed too, what I can do is give them credit for the second half against City.
It was classic Ferguson Manchester United play with great wing play and fullbacks pushing forward exactly where it hurt the most.
For Manchester City that was the right side with Wright Phillips and Micah Richards who were nothing short of fully exposed by the excellent Evra pushing Phillips way way back where he wasn't comfortable and Giggs being up to his old tricks against Richards, who judging by this might still best fulfill his potential as a central defender instead.While watching I was suprised that Hughes waited and waited without doing any adjustments whatsoever while United had clearly taken over the game creating tons of dangerous situations.
He had flirted with danger in some earlier games too where opponents also too easily created chances but at least there the City forwards were being very dangerous themselves. Despite their goals that wasn't really the case for most of the second half. This was a team dominating them and Hughes failed to come up with or try even, anything.

Overall with Manchester United the only thing I'm quite sure of is that they're weaker this season than the last couple of years. The reasons for that are pretty obvious. Not only have elite players gone and not really been replaced but with them various tactical options too.
To me the Tevez- C. Ronaldo - Rooney forward line looked pretty unstoppable and down through the chains it ensured an incredibly well balanced team who both attacked, not least on the counter, but starting with Rooney and Tevez defended really well too.

Rooney I think is a top 3 player in the world. Maybe even the second best after Messi. The good news for United is that he is still around. With him there is hope. But put him with an amazing attacking talent in C. Ronaldo and a player like Tevez who to a lesser extent does some of the same things both ways that Rooney does, and you have not just hope of great results, but certainty.

As a very non United fan I don't even like to think about it, but consider how close they were to winning both their very tough league and the Champions League two years in a row.
Think about what a great job of team defending Chelsea did on Barcelona in the semis. A job so good that I think most of the time it knocks that Barcelona side out. Then think about how Manchester United throughout the season had been the best defensive team. Better than Chelsea.
Consider the speed and counter attack options they had up front that Chelsea did not.

This is a post I wrote on a sports forum before the final:

United does have great individual talent defensively but from watching Barca so much this year I really think that any team not defending as a TEAM, on a scale similar to what Chelsea did, will be an underdog. You just cannot leave them space.
Hiddink is not exactly known for playing that defensive, ever, yet this was the one time where he felt it was a must. That alone says alot.

Now ignoring the question of whether they will actually go for it or not, I think United certainly could come close to do a similar great job of TEAM defending to what Chelsea did, they certainly did well the last time they faced eachother, Barca have of course improved since then, and if they combine that with their "deadliest" transition game in the world, THEN I think they'll be favorites.

But I don't think any team not heavily geared towards defending, is a favorite to resist Barca's talent when that talent almost inevitably will have 55+ pct of possession.

Did Ferguson for once get it wrong? If he has commented on it since, I'd love to see it.What I do know is that the Tevez-C.Ronaldo-Rooney forward line didn't start and what I kinda wanted to say I guess by going back to all of this, was just how freakish good this Manchester United team were and how very close they were to become one of the best teams in history.
Something Barcelona then took from them and might very well improve upon even, this season if, they repeat.

Like I said, this season, Manchester United, I don't see them as any potential best team in history or anything like that, they do however have the best two-way player in the world, Wayne Rooney to build around, a manager who knows how to win the Premier League like no one else, and last but not least some of the rivals DO look weaker too.

There is definitely hope for Manchester United.

For Manchester City, overall I'm not sure if teamwise I have that much to add from even the last time they came up on this blog when they beat Blackburn.

Playerwise I fully expected Adebayor to score lots of goals. I tipped some people to bet on him as a topscorer even, since I thought he was at worst a top 5 favorite while the bookmakers had him quite a bit further down. Even behind Michael Owen comically enough.

A positive suprise has been Craig Bellamy who isn't just scoring but working very hard a lot of places on the pitch.

And in midfield I like Nigel De Jong who adds some balance to the side. That will be very needed when someone like Robinho is back in the lineup.

Finally in "engerland" even if we may want to we can't forget about lovely little Liverpool.

This was a team who through preseason as I watched questionmarks creeping up on virtually all the other top four sides that I was starting to lean towards making my pick for the title.

Even if, and I know some people are convinced that was the case, Liverpool did indeed run good last season with some rather fortunate results along the way, I liked how under Benitez from year to year there were clear signs of improvement.

Every year under Benitez the goals against had been around the same number. 25, 27,28 and then 27 last season. But at the same time the goals scored had been going up every single year, from 57 and 57 to 67 and last season a league best 77 goals scored.

For a team and a coach who rarely compromises defensive stability in favour of the attacking side of things, for them to get to a point where they improve what mostly has been described as a key problem holding them back, to a league leading best, I thought that was quite a dramatic sign. A very positive sign.

Enter evil evil Real Madrid and them stealing key central midfielder Xabi Alonso.
Always a good technical player, under Benitez, Alonso's physical tools and tactical awareness had improved to such a point where he was becoming one of the best central midfielders in the world and certainly with another one of those, the superb Mascherano, made up one of the best central midfield tandems around.

A tandem that not only ensured Steven Gerrard could play his best in front of them behind Torres, but who made the defensive four look good to. Made their job easier.
And in the case of someone like Jamie Carragher, who's been struggling quite a bit this season, probably a whole lot easier.

Trying to fill his shoes has been young brazilian midfielder Lucas. I think the jury is still out of him and the first indication of him doing a sufficient job will be when the Liverpool defense starts looking consistently balanced again.
So far Carragher has been on his heels way too much and even the normaly excellent Mascherano has at times struggled with the same defensive duties where he normaly has thrived. Not good signs.

Alberto Aquilani who they bought from Roma is yet to play this season. He has been a great talent for many years but has been held back by a lot injuries.
At his best he'll likely have even more to offer forward than someone like Alonso and if Benitez like I think he will, it's what he did with Alonso and others, will have him improve his physical ability and defensive play, we could, barring injuries, see a truly great player sometime in the future.

Elsewhere Liverpool has perhaps the best pure striker in the world in Fernando Torres, a great mainly attacking midfielder in Steven Gerrard and a very good two-way player in Dirk Kuyt.

Like Manchester United, Liverpool have hope.


I hope to have a part II focusing on Italy and Spain a little later.

Tactical developments and focus on France

In the coming days I will be touching a great deal upon different tactics for different teams during EURO 2008.
In my last post I was slamming Croatia for their very poor and I think very dated tactics used against Austria.
To see where I'm sort of coming from, before I go into these things even further in future matches, I think it's a good idea, kind of as an introduction, to post some things I wrote that were part of an interesting debate I was having on a sports forum.

What started the discussion was us doing a modern premiership draft. 20 participants would pick one player each round and assemble their dream team so to speak.
Later if I can muster the engergy, we're in the 8th round so far and my team is Petrescu, Stimac, Evra, Essien, Fabregas, Parlour, Defoe and Di Canio, I want to go through, if not all the teams, then certainly the most interesting ones and give my views on them or maybe even rank them all.

But the first thing that came to my mind is how players today generally are better.
Even when going back "only" 10 years I think there is a clear difference.
Now I also think that the true elite players going back as far as 15-20 years, I'm thinking top 5 in the world here at their position, they would still be top players today.
You can even argue that with much more focused training these days and more advanced talent development, that an even larger group could do just fine.
The overall depth and the size of the talent pool is just a lot bigger now.

You'd also have to factor in how the tactics have changed and that's when I started thinking how many truly excellent players from previous years would have a really hard time fitting in on modern teams especially on similar positions to those they actually played at.
Simply because some of those positions don't even exist anymore. There are no classic wings in 4-4-2 systems and the playmaker, the number 10 type of player, has also been removed from the central midfield in a 4-4-2.

That was basically what lead to what I'm about to post, but first there are a few things that I forgot.
Firstly the modern 4-4-2 without classic wingers, without a playmaker in central midfield.
I missed touching upon Sacchi and his late 80s, early 90s Milan team which is very integral to that whole 4-4-2 pressing "revolution"

and how it slowly but gradually developed away from an attacking system to either, like with heyday AC Milan, a very balanced system creating great pressure, or as seen in recent years with a number of teams, a very defensive system where you could avoid taking risks.

Instead because the debate started with the question of how well unique players like David Ginola or Eric Cantona would fit in now, I made France my focus point and rambled on and on about the various tactical factors, there were others as well, leading to the rise of the France national team.

Sort of use that as a red line through various changes in football the last 10-12 years.
AC Milan and their Italian 4-4-2 will have to wait for another post but I think it's really interesting to compare it to, and the battle with, a more classic English 4-4-2 which probably didn't die on the highest level until the late 90s.

But here, pretty much unedited are some long forum posts, the second the most detailed about modern football developments and the specific roles for some well known different players:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Cantona, and Ginola too for that matter, had both long been ruled completely out of that team cause they just didn't fit into a modern system build to win at the very highest level, ALTHOUGH at that time they WERE the best players... and that's the difficult thing when imagining older players playing now, at least for me, because where would they play?
Ginola simply could not play wing in a 4-4-2 now. Just impossible. Same with the young Giggs and every other great wing from the past. Not because they weren't truly great players but because any 4-4-2 with wings, think England during Euro 96 as one of the last dying examples of this, would get destroyed now.
It would have to be 4-3-3, or as we actually see a lot now someone who in the past would have been a wing, now instead playing behind the forward in a 4-4-1-1.

Another thing that happened as the 90s came to an end was the great playmaker being removed from the central midfield and actually out to where the wings used to roam.
It was basically the death of the classic number 10, instead replaced by very allround or just players who were good defensively.
In the central midfield it had always been one creative midfielder paired with one defensive.
Now instead it became two central defensive midfielders and you were able, thanks to the increased skill levels, to effectively attack directly with little risk using just 5 players.

Great number 10s like Laudrup and Hagi were suddenly found playing on the left side for their respective teams
and when trying to find a place for Lothar Matthäus, architect or dynamo of Germany's 1990 world cup win, both country and club positioned him as a good old fashioned German libero!

But back to Cantona. He would need to move around a lot more but with his vision and most importantly not being a player who needs a lot of space, which is so key now, I could see him playing very well for quite a few of the current best teams.
He would definitely fit in like I said at Manchester United with Rooney and Ronaldo but at Arsenal too.
Chelsea and Liverpool much less so but playing a similar role as Totti in Roma's unique striker absent system? I could see it.
Ibrahimovich at this point (note: under Mancini not really playing for Mourinho where he was more of a targetman playmaker) for Inter is a lot like Cantona was for United and there are a few teams in Spain where he would fit in too.

Some other posters rightly point out the unique circumstances playing their part in Cantona and Ginola not being part of the French team anymore come 97-98.

This is my more detailed response:

I guess I'm responding to the both of you and since I find these discussions very interesting this will probably be long.
I just hope it will stay somewhat coherent and maybe even relatively on topic.

Well first of all, when I said long gone from the team I did of course mean what happened in the 94 World cup qualification and the subsequent team and system, France then started building from what was a solid, but also very unspectacular Euro 96 team.

Yes the unique personalities of Cantona and Ginola definitely did play a part in them not being part of the team anymore. Absolutely.
So did the emergence of an amazing talent in Zidane, but who it should be noted did not have a good Euro 96 with many seeing Djorkaeff as the real future of the team. And few people in the immediate aftermath it's my impression saw Zidane as the new Michel Platini that he was being billed as.

This partly because France was playing a system that wasn't very good for someone who rapidly was turning into the ideal modern attacking player.
It actually took the vision of Marcello Lippi at Juventus to create the role where Zidane could show that he was the new best player in the world.


At Bordeaux and in his early national team days he was often misused as one of the front two in a 4-4-2 like system which at this time was still most often a very attacking system (see my ramblings about wingers) and not the emphasized defensive systems we're seeing used by many teams now.
The "new very defensive 4-4-2" emerged, is my theory, not to sidetrack this too much, to counter the flexible possesion based type of systems who had been dominating since France 98 and seen in full flow at Euro 2000 and of course at Real Madrid in club competitions.

But back to Zidane himself.

Don't get me wrong, he was still very good, would be in any system, but the full potential of a player in his prime with the best technique ever seen coupled with a workrate never seen from a supposed classic number 10, PLAYING very often against old fashioned full of holes 4-4-2's employing too many men in attack often generously handing away great amounts of space, having that star "just" play as a forward wasting time among other things making deep forward runs complementing a lone striker and the winger, the players that he very much instead should be the one setting up and USING from further behind, that was just a waste of unlimited potential.

Marcello Lippi being the genius that he is in putting players complementing each other optimally was able to spot that.
Jacquet realized it too and of course in hindsight it's very easy for everyone to see!
But at that particular time it really wasn't.
Instead generally speaking if you were an emerging midfield talent, you were either a very good defensive midfielder or a wing type of player or at least placed there if you were seriously lacking defensively.
Prime Zidane of course was neither a defensive midfielder or someone suited for the wing and thankfully very soon instead he was the centerpiece in 4-2-1-2-1, or 4-2-3-1 if you will, systems for France and 4-3-1-2 or similar for Juventus being a modern day playmaker.
Or sometimes 3-5-2's becoming 5-3-2s when defending.
Lippi combining old style catenaccio with the modern game. Carlos Ancelotti when he took over Juventus also went from formerly being a very conservative manager at Parma to trying new systems because of Zidane and would of course later do a similar thing with the deep-lying tactical role of former forward Andrea Pirlo which in many ways played a huge part in how some results have gone in recent years. But that's for another time.

The overall point being that flexible systems were being created in order to optimally succeed and were working great basically until very all round and (even more so) very fit players and great athletes of the huge global talent pool, more than ever, in new very disciplined 4-4-2s and 4-5-1s and even new 4-3-3s under Jose Mourinho started to make possession football look naive on a regular basis.

I can almost visualize Mourinho spending a few years working under attacking genius Van Gaal at Barca and in his head scheming and steaming and perhaps not least realizing, how to effectively counter superior technical skills and attacking football.

And I should say what he was seeing was "just" Van Gaals modern total football played by a wave of new great athletes in Ajax and then great technical players at Barca.
The Barca fans I remember, were very unhappy about Van Gaals strict systems, and classic dutch speedster wings.
I'm guessing they wanted the emerging possession football. Not this albeit attacking when functioning at least also tightly balanced total football morph.

Ajax style attacking football in many ways in the current game had already been exposed by Capello and Milan in the landmark 1994 Champions Cup final humiliating Johan Cryuff's very much idealistic dream team and when new great athletes in Ajax struck back so to speak, briefly in 95 against a very defensive Milan team, they were put in their place by Lippi's very modern Juventus team the following years and I don't think (if it was in fact that even) we've seen truly successful old style total football with classic wings since.

In Spain Van Gaal did win a couple of league titles but this was still pre 2000 and generally for a good team with good players also a good time for almost any kind of attacking non classic 4-4-2 system featuring very good players.
And of course it had Pep Guardiola left from the dream team still controlling the midfield better than anyone, but as soon as he got older and eventually exited, it was the more flexible possession attacks of Real Madrid and La Coruna that took over and of course the other side, a new school of calculated, coming from Benitez Valencia team as well.


I think recent good examples of flexible possession football the last few years getting exposed by balanced defensive teams has been what Valencia did in Spain, Liverpool in European competition, under Houllier and later Benitez just in from Valencia, South Korea doing as well as they did in the World Cup, Greece with much inferior talent winning Euro 2004, Argentina DESPITE the best talent failing again and again, Brazil UNLIKE Argentina actually MAKING compromises and Chelsea while employing the Mourinho style catching up to the dominating attacking football of Manchester United and Arsenal in England.

Now with that out of the way, back to Ginola and Cantona and how they would or could have fitted into the new France.

You say if they were good enough they could adapt to any system.
Ginola, who is one of my all-time favorite players, and Cantona until his early retirement were at least up to 1998 where new great players emerged, without a doubt top 4-5 players for France.
Ginola was simply sensational for Newcastle and in my opinion even better than later when he finally won player of the year while playing for Tottenham.

Cantona had become a God among United fans and turned from a good forward to a great playmaker sort of player.
Not like Zidane mind you who by 1997 could do it anywhere on the field, but a bit like Ibrahimovic now and to a certain extent someone like Berbatov, meaning very few were better with the ball in the final third.

The point I'm getting at, is that I just don't believe, no matter their personalities and the stories about conflicts with the federation and other players, like Deschamps (the water carrier!), that a team building towards a World Cup which they're hosting, on the surface like you say, desperate for offense following the drought that was Euro 96, IF they thought these great players, still seen by many as their BEST players, could improve their team in any way, would not find a solution, bite the bullet and make them part of that team at almost any cost.

Except that is of course for the very special cost that I'm arguing, them actually making the team worse!
In your post you point to the reason being personality-wise.
I pointed towards them not fitting into a new system and style of play.
It may very well just be a combination of both but as I see it the players that were used in the buildup, and in theory they COULD have brought Cantona back following the ban, were ultimately used because of football reasons and because they were thought of as players who would do a better job. Within that new system.

In that system Cantona could not have played the role of Zidane. Lack of range, fitness and workrate would make that impossible.
Then the alternative would have been a 4-4-2 with Cantona being behind the striker making even an ordinary one a good one.
But that would leave no place for Zidane, except for somewhere where his full potential once again wasn't in use and where Djorkaeff, Henry, Pires and arguably even the ordinary Diomede could do an optimal job, and the whole thing would become very similar to Euro 96 just with Cantona instead of Zidane.
With Zidane at this point in a flexible system showing amazing things at Juventus, this was already an utopian thought.

If it was 6 years earlier Cantona could actually have played as the lone striker in front of Zidane and the wing type players, better than Dugarry or Guivarch anyway, but not better than the emerging Trezequet and of course at this point he had turned into very different player.
A better one but also a slower one ill suited for a striker role.

Then as far as I can see that leaves one option and it's the only realistic one.
Playing Cantona as one of the two midfielders/wings other than the two defensive ones which was always Deschamps coupled with Petit or Vieira.
And it should be said that the two defensive midfielders and the playmaker were untouchable in this system so it would have to be at the expensive of one of the other two. That's just a fact.

Now the problem is that those other two were players creating width and they had to be effective at the wing something which Cantona definitely wasn't a specialist at.
Eventhough it wasn't the most important thing for this type of attack, where would the crosses come from?
Trezequet or Dugarry, if it were one of those playing as striker, were both very good in the air and would need some service. With Cantona that would be a problem.
The players actually used were Henry who at this point was a very good wing and who did a great job.
Pires who was a very good alternative and someone like Karembeu who was having succes at a very similar role in Real Madrid and who actually provided defensive help too again something which neither Cantona or Ginola, who of course would have had to play one of those positions too, could do.

The whole point of this system was to move away from a 4-4-2 system that at this point had either become a system full of holes or the inflexible system they had used in EURO 96 unable, even with Zidane, to create any kind of attack.
Cantona and Ginola (who incidentally could work in a 4-4-2 and did but for any
team with Zidane on it that system had simply become the past) I feel would just create more holes and generally just lack the needed speed or in Ginola's case acceleration because he WAS godspeed WITH the ball, but on a team controlled by Zidane with the advantage that comes with it of making great direct attacks, neither of them could make the runs at the needed speed to make the optimal plays that those playing instead was capable of.
Someone like Ginola very often just slowed things down and then proceeded to just create magic on his own.
That's all good but it's far from ideal in this system.
Who would he create for anyway? There is only one striker and the two defensive midfielders are rarely going forward. Both things very unlike what was taking place at Newcastle at the time.
Making the deep forward run is not exactly number one on Zidane's priority list which then leaves only fullbacks making very selective runs and the other midfielder occupying the other wing.

Far far from ideal compared to what France succeeded in doing in 98 and then in full flow, until the final, at Euro 2000.



Even Djorkaeff the least wing type player of those mentioned, still if you factor all plusses and minuses was a better solution in the french 4-2-1-2-1 than either Ginola or Cantona.
Similar passing to Cantona. Not as good at crossing and creating width as Ginola but still much better at that than Cantona.
Good pace at this point in his career on the first meters and able to make great forward runs into the penalty area where he was also a very good finisher.
AND on top of this he possessed a very good work rate with responsible defensive awareness. Something hammered into his brain in Italy.
Needless to say, neither Ginola or Cantona possessed that.
Just a very all-round, very flexible player who fitted very well into that particular flexible system.
Ginola and Cantona just didn't and that was my original point.

There may have been, no there were, a lot of other causes having to do with them not getting to be a part of this team and its rise but I'm just saying that even though they were great footballers, football reasons played a part too and if France thought they could have helped the team footballwise, not hurt it, they could have made them playing their part actually happen. Made it happen.



My belief is that Jacquet and Lemerre, who later just could not let go of this system even when it was falling apart in Korea, he loved it so much, had realized that within this new, I used the word modern system that they were going to go with, Ginola and Cantona, the country's most famous players just were not optimal.

Like Marcello Lippi says: " The best players don't always make the best team."
The France team was a great example of just that.