Could Portugal finally win it all?

Will there be more tears this time?

Eight years ago the tournament was held in Portugal. Eight years ago Portugal should have won it. They had the team - the home advantage - and an opponent in the final that they should beat. But we all know how it ended. The Greeks pulled off probably the biggest international shock of our time to win Euro 2004. Since then the Portuguese team has performed solidly in tournaments - 4th place in the 2006 World Cup, Quarter finalists in Euro 2008 and knocked out by the magical Spanish in the 2010 World Cup. However that elusive first major International trophy still alludes them!

At all the recent tournaments the Portuguese have looked promising and with the players they have they have consistently been seen as contenders to win. Could Euro 2012 be the tournament that breaks their reputation as nearly men?

The foundations for success are there - A very solid defensive. Perhaps the best in the tournament. The Real Madrid boys (Pepe, Coentrao) being the stand out defenders of the competition so far. I would go as far as saying Coentrao has been the best left back in the tournament. Not small praise considering who he is up against in that department - Ashley Cole and Phillip Lahm. Their midfield possess both the solid (Veloso, Moutinho, Meireles) and the spectacular (Nani and Ronaldo). They lack a potent goal scorer but Postiga holds the ball up extremely well and links with Ronaldo seamlessly and everybody knows about his goal scoring record which more than makes up for Postiga's lack of goals. Portugal also have the added strength of a wealth of options on the bench - both attacking and defensive. Custodio can be brought on to tighten up the midfield and in Nelson Oliveira and Silvestre Varela they have game changing attacking options. There main weakness is the lack of a world class goalkeeper something England, France, Germany and Spain all possess. And this could be their downfall. 

The Madrid boys could be key.

However they have a relatively kind draw. No game at this stage will be easy but the Portuguese should be considered heavy favorites to beat the Czechs; who despite qualifying top of their group were dismantled against a team (Russia) possessing pace and guile. This is something Portugal have bucket loads of. If they do manage to beat the Czechs (nothing is certain) they will face either France or Spain in the semi finals. Both will be tough fixtures - especially the Spanish. But the Portuguese are more suited to beating these two than if they had to face Germany, England or Italy. So in this respect the draw favors them. In fact the last time they faced the Spanish they won 4-0. And although they historically perform poorly against the French they would go in to the tie as favorites. If they do manage reach the final anything can happen as shown by their defeat to Greece eight years ago. 

Bento has got the Portuguese firing! 

I am not implying that winning the tournament is something the Portuguese will do. My point is that they have the resources to win it. They have a stigma of getting it wrong in big games - some even tipped them to finish bottom of Group D. However this is a different and more united side than in previous tournaments. The players are younger and more hungry for success. They have a manager in Bento who has managed to build a solid team and also incorporate the Ronaldo factor. It is easy to forget that they have the second best player in the world in their ranks and as we saw against Holland he can be just as effective for his country as he is for his club.

In fact if Portugal could be likened to one club team it would be Real Madrid (not surprising when you consider who is the Madrid manager). And of course Real Madrid beat the side many claim are the best club team ever to the league title last year. Can Portugal do the same?

The Ox. Theo, Young and Danny boy

You may have read my recent blog on the French and their chances at Euro 2012. If you didn't catch it here is a quick summary. The French are good and England better not forget it. Yet despite my conclusions on the French team I still believe that England are capable of beating them. In fact if Roy picks the right team I think we should beat them.

Technically France are a very good side. They keep the ball well in midfield and have quality wide players who can create a hat-full of chances if given half a chance. However as England have proved in the two warm up games against Norway and Belgium we are prepared to give up the ball and hit the other teams on the break. This is due to the players we have available compared to other top nations. Our best player with the ball (Jack Wilshere) is injured. France have Nasri, Cabaye and Ribery who are all technically very good on the ball. Yet this doesn't mean we are unable to compete. Are Chelsea really the best team in Europe? No of course not. But due to playing to their strengths they won the most illustrious competition in Europe. England have similar strengths and will have to play to them to have any chance against the French.

We have one of the best 'keepers in Europe. The best left back in Europe. Terry and Lescott are a solid partnership. And Glen Johnson is a lot better defensively than people give him credit for. This solid back four will be protected by the axis of Gerrard and Parker. Two players who wear their hearts on their sleeve and will fight for everything in the middle of the park and both are also very good on the ball. However the mystery will be about who will start on the wings and up front.

Can Welbeck replace his clubmate?

Here it becomes important to examine the French tactically. Their full backs - likely to be Evra and Debuchy - are both good players but tend to leave a lot of space in behind them. Their strength is in their attacking ability and therefore England will need to play wingers who are quick to exploit the space and who are also keen to track back. Both Walcott and Chamberlain fit this description. Their pace would force the French full backs to stay deeper and also maximize England's effectiveness on the break. The two Gunners used correctly could give England the edge in a tight contest.

Ashley Young is almost certain to start in the hole behind the striker where he has been effective in the warm up games. This leaves just the striker. With Rooney unavailable for the game. Should it be Welbeck or Carroll who start upfront? Looking at the French side I would plump for Danny boy. Mexes and Rami tend to leave a lot of space between them as they are often given extra protection by the two defensive midfielders Blanc likes to deploy. Welbeck can utilise his pace to exploit this gap. By doing what he does well and running in behind the defense. Carroll lacks the pace to trouble the French defense and would be unable to take advantage of the high line the French like to play.

So due to the way the French are likely to set up I think that are best chance of victory would be to start with the pacey front four of Walcott, Young, Welbeck and Chamberlain. This front four would also suit the style of play that best suits England as it would be able to create a solid 4-5-1 when we are defending.

Yet, we will probably end up starting Downing, Milner and Carroll losing the game and going out on penalties in the Quarter Finals.

Or maybe not?

jgeorge

If the tail wags England stay number one

The likely lads 

As the rain falls on a sorry Edgbaston, I found myself watching the inevitable replays of tours gone by. Whislt watching highlights of a West Indies touring party in 2000, I noticed a stark contrast in the strength of the English tail when compared with today. Broad and Bresnan are in a different league to the likes of Gough and Cork. Yet, ironically in the Lords test match of 2000 it was the tail enders which won the match for England and this got me thinking about how important it will be that the lower order performs with the bat against South Africa later in the year.

Now of course it is primary job of England's bowlers perform with the ball in the series which pits the number one and two sides against each other, but their performance with the bat could make the crucial difference. When examining the two test sides it is difficult to see where the series will be won and lost. Both sides have strong openers - Smith and Peterson for South Africa, Cook and Strauss for England - as well as fantastic middle orders. Boucher and Prior are accomplished Wicket Keepers and  the sides possess arguably the two best bowling attacks in international cricket. Some will argue that South Africa lack a spinner with the class of Swann but if CSA cricketer of the year Vernon Philander can keep up his unbelievable form he will more than make up for that. So on paper the sides seem very evenly matched with neither team having a clear, traditional advantage over the other. This is why i feel the contribution of the English tail enders with the bat will be key. It is the only area in which we are substantially stronger than the South Africans and could make all the difference especially if their bowlers skittle out our top order - which is not an unlikely outcome. This is a series that will be won on very fine margins and each side will need to perform at their best. 

50 Wickets in just 7 matches. And what? 

 The batting line up in the 2nd test against West Indies last week ended Prior, Bresnan , Broad, Swann  and Anderson. If you compare this with the likely tail of South Africa you will see a major difference between the two.


         

         Player                             Country                              Batting Average 

         

       Prior                                  England                                              42.31

       Bresnan                             England                                             40.22

       Boucher                            South Africa                                       30.30

       Broad                                England                                             27.92

       Swann                               England                                              21.72

       Steyn                                South Africa                                       15.09

       Tahir                                 South Africa                                       15.00                                   

       Morkel                             South Africa                                        14.23

       Philander                          South Africa                                        13.71

       Anderson                          England                                              11.61            Source - Cricinfo 

This batting partnership could be key 

England occupy four of the top five spots whilst South Africa only have one player with an average over twenty (the aging Mark Boucher who is expected to retire after this tour and has just one score of 50 in his last ten innings). Only Anderson finishes below the South Africans but he has played in far more test matches  meaning his average is a truer reflection of his batting ability.  If England can make this advantage count it could be the difference between being the number one or number two test side in the world. Often the importance of the tail  has been overlooked but in this series it could be paramount to the teams chances.


Interestingly a series which will feature the worlds two best bowling attacks could be decided by their batting not their bowling.

Andy Murray - Why the glum face?

As I watched the classic ups and downs of an Andy Murray Grand Slam match with my twitter feed rabbiting away, I found myself dumbfounded by the amount of abuse he was receiving from British tweeters. As he slaved away on a foreign red surface against an accomplished old pro, any support from back home was sporadic at best.

OK so he's not the long haired, tanned, bandana wearing, swashbuckling Spaniard on the opposing baseline. He's a pale, freckly, curly haired Scot. But he's ours and he's great. Often portrayed as a sullen and dour figure, in my experience Murray is far from it. Intelligent and well spoken, Murray is certainly more charismatic, humourous and accessible (his youtube channel and twitter account are testament to this) than the adored Federer. Whose privacy resembles that of royalty. Although being involved in sketches with James Corden (Smithy vs. Andy) and appearing on comedic programmes the public just doesn't seem to get Andy. His dry sense of humour it seems is misconstrued.

Criticism is not just saved for Murray's perceived off court persona, far from it, he is constantly berated for his 'moodiness' during matches. Yes he does shout and rant and perhaps his game would benefit from a calmer approach. But the hypocrisy of a country that heralds John McEnroe, the king of tennis trash talk, is bewildering. Showing emotion in sport is what makes it interesting for me, that's why we love the likes of Ronnie O'Sullivan and Darren Clarke. They bring a human and thus exciting element to traditionally 'dull' sports. Even when Murray broke down in tears after his Australian Open final loss to Federer the British public still failed to embrace him, why?


Twitter even exposed me to criticism of his style of play. Some suggesting he does not try to win points. Admittedly Murray does not have the traditional British grace of a serve volleying Tim Henman, however we all agree that this is nigh on impossible if one wants to be a top 10 player in the modern game. Murray's play is certainly not monotonous, his well publicised drop shot and extroadinary speed and defensive work are nothing short of spectacular. In comparison to his conqueror David Ferrer (match report can be found here), whose formulaic and typically Spanish baseline style is relentless and uninspiring, although undoubtedly effective. Ferrer's consistent tactics have led him to his first French Open semi final and a top 6 ranking. Targetting Murray's backhand for much of the longer rallies before picking the right time to then attack the Brit's forehand side. This 'Spanish way' was the key to Ferrer's success but was not revolutionary nor exciting tennis.

Murray is by far the best British tennis player of the modern era. With 22 career titles and 3 Grand Slam finals, he sits as the 10th biggest career prize money earner in the history of the game. In reaching the semi finals of each Grand Slam last season, he became only the 7th player to achieve the feat. Unfortunately for Andy, the three players ahead of him in the rankings are potentially 3 of the 5 greatest players to ever pick up a racket. A golden age for the sport. This elusive Grand Slam seems to be the catalyst for much of the Murray criticism. At only 25 he has his best years ahead of him and surely will win one of the big four sooner or later. Other british sportsmen have failed to win the biggest tournaments and are adored by fans. Luke Donald and Lee Westwood have been at the top of golf for a few years now and have failed to convert their success into majors, but they are not publicly bashed.

There is this nagging question of nationality, so Murray doesn't like being called English, well he's not. I wouldn't like being called Scottish. His nationality seems to bring his most crude criticism from not only the public but the lower end of the media. The suggestion that Murray hates England and Britain is unsubstantiated and odious. It seems it is the complex of those talking about Murray than one of the man himself.

With Wimbledon on the horizon, which I still believe is his best chance of Grand Slam victory, I urge you all to get behind Our Andy. 


JLloyd

Euro 2012 - The French Revolution?

Recently i have spent a fair amount of time discussing the Euros and in particular these three questions. Who will win it? Who will be top scorer? And who will be the break out player? And to my surprise very rarely has anybody mentioned the French. Unbeaten in their last twenty games and boasting a hungry young squad they are a team that are at the forefront of our minds due to England's opening fixture but this i feel has led to them being overlooked as tournament contenders.

This is a completely different team from the one that crashed and burned at the World Cup. No longer are they an unsettled squad but the new coach Laurent Blanc has brought a cohesion and happiness to the French camp. In fact it has been argued that the current squad is too inexperienced with many players plying their trade in the French league and possessing less than 20 caps. However this contrast's with the star studded squads that have braced previous tournaments and has led to a lack of egos and an increase in unity in the squad. Something that can be viewed as nothing but positive. 

Blanc is likely to utilize an effective 4-2-3-1 formation which places strong emphasis on keeping the ball and using it efficiently. This is possible due to the attacking and flexible threat players such as Benzema, Nasri, Martin and Ribery bring to the team. They are complemented nicely by the defensive base that can be provided by the likes of Cabaye, M'vila and Diarra. Although there are worries about the French central defenders, the Mexes and Rami partnership looks shakey with some even calling for the much improved but inexperienced Laurent Koscienly to start against England , they have the magnificent Lloris in goal and a number of solid full backs to choose from (Evra, Clichy and Debuchy). If the French can overcome some defensive issues and their tricky opening fixture they will be well placed to perform strongly throughout the rest of the tournament due to the strength of their squad.. Odds of 10/1 to win the tournament look very appealing. 

This brings me on the subject of top goalscorer. Robin Van Persie and Mario Gomez are in some sense the rightful favourites to win the golden boot. However many are talking about Jelavic or Lewandoski as potential dark horses due to their blistering club form. Yet criminally, Karim Benzema is being overlooked. His impressive goal tally for Real Madrid (32 goals in 52 games) has been overshadowed by the astonishing feats of Ronaldo and Messi and although it is true that he is yet to light up the international stage he is currently in the form of his life. He will be the sole focal point of the French attack and will be given plenty of opportunities to score from the creative three behind him with Ribery in particular determined to impress. Therefore not only do France possess the squad to challenge at the Euros they also have a world class striker who could light up the tournament. 

Finally my last question - biggest breakout player? Every international tournament always throws up a player or players that makes their name on the world stage with some dazzling performances. In the 2010 World Cup  it was Muller, whilst the 2008 European Championships gave us Arshavin. Players who although relatively well known in their own league or country had yet to have their class appreciated on a global scale. My tip for the break out player of the tournament is Mathieu Debuchy. Almost certain to start at right back due to absence of Sagna. Debuchy is a tough tackling, adventurous full back who is able to produce consistently good crosses. He needs some work on the defensive side of his game but with top class sides like Man United and Barcelona supposedly on the look out for a new full back a good tournament for Debuchy could lead to great things. 

Could Euro 2012 herald a new era for the French? Unfortunately for England the signs are positive but we will find out soon enough. 

jgeorge 

England's Liverpudlian Squad - Time to 'Calm Down'

As the UEFA Euro 2012 Championship draws near the England squad are dropping like flies. The latest inclusion of Liverpool's Martin Kelly has brought their representation in the squad up to 6. With their poor league form, this has drawn a great deal of controversy. But if they have invested heavily in English youth unlike many other top teams, then why should there not be a heavy Merseyside presence. Liverpool have provided some of England's finest young talents over a number of years. In addition senior players such as Steven Gerrard, Stewart Downing and Glen Johnson, with 162 caps between them would likely help Henderson, Carroll and Kelly bed in.

I am a big believer in having club contingencies within the national set up. The successful Spain side of recent years has incorporated successful combinations within club sides into the national side. Of course I am not suggesting that Henderson and Carroll are like Xavi and Iniesta, however the bond of club football and consistency this brings is surely something which would benefit at least the team camp and morale if not on pitch performances. Although this heavy presence from the red side of the Mersey was largely due to unforeseen circumstances, one would suggest that it is not all doom and gloom. Their league form was poor, they drew far too many games at home, but the European Championship is not a league, its a cup. Cup football is a different animal as Chelsea showed us with their seemingly impossible cup double and 6th placed league finish, a feat that we will seldom see again. Liverpool weren't too bad in the cups. Reaching the final of both domestic tournaments, in which we saw some of their best performances both as a team and from individuals such as Downing and Carroll. The FA Cup in particular saw Downing score 2 and gain 2 assists in 6 games and Carroll put 4 in the back of the net en route to second place. With both in with a shout of featuring in the opening game of the tournament perhaps the boys from the North West will paint the East red, again.


Jlloyd