Why Grealish Wasn’t Worth It
Pleasant play on Jack Grealish although hindsight is a wonderful thing. It is very easy to play the “what could have been” game when it comes to buying players.
Phrases like “should have bought it” and “of course what it’s worth now” have been used by supporters and fans for years about players who slipped through their team’s net (a of my Arsenal friends showed me an ‘Arsenal XI’ which had both Ronaldo and Messi as missed transfers).
No one pulled the money for Grealish this summer because then he wasn’t worth it, he’s been in phenomenal form since August, but in the last 10 games of last season he provided a purpose and no help. The reason for the sudden change in shape is space.
Last season his middle position was just behind the striker, this season his middle position is wide on the left, usually behind the opposition right-back, isolating a center-back who has been sidelined. His left-back, his left-back, usually Targett, doesn’t venture past the center line, giving Grealish plenty of room. It is in this space that Grealish causes all these problems. Denying him space and he struggles, against Leeds the dubbing from the right side of Costa and Dallas only saw Grealish compete for only 75% of his passes, against Soton, the Walker-Peters and Armstrong team who doubled the side Right saw him shut up, yes he got an assist for Mings and a 97 minute goal but his pass dropped to 68% and only 2 chances were created.
My point (we finally got there) is: would Grealish have that kind of space playing for Manchester or for Arsenal, Chelsea or Liverpool. The teams dig against the best, place the men behind the ball and especially “double” the players, Salah, DeBruyne and Co are regularly faced with 2/3 defenders.
Maybe the big teams watched Grealish in a more central role last season and decided he wasn’t worth the money, this season with space and rightly so that he’s worth every penny, there is still this annoying retreat.
Robbie DFC Éire (Watching him against Ireland broke my heart a bit)
England is at its level
Here’s a counterpoint to all the shenanigans of Gareth Southgate’s tactics: England lost to one of Europe’s top teams and it’s not a shameful or even unexpected result.
England is good, not great. The quarter-finals are generally our level. We are not entitled to anything higher. The players are not that good.
After the Euro 16 disaster in Iceland, expectations were finally lowered. For once, the people of this country seemed to realize that there was no reason to expect England to win against all of their opponents. England have very good players, but these players are no better than, for example, Belgium.
For a while, people finally stopped seeing England as a permanent favorite to win international competition. I rather suspect that outside of these islands, no one has done so for a few decades.
But now Southgate is becoming a victim of its own good work. A very good race in 2018 with a good but limited team sent the media and many supporters back to the same level of illusion. “We would win this thing if only the manager wasn’t a clump!” ”
No, we wouldn’t. 2-0 in Belgium is not proof of Southgate’s inadequacy. It’s normal. This is the level of England. 2018 was an outperformance. You can hope for something better, but you shouldn’t demand it.
READ MORE: Belgium 2-0 England – Rate players
It was only a matter of time before the gutter press took on Marcus Rashford, and I’m absolutely not surprised the hate rag was the first to do so. Mediawatch has already elaborated on the hypocrisy of rank, but I wonder if there is something bigger at stake. And that’s the freedom that the Daily Mail can do time and time again and no one cares. Why? Because young black, bi-racial men are loyal to these Daily Mail guttersnipes, and much of his readership.
Why can they get away with it? Because the Daily Mail reflects us as a nation. Small-minded, bigoted, hateful and quickly becoming irrelevant. It is no longer just the agony of an empire, but a calcification of this country. As K Pop sweeps the world and a generation comes along that is fluid, environmentally conscious, and believing that we can actually make the world a better and fairer place, the pragmatism and conservatism of the past becomes a powerless ideology.
Conservatism has not fed the poor and the needy. Conservatism has not protected us during a pandemic. It only hurt us. The Daily Mail hates Marcus Rashford and other successful young black men for refuting the story they’ve been shooting for 50 years. They hate that someone in poverty can stand up and want to take everyone around them with them, rather than pulling the drawbridge. He is everything that the Daily Mail and its readership are not. He is caring, compassionate, not greedy and impartial. Ironically, everything this country claims to be, but it clearly isn’t.
I’m an Arsenal fan and IMO Marcus should be BBC SPOTY and every year after that. He has shamed this government twice, ironically doing the job the useless Labor Party should be doing. The Daily Mail has come for one of the best of us, and we have to defend it from the tax exiled non-doms who have too much influence on this island.
John Matrix AFC
Always sunny in… Wrexham
With the recent purchase of Wrexham by Rob McElhennyI can only assume that we will see the release of a feature film called “The Gang Ruin a Football Club”.
Conor (Billy Koumetio to the Rescue) LFC
Congratulation to Johnny Nothing for finally hopping the shark with his Chelsea vs Krasnodar rant.
The weird thing here is that I completely agree with JN that we as a society don’t take climate change seriously enough and that unless we do (probably even if we do) , our lives will fundamentally change in the future, and not for the better. The response to this in a wide range of policy decisions, behavioral changes and technological solutions that will either remove the harmful impacts / emissions associated with our actions or mitigate their impact. We can already see the change in these areas with a shift to green energy, electric cars, discussions of carbon taxes and increasing vegetarian / flexitarian diets.
My problem is, I just don’t understand what JN is trying to achieve. Choosing such an extreme example that has such a limited overall impact will only deter people from engaging with the message. As with most things, it would eventually become political. The clubs themselves and UEFA / FIFA could easily afford to offset the carbon linked to these activities and also get involved in education campaigns to get people to make decisions in their own lives that would improve the situation. (similar to football’s engagement with Say No to Campaign Against Racism).
Like I said – I agree with the climate change post, but to say we have to cancel flights for football ultimately seems to justify those idiots on Twitter / Facebook who think the left wing is from you ruin life.
John Walsh, Keyboard Warrior, Belfast.
READ MORE: Killing the world for soccer is absolutely insane
… The thing is, John Nicholson is right. If we are to avoid the climate apocalypse, we all need to fundamentally change the way we live. And that largely means cutting the flight. It’s unpleasant, but it’s true. I don’t think ‘that might deter people from football’ is really a good excuse not to.
…Reading Michael’s email, and completely get where it came from, but I still think preventing people from suggesting ways to do better because there are ways they could have done better in the past is a business pretty pointless that usually stops anyone from trying to effect positive change.
Regardless of anything else, it is undeniable that if we are facing a climate catastrophe with a third of the world’s population migrating in search of survival and our food systems broken down, and more deadly and frequent pandemics and more weather events. extremes (which, miserable and all as it is predicted), it will be hard to look your kids in the eye and say “yes but, playing games in other countries 5 times a year was more fun, so it was totally worth it ”. I would say he was well aware that this would be a universally pilloried point, but it’s beyond mind that we never even talk about it as a problem, and even try to raise it. lead people to remind you of all the times you’ve been in combustion engine vehicles, you fat left-handed hypocrite.
Which is a roundabout way of saying I think it was bullshit, and a good point at least worth discussing is what these pages are for if nothing else.
Still, I think it would be great if John could find some common ground between his writing of yesteryear (2006, 2007) and his ultra-preaching and anarcho-syndicalist sermons of today. An example for young people. It was thanks to JN on this very site that I learned that eating celery makes your load of cum absolutely huge. He said apparently male pornstars were doing it to get these spectacular bucks.
John, maybe once a month you could write a column for the column that brings to mind that old-school style. But, you know, kinda awake.