Euros had je ne sais quoi
AFTER the tournament, inevitably, comes the post-mortem. And it has been fashionable in some quarters to moan about Euro 2016. Scoring was down, ergo it was “boring”. The quality of the football was “diluted” because of the switch to 24 teams. Portugal became champions of Europe while winning just one game in the 90 minutes… surely, that’s a travesty.
Taste is, obviously, a personal thing. If you didn’t like it, you didn’t like it and there’s no convincing you otherwise. But maybe a bit of rational thinking would help.
Yes, the 2.12 goals per game is down on recent tournaments. In fact, it’s the lowest average since Euro 96, you know, that tournament held south of the border that’s been lionised in half-a-dozen documentaries and retrospectives. It’s roughly half a goal less than we would see in the Premier League, La Liga or Serie A, which basically means that, over two games, you would see one fewer goal than you would see in your bog-standard league football. If that’s enough for you to call the whole affair boring, so be it.
This dilution business, in addition to being condescending, tends to equate quality with entertainment. Those who argue that point evidently fail to remember the Champions League semi-final tie between Manchester City and Real Madrid where there was tons of quality on display, but little action on the pitch.
It’s not dilution that caused the supposed “big teams” to underperform. France were awful in the semi-final and final. Spain went out with a whimper. Belgium displayed all their tactical limits and naivete. Germany, ravaged by injuries and suspensions, found out they had less depth than once believed. As for England, the less said the better.
In other words, if you were looking for the big stars on the big teams to deliver then you were let down by most of them (notable exceptions being perhaps Antoine Griezmann, Gigi Buffon and Toni Kroos). But there’s no reason to think matters would have been different with a16or eight-team format.
As for Portugal winning just once in the 90 minutes, it’s all in the narrative. Again, I refer you to those Euro 96 retrospectives and Terry Venables’ heroes. They didn’t actually win a game in the knockout, whether in extra-time or otherwise. Portugal, at least, beat France and a fine Croatia side over 120 minutes.
All that before we even get into the underdog stories, the summer of hope and dreams the likes of Iceland, Wales, Northern Ireland and even Albania enjoyed. You need to be a real grump not to appreciate any of that.
HANGING on to Riyad Mahrez, N’Golo Kante and Jamie Vardy was always going to be tough – and expensive – for Leicester City. So it’s not a surprise they lost one of their key men yesterday with another edging towards the exit.
Kante penned a five-year deal with Chelsea yesterday after a brief courtship – and a reported £32million fee – while Mahrez has reportedly turned down a contract extension that would more than double his wages. Vardy, of course, had his chance to move when Arsenal met the value of his release clause, but, for now at least, appears to be staying put.
Part of you is tempted to moan about the loss of romance in the game. Leicester losing two of their best three players makes defending the Premier League title so improbably won last season only that much more unlikely.
There is also a fair chunk of reality at work here. Mahrez earned more money last season, about £1.75m, than he did in his previous five years as a professional. Kante isn’t far off that. Unlike some players who find themselves on £50,000 a week from the age of 20, these two don’t have millions of pounds in the bank. They’re both 25. The time to cash in is now.
For those of us who don’t make those sums, it’s easy to wag fingers. But we are talking about two young men who are unlikely to have any sort of career when they retire in a decade’s time. And there’s a big difference between walking away with a few million in the bank or £15m to £20m stowed away. The former affords you and your family an excellent lifestyle for the rest of your life. The latter guarantees security for your extended family for the next few generations.
Leicester, of course, have offered their own contract bumps, as high as £5m for each according to reports. But, simply put, there is no comparison with the commercial and economic prospects of joining a heavyweight club. And that’s before you even get into the issue of personal and professional growth.
They came to Leicester and they delivered a title nobody could have dreamed of. They did their time and, if they do move, they will leave behind a hefty transfer fee. Nobody can begrudge them if they chose to leave.
IF the Football Association do opt for an English manager to replace Roy Hodgson and the choice does come down to Steve Bruce and Sam Allardyce, the reaction in some quarters will be predictable.
After all we are talking about a guy who has lost more games than he has won in his last four jobs (and, bear in mind, while he’s taken charge of Premier League strugglers, he has also managed sides dominating the Championship); and another guy who was lampooned to high heaven in a spoof Twitter account and who likes to tell people just how good he is, like when he insisted that if he had been allowed to manage Real Madrid, he would have a stack of European Cups in his cupboard.
But maybe it wouldn’t be such a bad thing. Maybe a national side ought to be, above all, an expression of what that nation produces footballwise, both in terms of players and coaches. And maybe, given how different international football is from club football, results wouldn’t even suffer that much. In fact, they might even improve.
We attach way too much significance to the role of a national team manager. Yes, if it’s a Jogi Loew or Antonio Conte, a guy with a clear tactical vision capable of playing sophisticated football, that’s great.
But if you don’t have someone like that, perhaps a Bruce or an Allardyce, someone with experience and, in his own way, charisma, can get the job done too. Certainly better than someone trying to appear sophisticated without the tools and know-how to coach that way.