This week, in an effort to demonstrate their level of responsibility, students protesting against the rise in tuition fees broke into the Conservative party headquarters and set it on fire. Well done, what a stunning effort by the future of our country to demonstrate their maturity. It's a sad indictment of the predicament in which we, as a nation, currently find ourselves. The basic fact is, we've managed to reach unprecedented levels of debt, and we have to get out of it. I'm not going to take the traditional line of blaming Labour for this financial crisis, largely because all politicians are products of the society in which they live, and the requirements of their jobs are dictated by the will of that society. But enough of the blame game, this is about finding a solution.
For a number of reasons, I personally agree with the rise in tuition fees. University is, in essence, private education, and as such it should be paid for by those who benefit from it, rather than being subsidised by government (that is to say, taxpayers') money. You wouldn't expect to see the taxpayer pay for private schools, and university is no different. If we want our universities to compete in the World Rankings with those from the US, or the rapidly improving universities of the Far East, then they need money to do that. A rise in tuition fees would also encourage families to be more responsible in planning for their childrens' futures. Take the United States, for example. Families set up a 'college fund' when children are born, and pay into it every year in order to provide the money for a university education. This year, Harvard's tuition fee for first years stands at $34, 976. Do you see the centre of Boston being set on fire by angry students? No, of course not, because that fee corresponds to a system that is entrenched in American society. Private universities, paid for by the individual, out of money that has been earmarked for that individual's education. Logical, simple, effective. I completely accept that not every family can afford a college fund, and that bursaries are therefore an absolute necessity. This is, in fact, the one major caveat to my view on the situation: high tuition fees are acceptable, as long as a portion of the money generated by them is set aside to help those who cannot afford the fees themselves. While I agree with the idea of universities as elite institutions, I am fundamentally opposed to the idea that that elitism should be based on economic and social background. The only qualification necessary for getting into university should be academic excellence, and as a result, it is crucial that those who fit that category but cannot afford the fees be able to gain bursaries to help them do so.
The subject of academic elitism is my most central argument. Universities are supposed to be elite establishments, the pinnacle of academic excellence, where those driven to pursue study should aim to be. This is no longer the case in the UK. Instead, university has just become another stage in a person's life. This, again, is the result of society pursuing a warped idea that every individual has to demonstrate academic excellence. According to The Times, there are currently 127 Universities in the UK. To put this in context, there are only 66 official cities in the UK. How is it, then, that universities are supposed to maintain their elite status, when so many exist. They have been created in an attempt to make an academic university education available to all, but in doing so, their creators have simultaneously devalued the university system as a whole and sent out a shocking message that vocational careers are inferior to academics. Herein lies the real problem of the British university system. Such a large number of universities requires substantial financial support. If the government supports one university, it must support all, so it is forced into a situation where it either commits to funds that it simply cannot afford, or alternatively follows its present path of raising tuition fees so that these institutions become self-sufficient. In order for students to attend these fast-becoming-compulsory establishments, they take out a student loan under the assumption that they will reap the benefits of their university education and be able to pay it back in no time at all. This is, of course, hugely flawed, as the majority of large companies will employ something of a prejudicial approach to their selection of applicants, with the names of established universities being infinitely preferable to those of the newer institutions. As such, those gaining degrees from Universities lower in the league table are unable to compete in the job market with those from, say, the top 40, making it harder for them to pay back the debts incurred by their student loans, thus increasing the pressure on the government to continue to fund the Student Loans Company.
One potential solution springs to mind. Draw a line under the top 40/50 universities. Those establishments should retain their university status. Institutions below that mark should instead focus on vocational subjects, which, in spite of society's apparent shunning of them, are of vital importance. The academic degrees offered by these institutions are of little benefit to those who receive them, because they are simply unable to compete in the job market with those who have equivalent degrees from higher ranking universities. These vocational institutions could be funded by the trade unions responsible for the different vocations, who would in turn see that funding returned to them by the huge influx of people into those various professions. Equally, large businesses reliant on the influx of academic students could help to fund the universities, and would equally recieve increased manpower as compensation. This would enable larger bursaries to be offered for those unable to pay tuition fees, while the actual tuition fees themselves might be able to remain slightly lower as having a smaller number academic institutions would in turn enable funding to go further.
Our society of political correctness will probably disapprove of such an analysis. Well, frankly, I disapprove of today's politically correct society. Our attempts at offering equal opportunities are utterly flawed. We focus on academics, while failing to emphasise the skill and ability required by vocational professions. I am an academic and a thinker. I have a job lined up for next year, following the completion of a Masters Degree, as a Consultant. Can I fix most household appliances? No. Do I understand how the engine of a car works? No. Could I build a house? No. Are any of these examples less important to society than my academic qualifications or my future role as a consultant? No, of course not. So why are we trying to make everyone go to university? Why are we so obsessed with academics? Why are we tipping the scales against those with the skills to follow more vocational careers?
David Cameron speaks of a 'Broken Britain'. If this is indeed the case, then it was broken by our minds more than our actions. It was broken by our prejudice against vocational professions, and our emphasis on academics. It was broken by our attempts to make everyone the same. In the process, we overlooked the true beauty of our society - that it is composed of millions of different individuals, each with their own skills and abilities, each one as valuable as the next. Only by overcoming our prejudice and striving, as a community, to see that beauty again, will we ever really fix our society...
Saturday, 13 November 2010
Saturday, 6 November 2010
'Air traffic control, this is Tottenham Hotspur, we seem to be having a little engine trouble...'
So Spurs returned to earth with all the grace of a Qantas flight this lunchtime, with a 4-2 defeat away at Bolton. This is partly written out of anger, and partly in an effort to demonstrate that I'm not entirely biased, and that I can lay into my team just as happily as I can praise them. This, after all, is what being a football fan is really all about: taking the bad as well as the good. Today was definitely one of the bad times.
To save writing a summary of each individual performance, I will instead direct you to read the accounts in 'Why last night mattered', substituting an expletive followed by a negative comment in place of each positive remark. Essentially, each player's performance was the exact opposite of their efforts on Tuesday night. The team, as a whole, lacked any real creative spark or drive. There was no passion, and we allowed Bolton to dictate the tempo of the game. Each player seemed to be playing at 50%, and the most disappointing aspect was that there seemed to be no thought as to how best to break down the opposition. Time and again we would win the ball, only to give it away through a sloppy pass or a wild defensive clearance. We gave away too many fouls, including a completely unnecessary penalty, which in itself was the result of one of the aforementioned wild defensive clearances by William Gallas. It was as if the team was hungover, incapable of stringing a decent move together. On the rare occasions when Modric or Bale did manage to spark a bit of life into the midfield, there was simply no end product. It highlights our need for a top class striker (or, at the very least, for the return to fitness of Jermain Defoe) - it's all well and good having midfielders who can leave the opposition choking on their dust, but if our own strikers can't keep up with them to convert the chances that are created, it seems like a bit of a waste.
Don't get me wrong, the two goals we did score were terrific - an excellent run from Alan Hutton finished off with a delicious, curling effort from the edge of the area from the Scotsman's weaker left foot, and a delightfully timed volley from Roman Pavlyuchenko. Yet those moments really gave too much credit to our overall performance, which was undeserving of such moments of brilliance. It would not surprise me if Hutton's effort made the November goal of the month list, but I'm sure anyone associated with Tottenham would have traded it for a tap-in akin to one of the goals on Tuesday night if that meant that Tuesday night's performance went along with it. We can point to the absence of Rafael Van der Vaart and Aaron Lennon as a possible reason for the poor display. The presence of the former's skill and movement, and the latter's sheer pace and ability to terrorise defenders, would surely have given a lift to an otherwise lacklustre display. We can't expect Bale to be brilliant every game (even God had to rest on the Seventh day), and Modric gave a good account of himself. But what of the rest? Sandro did nothing of note, Kranjcar was a real disappointment, and neither the introduction of Bentley nor Huddlestone seemed to give any added impetus to the team. Palacios actually played rather well, and it was a little surprising to see him replaced at half time by Pavlyuchenko, who, aside from the consolation goal, was a peripheral figure. Yet the real criticism must lie with the defence: Assou-Ekotto's touch was about as subtle as napalm, and Gallas and Kaboul played with all the skill and experience of school-children, repeatedly committing needless fouls, hoofing the ball clear with no real aim at almost every opportunity, and, worst of all, failing to coordinate with each other on numerous occasions, leaving the Bolton attackers with acres of space in which to work. This was evidenced in all 4 goals - the ease with which the opposition broke free was in stark contrast with the tight marking and constant pressing that characterised the Inter game.
Perhaps this is the crucial point though. Perhaps we simply did not give Bolton enough respect. In fairness, even most Bolton fans would admit that their team is, at best, an average Premier League side. They certainly don't have the ambitions of the Tottenhams, the Manchester Citys, the Evertons and the Villas of the league. But they still have good players, as witnessed today. The result did not flatter them, it was a scoreline that they entirely earned. If anything, the two goals that we scored were something of an injustice to Bolton's overall performance.
I'm not going to sit here and say I think that Spurs are a terrible team because of that performance. Anyone who witnessed Tuesday's match will admit that, when on form, we have a side capable of competing with and beating the very best. What I do find frustrating is the regularity, or rather lack of it, with which we display such ability. We have struggled to really get going in the league this season, and this is cause for concern. As wonderful as our performances in the Champions League have been (the first leg against Young Boys and the first half of game 1 against Inter aside), and as free-flowing as the goals in that competition might have been, 13 goals in 11 premier league games is simply not good enough for a team who wish to challenge for a top 4 place, particularly when those goals have come at the price of 14 conceded. To put that in context, we have scored 13 goals in our last 4 Champions League games. Our defence is questionable, and we know this, but our strike force has given a magnificent account of itself in that competition. It is often argued that most European teams play at a slower pace to the Premier League, and this is why it is easier for English teams to score goals in European competitions. Yet Inter Milan have one of the best defensive records on the continent over the last few seasons. We put 6 past them in 2 games. How is it that we then failed to even score once against Wigan, at home, a team we beat 9-1 less than 12 months ago?! I can't answer that specifically, as I did not see that particular game myself, but I can suggest an idea or two in response to the performance I have just witnessed. Bolton were not quicker than us. On the rare occasion that we broke them down, we did so with style, looking dangerous and giving them little chance of response. Yet the crucial word here is 'rare'. We needed to put together 60 or 70 minutes like that, not the occasional 2-3 minute spell. We simply lacked the intensity demonstrated against Inter. This is not good enough, and above all, it's disrespectful. Why should we go out and play with such passion against Inter, and yet play with half that intensity against Bolton. Do they not deserve to face the best that we can produce? Are they not worthy of the performance that we gave on Tuesday?
We have a hugely talented squad, of that there is no doubt. You can blame injuries or fatigue as much as you like for performances such as today's, but ultimately our squad should be up to the task. Players will undoubtedly have off-days, but for the whole team to play that poorly is pretty unacceptable. If Chelsea, Arsenal and (albeit to a lesser extent this season) Man Utd can do it, there are simply no excuses for us. If not quite on the same level as those teams yet, we are certainly not far behind, and if we want to be considered their equals, then we have got to start acting like it. Seasons are not made or broken on individual performances. They are the result of 38 weeks of hard work. As great as Cup and European victories might be, the ultimate judgement of a successful season lies in the team's performance across the 3420 minutes of league football, and we would do well to remember this. We beat Inter Milan, and that was fantastic, but unless that is all we want to show for our season, we need to start playing with that level of intensity again in the league, just as we did last season. If not, our Champions League experience will be something of a one-hit wonder, and all the effort that has been put in to get the club this far will have been for nothing.
To save writing a summary of each individual performance, I will instead direct you to read the accounts in 'Why last night mattered', substituting an expletive followed by a negative comment in place of each positive remark. Essentially, each player's performance was the exact opposite of their efforts on Tuesday night. The team, as a whole, lacked any real creative spark or drive. There was no passion, and we allowed Bolton to dictate the tempo of the game. Each player seemed to be playing at 50%, and the most disappointing aspect was that there seemed to be no thought as to how best to break down the opposition. Time and again we would win the ball, only to give it away through a sloppy pass or a wild defensive clearance. We gave away too many fouls, including a completely unnecessary penalty, which in itself was the result of one of the aforementioned wild defensive clearances by William Gallas. It was as if the team was hungover, incapable of stringing a decent move together. On the rare occasions when Modric or Bale did manage to spark a bit of life into the midfield, there was simply no end product. It highlights our need for a top class striker (or, at the very least, for the return to fitness of Jermain Defoe) - it's all well and good having midfielders who can leave the opposition choking on their dust, but if our own strikers can't keep up with them to convert the chances that are created, it seems like a bit of a waste.
Don't get me wrong, the two goals we did score were terrific - an excellent run from Alan Hutton finished off with a delicious, curling effort from the edge of the area from the Scotsman's weaker left foot, and a delightfully timed volley from Roman Pavlyuchenko. Yet those moments really gave too much credit to our overall performance, which was undeserving of such moments of brilliance. It would not surprise me if Hutton's effort made the November goal of the month list, but I'm sure anyone associated with Tottenham would have traded it for a tap-in akin to one of the goals on Tuesday night if that meant that Tuesday night's performance went along with it. We can point to the absence of Rafael Van der Vaart and Aaron Lennon as a possible reason for the poor display. The presence of the former's skill and movement, and the latter's sheer pace and ability to terrorise defenders, would surely have given a lift to an otherwise lacklustre display. We can't expect Bale to be brilliant every game (even God had to rest on the Seventh day), and Modric gave a good account of himself. But what of the rest? Sandro did nothing of note, Kranjcar was a real disappointment, and neither the introduction of Bentley nor Huddlestone seemed to give any added impetus to the team. Palacios actually played rather well, and it was a little surprising to see him replaced at half time by Pavlyuchenko, who, aside from the consolation goal, was a peripheral figure. Yet the real criticism must lie with the defence: Assou-Ekotto's touch was about as subtle as napalm, and Gallas and Kaboul played with all the skill and experience of school-children, repeatedly committing needless fouls, hoofing the ball clear with no real aim at almost every opportunity, and, worst of all, failing to coordinate with each other on numerous occasions, leaving the Bolton attackers with acres of space in which to work. This was evidenced in all 4 goals - the ease with which the opposition broke free was in stark contrast with the tight marking and constant pressing that characterised the Inter game.
Perhaps this is the crucial point though. Perhaps we simply did not give Bolton enough respect. In fairness, even most Bolton fans would admit that their team is, at best, an average Premier League side. They certainly don't have the ambitions of the Tottenhams, the Manchester Citys, the Evertons and the Villas of the league. But they still have good players, as witnessed today. The result did not flatter them, it was a scoreline that they entirely earned. If anything, the two goals that we scored were something of an injustice to Bolton's overall performance.
I'm not going to sit here and say I think that Spurs are a terrible team because of that performance. Anyone who witnessed Tuesday's match will admit that, when on form, we have a side capable of competing with and beating the very best. What I do find frustrating is the regularity, or rather lack of it, with which we display such ability. We have struggled to really get going in the league this season, and this is cause for concern. As wonderful as our performances in the Champions League have been (the first leg against Young Boys and the first half of game 1 against Inter aside), and as free-flowing as the goals in that competition might have been, 13 goals in 11 premier league games is simply not good enough for a team who wish to challenge for a top 4 place, particularly when those goals have come at the price of 14 conceded. To put that in context, we have scored 13 goals in our last 4 Champions League games. Our defence is questionable, and we know this, but our strike force has given a magnificent account of itself in that competition. It is often argued that most European teams play at a slower pace to the Premier League, and this is why it is easier for English teams to score goals in European competitions. Yet Inter Milan have one of the best defensive records on the continent over the last few seasons. We put 6 past them in 2 games. How is it that we then failed to even score once against Wigan, at home, a team we beat 9-1 less than 12 months ago?! I can't answer that specifically, as I did not see that particular game myself, but I can suggest an idea or two in response to the performance I have just witnessed. Bolton were not quicker than us. On the rare occasion that we broke them down, we did so with style, looking dangerous and giving them little chance of response. Yet the crucial word here is 'rare'. We needed to put together 60 or 70 minutes like that, not the occasional 2-3 minute spell. We simply lacked the intensity demonstrated against Inter. This is not good enough, and above all, it's disrespectful. Why should we go out and play with such passion against Inter, and yet play with half that intensity against Bolton. Do they not deserve to face the best that we can produce? Are they not worthy of the performance that we gave on Tuesday?
We have a hugely talented squad, of that there is no doubt. You can blame injuries or fatigue as much as you like for performances such as today's, but ultimately our squad should be up to the task. Players will undoubtedly have off-days, but for the whole team to play that poorly is pretty unacceptable. If Chelsea, Arsenal and (albeit to a lesser extent this season) Man Utd can do it, there are simply no excuses for us. If not quite on the same level as those teams yet, we are certainly not far behind, and if we want to be considered their equals, then we have got to start acting like it. Seasons are not made or broken on individual performances. They are the result of 38 weeks of hard work. As great as Cup and European victories might be, the ultimate judgement of a successful season lies in the team's performance across the 3420 minutes of league football, and we would do well to remember this. We beat Inter Milan, and that was fantastic, but unless that is all we want to show for our season, we need to start playing with that level of intensity again in the league, just as we did last season. If not, our Champions League experience will be something of a one-hit wonder, and all the effort that has been put in to get the club this far will have been for nothing.
Thursday, 4 November 2010
The guy from The Script needs to get over it....
I can't claim to be a massive fan of The Script. In fact, I think I only know two of their songs - 'The Man Who Can't Be Moved' and 'If You Ever Come Back'. They're both pretty good songs, in fairness. Yet you have to question the lyrical motives behind them. What we have here is a guy who's obsessed with an ex-girlfriend who, I'm sorry to inform him, is clearly not coming back. In the former, he's apparently converting into some kind of hobo in the vain hope that, in response to some vague pang of nostalgia, the said girl might go back to the place where he first met her. This is unlikely, my friend. If she really wants to see you again, she'll probably call you. Or if she's really spontaneous, she might turn up at your house. It's highly unlikely, however, that she'll think 'oh, I really want to see him again...I know, I'll go back to the first place we met, because obviously, in my absence, he'll have given up every last shred of dignity he has and will have decided to live on the street, desperately hoping I might show up again.' The most arrogant girl in the world would be hard pushed to come to such a conclusion. And think about it, even if this most unlikely of events does unfold in a manner akin to your bizarre process of logic, do you really think anyone's going to get back into a relationship with you if you've lost your job, your house, all sense of dignity, and probably absolutely stink through a lack of adequate hygiene?!
'If You Ever Come Back' seems to be at the other end of the scale. Having decided that becoming a homeless person is probably a little bit extreme, the guy is going with an alternative policy of just pretending nothing's changed. So he's going on living his life as if he's in a relationship, just without a girlfriend. And every time he realises that she's gone, he apparently bursts into tears again. Man the fuck up. And what the hell is going on in the chorus?! 'I'll leave the door on the latch' just in case you ever come back?! That's a sure fire way to get burgled. And to make matters worse, after that blatent declaration of lax security, your insurance firm won't pay out. So you'll have no girlfriend, no possessions, and no money to buy new things with. 'I'll have a smile on my face if you ever come back'. How creeped out will she be at the sight of that?! She walks in and you're standing there, beaming at her, presumably with tear stains down your face, in a house that's quite possibly empty of all possessions. She's already walked through an unlocked door, so if she wasn't wierded out enough before, she certainly will be now. At the sight of that, any doubts she was having about the decision to leave you will vanish in an instant. And, just because I haven't quite had enough of ranting yet, how arrogant must you be to assume that she'll think she's made a mistake. You're clearly an insanely clingy person...that's almost certainly the reason she left you in the first place. Act like you don't give a shit, and then you might have a better chance of her coming back. Giving up your job and dignity in favour of an extended mourning period for your failed relationship is unlikely to convince her that you're a viable long-term partner.
So please, whichever one of you writes the lyrics for these songs, seek some sort of counselling. You clearly have a few issues. At no point in either of these songs have you thought to ask why she might have left you. You're just casually going along assuming that you're perfect and that, sooner or later, she'll realise that!
But on a more serious note, it's this kind of bullshit that makes people so melodramatic these days. You're filling all the people who listen to your music with the deluded hope that these kind of gestures might actually win someone back. They won't. It's just that simple. Why? Because it's creepy, it's wierd, it's clingy, it's obsessive, it's arrogant, and it shows no willingness to change. She left you for a reason, and until you realise that and address it, you have no chance of getting her back. So one possible solution is: talk to her. Shocking, I know, and it probably wouldn't fill three minutes and fifty seconds of song in quite the same way. But if you really want to get your girlfriend back, just try talking to her, and stop whining to us about it.
Rant over.
'If You Ever Come Back' seems to be at the other end of the scale. Having decided that becoming a homeless person is probably a little bit extreme, the guy is going with an alternative policy of just pretending nothing's changed. So he's going on living his life as if he's in a relationship, just without a girlfriend. And every time he realises that she's gone, he apparently bursts into tears again. Man the fuck up. And what the hell is going on in the chorus?! 'I'll leave the door on the latch' just in case you ever come back?! That's a sure fire way to get burgled. And to make matters worse, after that blatent declaration of lax security, your insurance firm won't pay out. So you'll have no girlfriend, no possessions, and no money to buy new things with. 'I'll have a smile on my face if you ever come back'. How creeped out will she be at the sight of that?! She walks in and you're standing there, beaming at her, presumably with tear stains down your face, in a house that's quite possibly empty of all possessions. She's already walked through an unlocked door, so if she wasn't wierded out enough before, she certainly will be now. At the sight of that, any doubts she was having about the decision to leave you will vanish in an instant. And, just because I haven't quite had enough of ranting yet, how arrogant must you be to assume that she'll think she's made a mistake. You're clearly an insanely clingy person...that's almost certainly the reason she left you in the first place. Act like you don't give a shit, and then you might have a better chance of her coming back. Giving up your job and dignity in favour of an extended mourning period for your failed relationship is unlikely to convince her that you're a viable long-term partner.
So please, whichever one of you writes the lyrics for these songs, seek some sort of counselling. You clearly have a few issues. At no point in either of these songs have you thought to ask why she might have left you. You're just casually going along assuming that you're perfect and that, sooner or later, she'll realise that!
But on a more serious note, it's this kind of bullshit that makes people so melodramatic these days. You're filling all the people who listen to your music with the deluded hope that these kind of gestures might actually win someone back. They won't. It's just that simple. Why? Because it's creepy, it's wierd, it's clingy, it's obsessive, it's arrogant, and it shows no willingness to change. She left you for a reason, and until you realise that and address it, you have no chance of getting her back. So one possible solution is: talk to her. Shocking, I know, and it probably wouldn't fill three minutes and fifty seconds of song in quite the same way. But if you really want to get your girlfriend back, just try talking to her, and stop whining to us about it.
Rant over.
Wednesday, 3 November 2010
Why last night mattered...
For those who don't know, I'm a Spurs fan. Just thought it best to get that out of the way before writing what would otherwise have seemed to be a rather biased article! Last night, Spurs welcomed the European Champions, Inter Milan, to White Hart Lane, and, as even the most ardent of Arsenal fans would have to admit, gave them a masterclass in how to play football. This Inter Milan team was composed of some of the finest players of the current generation - Samuel Eto'o, the prolific Cameroon striker who scores goals for fun; Wesley Sneijder, one of the World's finest attacking midfielders; Lucio and Walter Samuel, a formidable centre-back partnership of pace, power and brute force who have contributed significantly to a side that has only conceded 4 goals in 9 Serie A games this season; Javier Zanetti, the legendary Argentinian utility man, whose experience and career success is almost without rival; and Maicon, widely recognised as the best right-back in the World. This Inter side strikes fear into almost anything in its way, but last night, it was the Nerazzuri who were running scared.
The final score of 3-1 was no more than Spurs' performance merited. While the plaudits will largely rest with Gareth Bale, who, time after time, ghosted past Maicon, Lucio et al. as though they didn't exist, producing chance after chance and coming away with two assists (for the goals of Peter Crouch and Roman Pavlyuchenko) to add to his magnificent hat-trick in the San Siro a fortnight ago, it would be wrong to attribute such a magnificent result to the efforts of just one man. The whole team played magnificently. Peter Crouch did a terrific job as the lone striker, holding the ball up and linking play, and while he did his best to ensure his name would not be on the scoresheet with a woeful effort following some terrific work from the Welsh wonder, his goal was no more than his performance merited. Indeed, it was reminiscent of his performance at Eastlands in May, which secured Spurs' place among Europe's elite. Rafael Van der Vaart was as outstanding as ever, making intelligent runs, finding space and linking play brilliantly between midfield and attack. Aaron Lennon tormented Christian Chivu at left back, running at and beating both him and Javier Zanetti again and again. Luka Modric ran the show from the centre of midfield, dancing circles around Sulley Muntari, and it was his stunning combination of skill and vision that set up Van der Vaart's goal, darting past the helpless Ghanaian midfielder and slicing open the Inter defence with a magnificent pass. His performance left Wesley Sneijder trailing in his wake. Tom Huddlestone, who by his standards was not particularly involved in the Spurs attack, should receive no less credit. Playing in a holding role, Sneijder seemed to be his responsibility. That the Dutchman was chiefly limited to tame, speculative efforts from the edge of the area, and was left squirming to find space to pass in, is testament to Huddlestone's defensive efforts, which have often been called into question. Jermaine Jenas, equally, gave a solid performance when he came on, and more than justified Harry's decision to put him on ahead of Wilson Palacios. In defence, Alan Hutton did a great job against Goran Pandev, who may as well have been sitting on the bench for the first half, and particular praise should be given to Benoit Assou-Ekotto, who put in a tireless shift against Jonathan Biabiany, who ran riot in the San Siro two weeks ago. Younes Kaboul and William Gallas were solid at the back, and despite one or two errors of judgement, never really looked out of their depth against the sublime Eto'o, whose solo-effort goal was a brief moment of consolation in what was otherwise a night to forget for the black and blue half of Milan. Last, but by no means least, Carlo Cudicini made a few top-class saves when called upon, notably from one of Wesley Sneijder's notorious free-kicks, frustrating the Inter attack on the rare occasions when they did manage to create a shooting opportunity. All in all, it was a terrific team performance, and this should not be overlooked, even if particular praise should be reserved for the terrific performances of Bale and Modric.
Now, the crux of the matter: why was this so important. It was important because Spurs don't normally do this. We don't outshine legendary teams (and I don't think it's too far to go to use the term 'legendary' to describe this Inter side). On the rare occasions that we beat them, it is usually an expert example of the smash and grab technique - get our goal(s) and then hold on for dear life. Our victories against the top 4 sides last season demonstrated this: 2-1 against Liverpool, 2-1 against Arsenal, and 2-1 against Chelsea. We might get the goals, but usually we then invite pressure upon ourselves by allowing the opposition to control possession and gain momentum. There's a reason why Spurs fans have no fingernails! Yet over the last few seasons, we have at least been winning these games, and last night was an important milestone marking our progress. With the exception of a 5 minute period before half time and a 10 minute period late in the second half that culminated in Eto'o's goal, Spurs dominated the match. Sneijder and Eto'o were largely spectators to a flowing and skillful display of attacking football from the North London side of which any team would be proud. This is an Inter side that, as a rule, does not concede goals. One could be forgiven for siding with the sceptics about the almost-comeback in Milan, that Inter were complacent after taking a 4-0 lead, and that their lack of concentration was the main factor in Bale's hat-trick. Last night, there could be no such explanation. Spurs' performance was an example of sheer class, of flair and of brilliance. In truth, we could have scored 5 or 6. It is a sign of our progress. Two seasons ago, if a team like Inter had got a goal back in the last 10 minutes, we would have caved, and probably not only gone on to draw the game, but more often than not would have lost it. Now, there seems to be a steely determination in this squad. The players we have here are winners, and winners don't crumble. When questioned, they prove their ability. And that is exactly what goal number 3 was: Bale, just for the benefit of those who may not have quite understood his class up until this point, knocked the ball beyond Lucio and Maicon, obliterated them once more with his pace, and produced an inch-perfect cross which stranded the keeper and left Roman Pavlyuchenko with the simplest of finishes to secure the game. It would be wrong to overlook the influence of Harry Redknapp, who has been simply remarkable for the club since taking over two years ago. His role last night cannot be overstated, demonstrating his considerable tactical expertise in setting up a team that crippled the Inter attack.
All in all, this was football at its best, at least from a Tottenham perspective. It was a demonstration of how much the club has grown, of how high our ambition is, and just how capable we are of success. It is, of course, crucial that our key players, the likes of Bale, Van der Vaart, Modric and Huddlestone, stay at the club, that we develop some consistency in the squad, and no longer bow down to the big money offers of the 'big' clubs. This is not just because we can't afford to lose our best players. This is because if we really want to be one of the 'big' clubs again, an ambition which I genuinely believe we are on the verge of turning into a reality, it is crucial that we start acting like one in the transfer market. We need to start believing in our own ability to challenge, and in our own power to attract and keep the world's premium talent. We have just beaten the champions of Europe. If that's not enough to signal to our players that we are a club with the ability to match their ambition, then I don't know what is. But I don't think it's the players who need convincing. I'm talking to you here, Mr Levy. If you really want Tottenham to achieve the heights that you claim, if you want to look back on your time at the club and see success, then please, don't sell our best players when the big money offers come in. Because ultimately, money is great, but success can never be taken away from you. I'll leave you to decide which you'd prefer to have...
The final score of 3-1 was no more than Spurs' performance merited. While the plaudits will largely rest with Gareth Bale, who, time after time, ghosted past Maicon, Lucio et al. as though they didn't exist, producing chance after chance and coming away with two assists (for the goals of Peter Crouch and Roman Pavlyuchenko) to add to his magnificent hat-trick in the San Siro a fortnight ago, it would be wrong to attribute such a magnificent result to the efforts of just one man. The whole team played magnificently. Peter Crouch did a terrific job as the lone striker, holding the ball up and linking play, and while he did his best to ensure his name would not be on the scoresheet with a woeful effort following some terrific work from the Welsh wonder, his goal was no more than his performance merited. Indeed, it was reminiscent of his performance at Eastlands in May, which secured Spurs' place among Europe's elite. Rafael Van der Vaart was as outstanding as ever, making intelligent runs, finding space and linking play brilliantly between midfield and attack. Aaron Lennon tormented Christian Chivu at left back, running at and beating both him and Javier Zanetti again and again. Luka Modric ran the show from the centre of midfield, dancing circles around Sulley Muntari, and it was his stunning combination of skill and vision that set up Van der Vaart's goal, darting past the helpless Ghanaian midfielder and slicing open the Inter defence with a magnificent pass. His performance left Wesley Sneijder trailing in his wake. Tom Huddlestone, who by his standards was not particularly involved in the Spurs attack, should receive no less credit. Playing in a holding role, Sneijder seemed to be his responsibility. That the Dutchman was chiefly limited to tame, speculative efforts from the edge of the area, and was left squirming to find space to pass in, is testament to Huddlestone's defensive efforts, which have often been called into question. Jermaine Jenas, equally, gave a solid performance when he came on, and more than justified Harry's decision to put him on ahead of Wilson Palacios. In defence, Alan Hutton did a great job against Goran Pandev, who may as well have been sitting on the bench for the first half, and particular praise should be given to Benoit Assou-Ekotto, who put in a tireless shift against Jonathan Biabiany, who ran riot in the San Siro two weeks ago. Younes Kaboul and William Gallas were solid at the back, and despite one or two errors of judgement, never really looked out of their depth against the sublime Eto'o, whose solo-effort goal was a brief moment of consolation in what was otherwise a night to forget for the black and blue half of Milan. Last, but by no means least, Carlo Cudicini made a few top-class saves when called upon, notably from one of Wesley Sneijder's notorious free-kicks, frustrating the Inter attack on the rare occasions when they did manage to create a shooting opportunity. All in all, it was a terrific team performance, and this should not be overlooked, even if particular praise should be reserved for the terrific performances of Bale and Modric.
Now, the crux of the matter: why was this so important. It was important because Spurs don't normally do this. We don't outshine legendary teams (and I don't think it's too far to go to use the term 'legendary' to describe this Inter side). On the rare occasions that we beat them, it is usually an expert example of the smash and grab technique - get our goal(s) and then hold on for dear life. Our victories against the top 4 sides last season demonstrated this: 2-1 against Liverpool, 2-1 against Arsenal, and 2-1 against Chelsea. We might get the goals, but usually we then invite pressure upon ourselves by allowing the opposition to control possession and gain momentum. There's a reason why Spurs fans have no fingernails! Yet over the last few seasons, we have at least been winning these games, and last night was an important milestone marking our progress. With the exception of a 5 minute period before half time and a 10 minute period late in the second half that culminated in Eto'o's goal, Spurs dominated the match. Sneijder and Eto'o were largely spectators to a flowing and skillful display of attacking football from the North London side of which any team would be proud. This is an Inter side that, as a rule, does not concede goals. One could be forgiven for siding with the sceptics about the almost-comeback in Milan, that Inter were complacent after taking a 4-0 lead, and that their lack of concentration was the main factor in Bale's hat-trick. Last night, there could be no such explanation. Spurs' performance was an example of sheer class, of flair and of brilliance. In truth, we could have scored 5 or 6. It is a sign of our progress. Two seasons ago, if a team like Inter had got a goal back in the last 10 minutes, we would have caved, and probably not only gone on to draw the game, but more often than not would have lost it. Now, there seems to be a steely determination in this squad. The players we have here are winners, and winners don't crumble. When questioned, they prove their ability. And that is exactly what goal number 3 was: Bale, just for the benefit of those who may not have quite understood his class up until this point, knocked the ball beyond Lucio and Maicon, obliterated them once more with his pace, and produced an inch-perfect cross which stranded the keeper and left Roman Pavlyuchenko with the simplest of finishes to secure the game. It would be wrong to overlook the influence of Harry Redknapp, who has been simply remarkable for the club since taking over two years ago. His role last night cannot be overstated, demonstrating his considerable tactical expertise in setting up a team that crippled the Inter attack.
All in all, this was football at its best, at least from a Tottenham perspective. It was a demonstration of how much the club has grown, of how high our ambition is, and just how capable we are of success. It is, of course, crucial that our key players, the likes of Bale, Van der Vaart, Modric and Huddlestone, stay at the club, that we develop some consistency in the squad, and no longer bow down to the big money offers of the 'big' clubs. This is not just because we can't afford to lose our best players. This is because if we really want to be one of the 'big' clubs again, an ambition which I genuinely believe we are on the verge of turning into a reality, it is crucial that we start acting like one in the transfer market. We need to start believing in our own ability to challenge, and in our own power to attract and keep the world's premium talent. We have just beaten the champions of Europe. If that's not enough to signal to our players that we are a club with the ability to match their ambition, then I don't know what is. But I don't think it's the players who need convincing. I'm talking to you here, Mr Levy. If you really want Tottenham to achieve the heights that you claim, if you want to look back on your time at the club and see success, then please, don't sell our best players when the big money offers come in. Because ultimately, money is great, but success can never be taken away from you. I'll leave you to decide which you'd prefer to have...
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)