 |
| |
|
 |
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
Red alert The clock is ticking for Houllier at LiverpoolPosted: Sunday May 25, 2003 8:25 AM
Gabriele Marcotti covers international soccer for CNNSI.com. He will answer questions from users in his mailbag periodically. Hi Gabriele, What are your thoughts on Liverpool at the moment? I expected good things from Liverpool this season but again a big disappointment. Do you think this will be Houllier's last season if he doesn't win the title or at least get us back into the Champions League?
I think the clock is definitely ticking as far as Houllier is concerned. He spent a lot of money last summer and the team hasn't shown any sign of improvement. Equally frustrating is the fact that Liverpool simply don't play particularly attacking football, and this was true even when they were winning trophies a few years ago. I am not convinced Houllier is the right guy to get the best out of players like, say, El Hadji Diouf who was harshly criticized this season. How do you explain the success of French players outside France as opposed to a dull and boring French league?
The French league isn't dull and boring, it simply doesn't attract the talented foreigners other leagues attract and the best French players regularly go abroad, further weakening the competition. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with France, it's just that they're sort of stuck in a vicious cycle. If they don't spend money, they won't be able to attract and keep top talent. But if they don't attract and keep top talent, they won't make much money.
I think your article titled 'Real shame' is inaccurate in some areas. It's true that Real has problems defensively. It is also true that if you take the game to them, and they are not in good form playing, their holes in defending will be exposed. Juve did that. Juve played intelligent, tactical and great. They deserved to win. However, if Real would have been in good form, Real would be in the final. However, Real, like Brasil, are the team to beat. Real has lots of talent. Everyone knows that. Just look at the press, including you, enjoying their loss and trashing them now. I guess it could be consider more like Man U and England frustrated fans. You cannot compare Man U to Real. If they are so better than Real, why are they not in the final? In fact, you cannot compare them to any English team. They did not even make it to the semifinals. It would be unfair to the Premier teams. The record speaks for itself. If you want a fair comparison, AC Milan, Ajax or Barcelona are better candidates. Teams that, like Real and Brasil, play beautiful, entertaining football.
You may want to re-read my column. I never suggested that Manchester United was a better team than Real Madrid. Rather, I stated that when the two teams met each other, for all of Real's dominance, it took fewer shots on goal than United. It's very easy to talk about how entertaining Real Madrid is. I'm all for entertaining, succesful football. But you can't lose sight of the basic point of the game, which is shooting on goal and creating chances. And that's something Real has failed to do on far too many occasions this season. Why do you see Oceania to blame for the lack of positions for Conmebol? You could take any number of the places from Europe!
Yes, you could, but why would you? European sides, like South American teams, have done far better than any other confederation. Oceania was handed one of Conmebol's spots and, in my opinion, that's not fair. Oceania simply is not competitive, apart from Australia, and even the Socceroos regularly fail to qualify for the World Cup. What bothers me is that FIFA's decision -- which essentially guarantees Australia a spot in the World Cup -- smacks of wanting to ensure that a wealthy, lucrative TV market like Australia is included at the expense of someone like Paraguay, Uruguay or Chile, all of whom would have generated less money in terms of TV rights. Gabe, it's refreshing to find 1st rate soccer commentary here in the US. As a frustrated soccer fanatic, I thank you. My queston is about Juan Roman Riquelme. Do you think that he will emerge as the great player Barca expected him to be? If not, what do you think is holding him back from succeeding in Europe? Is he too slow? Is it the mental aspect? Lastly, do you think Andres D'Alessandro will be able to adjust perhaps a little more rapidly to the European game?
Riquelme is outrageously gifted, but he's also one of the slowest players I've seen in a long time. He can settle in Europe, but I don't think he'll reach the level of a Pablo Aimar or a Juan Sebastian Veron. The European game is just too different for him. D'Alessandro will also need time to settle, but he seems better suited to European soccer. If he moves to the right club he can do well. A couple of years ago you wrote an article entitled better a Moratti than an Edwards. However events at Inter over the last four years prove its better to have an Edwards than a Moratti. As an Inter fan I think Moratti has run the club like a personal fiefdom (of course it's his money) but that doesn't justify making unilateral decisions especially on transfer policy. Let's start with the coaching personnel. The problems at Inter can be traced back to the 98/99 season with the sacking of Gigi Simoni. Simoni had won the UEFA Cup in style the previous season and we all know he was robbed of the Scudetto by some biased officiating, but Moratti fired him anyway. Lippi then came in, despite his impressive track record we all knew he was a Juve man through and through, and it showed (he simply didn't have the heart for the job) destroying talented youngsters like Pirlo & Ventola. Lippi was a disaster leaving behind a disunited dressing room. What we needed then was a strong disciplinarian, instead Moratti turned to Marco Tardelli! Cuper couldn't have come sooner!! Cuper has molded Inter back into a team but here we go again, for Moratti won't let him sign the players he wants to fit his 4-4-2 formation. Gabriele, why on earth does a coach get a four-year contract (which is long-term to me) and yet he can't have the team of his choice, why give him four years? If Inter are to move forward Moratti has to give leeway to Cuper on transfers. Moratti's decisions on the transfer market are quite baffling. For all the US$300 mil spent the club hasn't had a world class leftback and leftsided midfielder for the last four years. Moratti is the man who will sign Ryan Giggs simply out of admiration rather than longterm prudence. He got Vampeta because Ronaldo and not the coach had recommended him. Vieri got him to spend 10 million on Conceicao, a player who was having a nightmare at Parma -- he continues to disappoint. At the start of last season we had seven world class forwards impressive until you looked at the defense were we had the likes of Gresko. Where is the logic in swapping Dario Simic for Umit Davala ,when you don't even need Davala. Cuper might be ultra defensive, but Inter have always played the classic counter attack and besides with the exception of Emre the club lacks any real creative midfield players. Is Cuper to blame for this? It's only at Inter where Alvaro Recoba, who has never fitted in since his debut in 1997, is made the highest paid player, simply because Juve & Milan wanted him. Better an Edwards who gives the coach freedom and rightly criticizes when the coach fails and not a Moratti who buys the players, chooses who leaves and still blames the coach when things don't work out.
I agree that sacking Simoni was very harsh, but picking a guy like Lippi made sense. He's one of the top Italian coaches around and his exploits at Juventus the past two years prove this. Ventola had serious injury problems, though I agree that Lippi is one of many coaches who failed to spot Pirlo's talent. Tardelli was a terrible choice, but a temporary one. I disagree on Cuper. Moratti has given him exactly what he wanted. And it's not as if Cuper's selections have all been brilliant. He insisted on getting guys like Guly and Vivas who, in my opinion, are two of the worst players in the history of Inter. As for Conceicao, Cuper wanted a genuine winger and truly believed he could return to his best after a very bad year at Parma. Beyond that, Moratti got Cuper players like Toldo, Crespo, Almeyda, Cannavaro, Emre and others. Cuper handpicked Coco for the left back position -- another mistake in my opinion, but not Moratti's fault. The business with the Umit Davala for Dario Simic swap had nothing to do with soccer: it was simply an accounting move, so don't read anything into it. I might also add that Ronaldo has said that he left Inter because of Cuper. Beyond that, I think a manager has a responsiblity to field the best team with the players available to him. Cuper hasn't done that. He has fiddled with Recoba's position, forgotten all about Dalmat (who can be a very creative player) and failed to give Inter a coherent identity, beyond smacking long balls up to Vieri. Moratti must bear a lot of responsibility, but Cuper is far from blameless. Hey... Don't you think the second and winner goal for Real Madrid against Juventus in first leg semifinal was clear offside? Help me out in this? It was really annoying that referee accepted a goal after conversation with right side assistant. I was really looking for actual reason why the referee accepted. I came through this "after discussions with referee Terje Hauge, decided that the three Madrid players were not interfering with play and what may prove to be a crucial winner stood." from UEFA site. Question, what does 'three Madrid players were not interfering with play' means !!?? In short, they were offside and referee indeed did a mistake... don't you think so ?
I was actually at the Bernabeu when Roberto Carlos scored the goal in question. It all has to do with how the offside rule is interpreted. A player can be offside, but if his presence does not affect the play (usually because he is returning to an onside position) his offside is conidered "passive" and, if a goal is scored, it stands. The decision on Roberto Carlos' goal may have been debatable -- the three players may have blocked goalkeeper Gigi Buffon's sightline -- but I don't think it was an egregious error. I guess many will agree that Italian football is by far the least enjoyable to watch, a kind of game like this Milan vs. Inter semifinal is not really something that could make someone, who's not a fan of either team, go to the stadium or turn on the TV. Our national TV broadcasts the games from Serie A, but I watch them very rarely, because there's not much to see. But I wonder if there's any possibility that this will ever change, it looks like something that has deep roots in Italian football tradition and philosophy. Is there any possibility that the games in Serie A will ever look like those in La Liga or Premier League? And there's another thing I can't really understand. Why is Italian press always in favor of the game their teams play. They even praise catenaccio, they speak of it even as an art, while it's pretty clear that it's something that kills any joy that this sport brings. Why don't they, instead of that, put some extra pressure in another direction, towards more aggressive, attack oriented football. With the players they have on disposal, I could easily imagine a totally different kind of game, sometimes I have a feeling that in Italian teams a great player could never show all of his true individual skills. Why is it all like that?
When Italian clubs do poorly, the press harshly criticizes them if they employ catenaccio tactics. What it boils down to is results: as long as clubs keep winning, the Italian press will assume they are doing something right. You're right in saying that it's a philosophical issue: results matter more than style. I think you'll find however that many Italian Serie A sides do play a more open attacking brand of soccer. Milan, for one, though it doesn't always work out and Lazio of course, but also teams like Chievo, Modena, Empoli and Udinese. There is far more variety than there was a few years ago. Whether it kills the joy of the game is a matter of personal preference. Personally, I enjoyed both Milan derbies. They were hard-fought affairs, there were plenty of talented individuals and there was lots of passion. It was a battle and I thought it was enjoyable. Not everyone would agree with that, but, hey: Different stroker for different folks.
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
