Home
When I read Oli Kay's blog last week I didn't think it was a big deal. I disagreed with some of his points but, heck, I'm a natural contrarian, so I'm bound to find fault. And, yes, I'm Italian so maybe I thought I was being a bit oversensitive. But then, watching Sky Italia's sports news last night, I saw his piece being given massive prominence (smile Oli, you're famous in Italy!). And I soon realized I'd be asked to chip in my two (euro) cents.
I'll try to be as balanced and unbiased as possible, bearing in my mind that all of us are born with some kind of inherent bias: how we control and manage it is the key.
1. Oli writes that "it's strange how the balance of power (and money) can change so quickly", referring to the shift in prominence from Serie A to the Premier League. Actually, it's not so strange. A decade has passed since the time when England was a dumping ground for has-beens and never-weres. In that time, a lot has changed.
The Premier League - and here, regardless of how you feel about "modern football", you have to give credit to certain people - has turned itself into a commercial juggernaut. Credit to the marketing people doing the selling, who have put together a successful product. Credit to the people running the English game. But the success was also built on other factors, which Italy did not benefit from (thankfully).
For a start, England began from a much lower position. It's easier to move up when you're lower down than it is to stay at the top when you've been there for ten years (as was the case with Serie A from the mid-1980s to the mid-1990s). The other huge boost to England was born out of tragedy. Without the state-of-the-art stadia in England it's unlikely that the country could have rid itself so effectively of its hooligan problem within the grounds itself (outside, it's a different issue: remember the dozen Spurs supporters knifed a quarter mile from Stamford Bridge two years ago? Probably not, it was under-reported and not considered "football-related violence"). And would the grounds ever have been refurbished had it not been for the Taylor Report (a direct consequence of Hillsborough and Bradford)and some of the public money it brought with it? Probably not, or, at least, certainly not to the same degree.
At the same time, Italian football has gone out of its way to be self-destructive. Whether it was Calciopoli, the sale of individual TV rights, fan violence, general mismanagement at the top by people who should have known better, terrible policing in some cities (as most Englsh fans who have been to Rome can tell you) and accounting practices which sometimes range from the "creative" to the downright "fraudulent", monkeys could probably have done a better job. And, in this, you have to spread the blame around: from the administrators to the clubs to law enforcement to politicians to the media (who were clearly not vigilant enough) to some supporters themselves (who accepted absurd and extreme situations).
So there you have it. Oli is right on that point, the balance of power has shifted. But it's certainly not "strange" that it has. Oh, and this "Serie A-beset-by-fan-violence" litany has to end at some point. The fact of the matter is that incidents of violence at Italian grounds have declined in each of the last five years. But, of course, that's not a story. Perception is another matter of course. And it's certainly true that the Italian media devotes acres of press to any incident, whereas, in this country, witness the knifings after the Chelsea v Tottenham FA Cup game, violence tends to get buried.
2. But back to football. Oli's appetite isn't whet by the new imports. Fair enough. If you want to compare imports at the top four clubs in Italy and England, let's go ahead and do that. Ronaldinho was surplus to requirements at Barcelona? Great. So was Deco, who joined Chelsea and, incidentally, is three years older (retirement home indeed). Oh, and Oli speaks of Ronaldinho's "two years of unmitigated decline": I'll give you last season, Oli, but the year before that Ronaldinho scored twenty-one league goals in thirty-two Liga matches. If that's decline, I wonder what your definition of success is.
Looking at the newcomers in the two countries, I wonder what it takes to whet Oli's appetite. Gianluca Zambrotta, a World Cup winner from Barcelona, may not excite him, but maybe Jose Bosingwa does. Maybe David N'Gog does as well. You can laugh at Philippe Senderos. Go ahead. Ha! Ha! But he will not start at Milan and Arsene Wenger, a guy who knows his football, believed in him enough to keep him around for five years. Let's see who has the last laugh there.
In fact, it's difficult to compare the two countries' newcomers, at least at the top, because England's big four didn't sign too many players from abroad. But maybe they've been whetting Oli's appetite. Samir Nasri? Great young player - I was very impressed with the twenty-nine minutes he played at the Euros. Amaury Bischoff? Well, he started as many top-flight games as I have (zero). Guess I'll wait to see how that pans out. Daniele Dossena? Maybe I should make a joke about how a 26-year-old guy with two Serie A seasons under his belt can move from a mid-table side like Udinese into a starting job at Liverpool. But maybe I shouldn't. Philipp Degen? Yes, Swiss right-backs are terribly exciting aren't they? David N'Gog? Yes I know I'm scraping the bottom of the barrel here by citing a center-forward who scored one more top-flight goal than Julian Clary in his career, but, fact is, there really are no major signings from the Premier League top four to talk about. So I'll leave it there.
Oli evidently isn't excited by Julio Baptista, because he "flopped" at Arsenal and didn't do much at Real Madrid. Fine. The fact is that he's twenty-six, has thirty-six international caps for Brazil (which, I think he'll agree, are rather difficult to assemble if you're a complete donkey) and played ninety minutes in their last outing: a World Cup qualfiier against Argentina. If he's good enough to start for Brazil in an official game against their biggest rival, heck, I think I'll give him a shot.
Christian Poulsen? Well, if you talk to Guillem Balague (or Juande Ramos) he was crucial to Seville the last two seasons. But, it's true, he's no David N'Gog. Sulley Muntari? Methinks that if he'd signed for Arsenal or Manchester United you'd all be praising him to high heaven. Clearly it's just a coincidence that in his only season at Portsmouth they won the FA Cup.
3. Oh, and I've left the best for last. Where did the Special One choose to go and manage? Serie A. If watching Jose Mourinho manage a side doesn't entertain you (often more than his teams themselves), then you're a tough customer indeed.
4. I'll give Oli a pass on Shevchenko. I agree with him. He was a flop for two years. But it's not as if Milan signed him to build their side around him. If he wants to get a start at the San Siro, he has to beat out the competition of Kaka (who, as I recall, is pretty useful), Pato (another aging unexciting player), Ronaldinho, Pippo Inzaghi (giggle all you like - who scored the winner in Athens two years ago?) and Marco Borriello (19 Serie A goals last season, not a bad total). Bringing back Sheva was a calculated risk and an emotional choice. If it doesn't work out, who cares?
5. I should spend a word on Rolando Bianchi. I agree, he didn't live up to expectations at City. But those expectations should have never been there. This is a guy who had one great season in Serie A in which he scored eighteen goals. Which is more than three times the total he had scored in his entire career to that point (five in six years). I might add that he started seven games for City and scored four goals. A flop? Yes. But, believe me, I've seen worse. In fact, in his half-season at City he scored as many league goals (four) as the guy who started at center-forward for England in their last match (Jermain Defoe) scored in the same time period. It's also the same number of goals that the guy who came on for Defoe at center-forward for England in their last match (Emile Heskey) scored all season last year. So, yeah, if you judge Bianchi on half a season maybe it's true that he's rubbish, but if you apply that standard, maybe Heskey and Defoe are too. And they're good enough to play for England, aren't they?
One more thing and, in this, Italians are as guilty as the English. Judging a foreign player on a single season in your league is simply impossible. Ian Rush is remembered as a dud in Italy because he didn't have a good season in his one year at Juventus. In fact, he was one of the greatest strikers of the last thirty years. Bianchi is no Rush (obviously), but don't be too quick to judge based on limited evidence.
6. It may be churlish to point this out, but here's a quick recap. The top four in the Premier League added Deco, Bosingwa, Dossena, Nasri, Bischoff, Degen and a few lesser lights. They lost Flamini, Aleksander Hleb, John Arne Riise and Gilberto Silva. They came close to losing Frank Lampard, Didier Drogba, Emanuel Adebayor and, of course, Cristiano Ronaldo. I don't think, as Oli points out, that this is a time to be too smug.
7. Oli writes that individual clubs will remain a force at European level but the league is no longer as exotic or appealing as the Premier League or La Liga. He may be right, though I don't see what exoticism has to do with football. At a time when most top-flight clubs are dominated by foreigners nothing is really exotic, is it? And in this age of low cost travel and European integration, do we really expect something which is a two-hour flight away to be exotic?
As for what's appealing it's a matter of personal taste and you can't legislate for that. Personally, I love the Premier League and I love La Liga and I love Serie A. I don't think in terms of leagues, I think in terms of players and teams. For pure entertainment, watching Roma beats the stuffing out of watching Chelsea (at least last season's version), just as watching Manchester United is better than watching Juventus. For individual skill, I'd rather watch Barcelona than Inter or Liverpool.
8. To the people who attacked Oli in the comments below and to my compatriots who make such a big deal out of a single man's opinion: grow up. What's the point in engaging in a pissing contest? It's an indisputable fact that the Premier League has more money than Serie A. It's an indisputable fact that the Premier League performed better than Serie A last season in the Champions' League. It's equally indisputable that Italy are the world champions, that England did not qualify for the Euros and that Italy, over the last decade, has performed better at youth level than England. Oh, and it's equally indisputable that the Premier League is better run than Serie A.
Beyond that, the rest is opinion: who's better than who, who's on the decline, who's on the rise. Let's not get worked up over this. Let's enjoy football for what it is, let's leave the flag-waving and jingoism to our politicians. Let's appreciate great players and not be blinded by stupid stereotypes. Let's approach games with an open mind and try to judge without prejudice. To paraphrase Rodney King: "Can we all just get along?"
I'll try to be as balanced and unbiased as possible, bearing in my mind that all of us are born with some kind of inherent bias: how we control and manage it is the key.
1. Oli writes that "it's strange how the balance of power (and money) can change so quickly", referring to the shift in prominence from Serie A to the Premier League. Actually, it's not so strange. A decade has passed since the time when England was a dumping ground for has-beens and never-weres. In that time, a lot has changed.
The Premier League - and here, regardless of how you feel about "modern football", you have to give credit to certain people - has turned itself into a commercial juggernaut. Credit to the marketing people doing the selling, who have put together a successful product. Credit to the people running the English game. But the success was also built on other factors, which Italy did not benefit from (thankfully).
For a start, England began from a much lower position. It's easier to move up when you're lower down than it is to stay at the top when you've been there for ten years (as was the case with Serie A from the mid-1980s to the mid-1990s). The other huge boost to England was born out of tragedy. Without the state-of-the-art stadia in England it's unlikely that the country could have rid itself so effectively of its hooligan problem within the grounds itself (outside, it's a different issue: remember the dozen Spurs supporters knifed a quarter mile from Stamford Bridge two years ago? Probably not, it was under-reported and not considered "football-related violence"). And would the grounds ever have been refurbished had it not been for the Taylor Report (a direct consequence of Hillsborough and Bradford)and some of the public money it brought with it? Probably not, or, at least, certainly not to the same degree.
At the same time, Italian football has gone out of its way to be self-destructive. Whether it was Calciopoli, the sale of individual TV rights, fan violence, general mismanagement at the top by people who should have known better, terrible policing in some cities (as most Englsh fans who have been to Rome can tell you) and accounting practices which sometimes range from the "creative" to the downright "fraudulent", monkeys could probably have done a better job. And, in this, you have to spread the blame around: from the administrators to the clubs to law enforcement to politicians to the media (who were clearly not vigilant enough) to some supporters themselves (who accepted absurd and extreme situations).
So there you have it. Oli is right on that point, the balance of power has shifted. But it's certainly not "strange" that it has. Oh, and this "Serie A-beset-by-fan-violence" litany has to end at some point. The fact of the matter is that incidents of violence at Italian grounds have declined in each of the last five years. But, of course, that's not a story. Perception is another matter of course. And it's certainly true that the Italian media devotes acres of press to any incident, whereas, in this country, witness the knifings after the Chelsea v Tottenham FA Cup game, violence tends to get buried.
2. But back to football. Oli's appetite isn't whet by the new imports. Fair enough. If you want to compare imports at the top four clubs in Italy and England, let's go ahead and do that. Ronaldinho was surplus to requirements at Barcelona? Great. So was Deco, who joined Chelsea and, incidentally, is three years older (retirement home indeed). Oh, and Oli speaks of Ronaldinho's "two years of unmitigated decline": I'll give you last season, Oli, but the year before that Ronaldinho scored twenty-one league goals in thirty-two Liga matches. If that's decline, I wonder what your definition of success is.
Looking at the newcomers in the two countries, I wonder what it takes to whet Oli's appetite. Gianluca Zambrotta, a World Cup winner from Barcelona, may not excite him, but maybe Jose Bosingwa does. Maybe David N'Gog does as well. You can laugh at Philippe Senderos. Go ahead. Ha! Ha! But he will not start at Milan and Arsene Wenger, a guy who knows his football, believed in him enough to keep him around for five years. Let's see who has the last laugh there.
In fact, it's difficult to compare the two countries' newcomers, at least at the top, because England's big four didn't sign too many players from abroad. But maybe they've been whetting Oli's appetite. Samir Nasri? Great young player - I was very impressed with the twenty-nine minutes he played at the Euros. Amaury Bischoff? Well, he started as many top-flight games as I have (zero). Guess I'll wait to see how that pans out. Daniele Dossena? Maybe I should make a joke about how a 26-year-old guy with two Serie A seasons under his belt can move from a mid-table side like Udinese into a starting job at Liverpool. But maybe I shouldn't. Philipp Degen? Yes, Swiss right-backs are terribly exciting aren't they? David N'Gog? Yes I know I'm scraping the bottom of the barrel here by citing a center-forward who scored one more top-flight goal than Julian Clary in his career, but, fact is, there really are no major signings from the Premier League top four to talk about. So I'll leave it there.
Oli evidently isn't excited by Julio Baptista, because he "flopped" at Arsenal and didn't do much at Real Madrid. Fine. The fact is that he's twenty-six, has thirty-six international caps for Brazil (which, I think he'll agree, are rather difficult to assemble if you're a complete donkey) and played ninety minutes in their last outing: a World Cup qualfiier against Argentina. If he's good enough to start for Brazil in an official game against their biggest rival, heck, I think I'll give him a shot.
Christian Poulsen? Well, if you talk to Guillem Balague (or Juande Ramos) he was crucial to Seville the last two seasons. But, it's true, he's no David N'Gog. Sulley Muntari? Methinks that if he'd signed for Arsenal or Manchester United you'd all be praising him to high heaven. Clearly it's just a coincidence that in his only season at Portsmouth they won the FA Cup.
3. Oh, and I've left the best for last. Where did the Special One choose to go and manage? Serie A. If watching Jose Mourinho manage a side doesn't entertain you (often more than his teams themselves), then you're a tough customer indeed.
4. I'll give Oli a pass on Shevchenko. I agree with him. He was a flop for two years. But it's not as if Milan signed him to build their side around him. If he wants to get a start at the San Siro, he has to beat out the competition of Kaka (who, as I recall, is pretty useful), Pato (another aging unexciting player), Ronaldinho, Pippo Inzaghi (giggle all you like - who scored the winner in Athens two years ago?) and Marco Borriello (19 Serie A goals last season, not a bad total). Bringing back Sheva was a calculated risk and an emotional choice. If it doesn't work out, who cares?
5. I should spend a word on Rolando Bianchi. I agree, he didn't live up to expectations at City. But those expectations should have never been there. This is a guy who had one great season in Serie A in which he scored eighteen goals. Which is more than three times the total he had scored in his entire career to that point (five in six years). I might add that he started seven games for City and scored four goals. A flop? Yes. But, believe me, I've seen worse. In fact, in his half-season at City he scored as many league goals (four) as the guy who started at center-forward for England in their last match (Jermain Defoe) scored in the same time period. It's also the same number of goals that the guy who came on for Defoe at center-forward for England in their last match (Emile Heskey) scored all season last year. So, yeah, if you judge Bianchi on half a season maybe it's true that he's rubbish, but if you apply that standard, maybe Heskey and Defoe are too. And they're good enough to play for England, aren't they?
One more thing and, in this, Italians are as guilty as the English. Judging a foreign player on a single season in your league is simply impossible. Ian Rush is remembered as a dud in Italy because he didn't have a good season in his one year at Juventus. In fact, he was one of the greatest strikers of the last thirty years. Bianchi is no Rush (obviously), but don't be too quick to judge based on limited evidence.
6. It may be churlish to point this out, but here's a quick recap. The top four in the Premier League added Deco, Bosingwa, Dossena, Nasri, Bischoff, Degen and a few lesser lights. They lost Flamini, Aleksander Hleb, John Arne Riise and Gilberto Silva. They came close to losing Frank Lampard, Didier Drogba, Emanuel Adebayor and, of course, Cristiano Ronaldo. I don't think, as Oli points out, that this is a time to be too smug.
7. Oli writes that individual clubs will remain a force at European level but the league is no longer as exotic or appealing as the Premier League or La Liga. He may be right, though I don't see what exoticism has to do with football. At a time when most top-flight clubs are dominated by foreigners nothing is really exotic, is it? And in this age of low cost travel and European integration, do we really expect something which is a two-hour flight away to be exotic?
As for what's appealing it's a matter of personal taste and you can't legislate for that. Personally, I love the Premier League and I love La Liga and I love Serie A. I don't think in terms of leagues, I think in terms of players and teams. For pure entertainment, watching Roma beats the stuffing out of watching Chelsea (at least last season's version), just as watching Manchester United is better than watching Juventus. For individual skill, I'd rather watch Barcelona than Inter or Liverpool.
8. To the people who attacked Oli in the comments below and to my compatriots who make such a big deal out of a single man's opinion: grow up. What's the point in engaging in a pissing contest? It's an indisputable fact that the Premier League has more money than Serie A. It's an indisputable fact that the Premier League performed better than Serie A last season in the Champions' League. It's equally indisputable that Italy are the world champions, that England did not qualify for the Euros and that Italy, over the last decade, has performed better at youth level than England. Oh, and it's equally indisputable that the Premier League is better run than Serie A.
Beyond that, the rest is opinion: who's better than who, who's on the decline, who's on the rise. Let's not get worked up over this. Let's enjoy football for what it is, let's leave the flag-waving and jingoism to our politicians. Let's appreciate great players and not be blinded by stupid stereotypes. Let's approach games with an open mind and try to judge without prejudice. To paraphrase Rodney King: "Can we all just get along?"
And that was right before the 7-1.
