Balanced Sports on Soccerlens: Championship Promotion Playoffs analysis

Balanced Sports has again been published on Soccerlens, this time a piece by Matthew Wood analysing what makes a successful club in the Championship Promotion Playoffs.

Book review: The Willow Wand, by Derek Birley

This is a re-post from our affiliate book review blog, Books with Balls. There, you'll find the literature from a number of guy-friendly genres thoughtfully reviewed. Recent posts include this one, a review of the memoirs of late night TV's Craig Ferguson and a series of pieces on renowned historical fiction author Bernard Cornwell.

by Ben Roberts

The Willow Wand's aim is to explore some of the many myths of cricket. However, for the most part it is somewhat difficult to identify truly what myth is at any one point that being investigated. One must have an in-depth knowledge of cricket and indeed English cricket to truly take in what most of Birley has to say. Despite the significant amount of historical research put into this work, it does not provide a systematic presentation of cricketing history.

But this is not meant to be a negative opinion, just a reduction in the expectations with which I approached this work. What you do get from The Willow Wand is a mosaic of characters and time from throughout the long and rich history of the sport.

The book drives constantly that cricket is a medium in which persons sought to prove distinguishable features. Gentlemen from Players (Amateurs from Professionals), Wealth from Poverty, light skin from dark – none ever proved to be successful and in hindsight all actions of the sort proving petty and hypocritical. Such is the ridiculous extent of sociology that cricket has been pushed and pulled. Birley took time to sum up his beliefs in the final chapter titled 'Fun and Games' whereupon as you might expect from the title he concludes that one cannot see cricket through any other lens.

Refreshingly honest about the figures of the past, Birley does not airbrush over the faults of the game and its traditions. He questions long held views of the cricketing figures of the past such as Lord's Harris & Hawke as well as P.F. (Plum) Warner; opinion on the latter he makes reference to in his updated edition as drawing criticism from some parts upon the books initial print run in 1979.

Of particular enjoyment personally were his descriptions of West Indian crickets background, a topic not often broached, as well as his discussion on whether cricket and art can be stated as being one and the same. For the modern cricket enthusiast stung by the increased commercialism and descent into the abyss of gambling-driven corruption it may hurt to read that the prominent driver of many of the earliest recorded matches was commercialism and gambling. Matches were often fixed not for monetary gain but as an act of patronage to the amateur dignitary!

Being a cricketing nerd, I enjoyed the book as I became immersed in the nostalgia and dreamed of being involved during golden times in cricket history. But it is only a book for those like myself who bring a certain level of background knowledge to it and can enjoy it to the full. Others will become confused and frustrated as it constantly switches back and forth between stories, eras and personalities. The high English used by Birley remains difficult for the modern reader (criticism at this point can be leveled in both directions) - Birley is clearly a man of an age where cricketers of the right ilk never had names, only initials. Somewhere between tennis balls and footballs.

Cover Image thanks to bookdepository.co.uk

Fulham to join Stoke and Birmingham in Europa League?

As the Premiership season hurtles to a satisfying conclusion, few may be more sated than Mark Hughes. The Welshman, in his twelfth year of management, has led Fulham to tenth place so far this season, boasts a +4 Goal Difference and a fair play record which sees them firmly in contention for European football next season.

Roundly pilloried in his early days at Craven Cottage - for a combination of factors including the club's mediocre-at-best early form, his egregiousness about his time at Manchester City, an insistence that every opposing manager properly shake hands with him and finally, his not being Roy Hodgson. Using a finally-healthy forward trio of Andy Johnson, Moussa Dembele and - critically - Bobby Zamora, Hughes has masterminded the Cottagers back from a perilous December position. Fulham still struggle to win away from home, but they've solidified their spot as a mid-table Premiership team and haven't had a player sent off since 2009.

UEFA awards a Europa League position to the best-behaved club (in terms of red and yellow cards) in each of the three best-behaved European leagues, so long as that club hasn't already qualified for the tournament. While Fulham lead the Premiership's disciplinary table, they haven't assured themselves of this spot - should they commit three yellows more than second-placed Blackpool (or worse, a couple of red cards) over their last two games, they would be

lose their position. Stoke City qualified for the tournament thanks to their FA Cup success, while Birmingham's League Cup triumph could see them playing in Podgorica next year. To see Blackpool - perhaps even from the Championship - would provide the most unlikely trio of English Europa League entrants in some time.

The Whites' positive goal difference is also a boon. Alongside freescoring midfielder Clint Dempsey, their primary forward trio of Johnson, Zamora and Dembele have played a combined forty-two starts as Dembele and Zamora have spent much of the season recovering from broken legs. Each of the three has a differing, harmonising se

t of skills - Big Bobby's the target-man with eyes on an England call-up, Johnson's the archetypal goal poacher while Dembele is fleet of foot and nimble in the link-up.

This trident - thrust by Dempsey and Danny Murphy - has Fulham, Michael Jackson statue and all, sitting tenth in the league. Even after receiving an entertaining 5 -2 thrashing at the hands of Liverpool, Fulham boast a goal difference of +4, the second-best figure over the past ten EPL seasons for a club finishing in that position. Should they finish lower this differential could be a Premiership record. Like many managers, Hughes is most visible in defeat. That very little has been said of him during 2011 could perhaps be the ultimate compliment that his job in London has been completed in the image of the man himself - with very little fuss.

Image: Fulham's owner, Mohammed Al-Fayed with plastic friend. Courtesy: sports.yahoo.com

Balanced Sports on The Roar: The Demise of the Second Team

Balanced Sports has once again been published on the Australian Sports commentary and opinion site, The Roar - this time regarding AFL fans' reluctance to embrace a second team.

AFL: The Demise of the Second Team

Perhaps it's just that I'm getting older. It could be that people are more focused as myriad media sources clamour for our time. Maybe it's the sociopolitical economy that drives the AFL. But as I've aged, I hear less and less about that schoolyard phenomenon of the "second team".

I'm not talking about Fremantle, Port Adelaide, the Suns or even the foetal Greater Western Sydney but the schoolyard ritual often carried into adulthood which saw everyone barrack for one team - in my case Geelong - but also support another club in a less obvious way. No scarves or jerseys, just a mental attachment and a more fond disposition to that team after your first love. Fond hopes for success - in good times for your squad or bad - and usually they had the honour of being the second match report you read in The Age or The Sun.

And I know this isn't a phenomenon only I ascribe(d) to: throughout my schoolboy days it was amongst the first questions you asked a potential new friend: "Who'dja barrack for?" - if the answer wasn't your team, you hoped for a more positive response from your follow-up "And who's your second team?".

Growing up in Warrnambool, everyone had a second team - it went with the territory, both literally and figuratively. In Sou'west Victoria, you supported one team - most often Geelong, Fitzroy, Collingwood or Essendon - and had a strong secondary preference for usually the club nearest by location or presence. In our case the closest club was Geelong, just over two hours' drive away, while the young talent from the local Hampden league was "zoned" to Fitzroy, meaning that club had first choice of the available talent.

As an aside, it was also mandatory to have definite preferences as to who you supported in the Hampden League (Warrnambool - definitely not the hated South), it's feeder the WDFL (Russell's Creek) and in the VFA (Werribee). The first two were largely dominated by where you or your Dad played footy and, as always, partisan family values.

As the VFL necessarily begat the AFL and subsequently became the biggest sport in the country, it seems people have left their second team by the wayside. You may well still feel well-disposed to that loveable bunch of rogues (for me, Footscray, err, the Western Bulldogs) but their stranglehold as "second team" is a little more untenable, broached by the Aussie love of the underdog or even recent club changes. You don't care so much when they struggle or when their star is poached by another (new?) club. So what's promoted such a situation?

Predictably, there are many factors which promote a decrease in second teams' importance in our national consciousness. With clubs inspired more and more by the zen by "Six-Sigma", "best process" and "branding", they focus not just on vocal and visible support but the obvious revenue it generates. Ultimately, the league has become a business and as such follows the golden rule of the marketplace: there's little room for sentimentality.

Memberships form such an important part of footy financing, and as memberships aren't cheap, anyone who signs up wants value for money. Any time an Average Joe invests in a club, time formerly taken by a second team is often directed into a closer relationship with your first love. As your stake in one club increases, it perhaps decreases the amount you invest in a second team.

Clubs now position each other to attract the punters' attention, leaving little room for small smiles in the direction of other clubs. The league's business sense - and make no mistake, the league had to evolve in this way - places a high premium on brand loyalty. And for Average Joe and his mate Average Phil, that means you've gotta support the team. Preferably financially as well as emotionally.

As a signed-up Geelong member, I'm bombarded with seemingly daily updates as to what's going on at the Cattery: Jimmy Bartel lays into Harry Taylor, Neil Balme's opinions on issue X, Y or Z and even Mathew Stokes' memory for sporting trivia. The Cats want me as closely as possible in touch with club news and events and many members want that proximity. With such contact, they can colour my perception of my team: I can feel like I know "The Boys" or that the club cares about me. I don't doubt they do - just that like any relationship they'd like something from me as well.

With the banalities that often make up much of their emails, the Cats offer an "inside the dressing room" look at Kardinia Park, a chance to learn intimate knowledge of club operations and promote involvement in local events. Mostly, this is stuff you wouldn't know about another club. The Cats are staking out their territory: with emails, with online web chats and if they're not podcasting they're missing a fast-departing train.

Clubs want your full attention and I'd hazard a bet that many would probably prefer their fans don't have a definite second team. And this is fine. In a crowded entertainment marketplace where sport, fine art and plenty other methods of happy distraction vie for your custom, clubs are simply leveraging the tools at their disposal to ensure their competition. It comes though, at the expense of the second team: in order to promote themselves, clubs must suggest tacitly that their opposition is inferior (in excitement, potential, results, history, whatever), no matter how their on- or off-field merits.

The olden days - when Gary Ablett was a half-forward flanker - are gone and it's mostly for the benefit. The game is in much better shape in nearly every way, no matter how rosy the glasses are that you use to look back on those halcyon days. But subtly it's come to an almost biblical invitation - if you're not with us, you're against us. We can't blame anyone for it - there's really no need, either. It's just a strange change in the way we view our sport. Clubs need to continue to reinforce their brand, otherwise they may find themselves facing the fiscal situation of a Fitzroy or latterly, Port Adelaide and North Melbourne.

Images courtesy: http://mycardsscray.blogspot.com/2007_05_01_archive.html

Blackpool, Premiership strugglers, stick to their (pop) guns

Though Ian Holloway has earned plaudits for his attacking play and forthright press conferences as well as Charlie Adam for his "wonderful left peg", it could be that their Blackpool team are doomed to relegation from the Premiership this season. Holloway's philosophy, which he said came about after a period out of the game where he watched too much boring football, is to attack at all costs - a vast difference from the dour style he favoured as manager of Bristol Rovers, QPR, Plymouth and Leicester.

Adam and a mildly-surprising DJ Campbell helped the Tangerines into the top half early this term with an flurry of goals, but the club has won only twice this year in the Premiership and now sits seventeenth, out of the drop zone only on goal difference. But the offensive style so favoured by the Seasiders has come at a cost - Blackpool have conceded seventy goals already this season, one of the worst totals in the Premier League over the past ten years. There are still three matches to go.

Only seven other times has a team shopped over seventy goals. Three of those times occurred last year as Wigan (79 goals conceded), Burnley (82 conceded) and Hull (75) got pounded repeatedly by larger clubs. Over the past decade, of all the teams that conceded more than Blackpool have this year, only last year's Wigan escaped relegation; a fact due probably more to other club's incompetence rather than any particular Latic resolve. So does a promoted team playing expansive football have any benefit - other than aesthetic - in the Premier League?

Holloway's men have a goal difference of -22, meaning they've conceded 22 more goals than they've scored. Since 2001-02, every other club who's conceded more than seventy goals in a season boasts a goal difference in excess of -35. His fast-paced tactics mean their scoring balanced (somewhat) the ineptitude of their defence leaving them better placed (for now and without them taking a disastrous thumping in their last three games) than every other porous club this decade. Perhaps we're looking at this the wrong way: while 'Olly likes attacking football and instructs his club to play that way, he's probably correctly surmised that with the defence at his disposal, their best chance to avoid the drop is to attack.

However, football is more than stats. The Blackpool boss could have (again) correctly judged his club didn't have the mettle to compete against giants like United and Chelsea and thought it best to go out playing the style that got them to the Big Dance in the first place. As with Owen Coyle at Burnley and now Bolton, there's something to be said for sticking to one's principles. If Blackpool were to survive to fight again next year, many would celebrate: another year of Olly's sound-bites, more fluid football and the joy of supporting an underdog in the top flight.

Image courtesy http://live4liverpool.com

NBA: Never Been Altered

Ben Roberts

I potentially risk the ire of Balanced Sports' editor-in-chief with the following reflection. Having been on paternity leave recently an old flame has been reignited. Probably it has been since the Chicago Bulls collected their first 1990s 'three-peat' when I last engaged with Basketball and watched the NBA consistently.

Not only have I been taken in by the current play-off series' but I also decided to borrow a couple of DVDs from my brother (who has maintained the fire for the hoops over many years) containing two of Michael Jordan's great performances: 1995 just out of retirement against the New York Knicks, scoring 50 plus points, followed by a flu-ridden Jordan in the 1997 NBA finals helping the Bulls to victory over the Jazz in Salt Lake City (see image).

The combination of the current play-offs with the trip into history led me to surmise that really the game of Basketball hasn't changed all that much, thus the title. Don't read into this negatively or positively, I certainly haven't made a judgement call, nor will I probably be able to back it up with expert opinion. But is it not surprising that someone can make such an observation 18 years since there last serious viewing of the game?

Watching a current match compared to these now 15 years old matches only three things stood out to me as clearly indicating a difference: The sepia toned film of the older matches, the fashions of players differed (though only slightly, spectators differed dramatically) and finally the logos of teams adorning the court. Noticeably none of this reflects the actual gameplay despite some rule changes having occurred.

While I may be mistaken, if it's true, what does this say about the game? Is the controlled environment – constant climate, consistent court, combined with the smaller number of competitors limiting the amount of variation. Minimal adjustment to rules over history? Again let me say that this is no means a negative, just an observation. Most other sports to watch bear little to no resemblance to past matches, certainly Australian football has changed markedly even since the mid 2000s and continues to change season by season and does not have the aforementioned characteristics.

Potentially this observation extends to other USA sporting pursuits where statistics play such an important part of analysis. Few sports with cultural centres outside the United States ever feel free to compare statistics half a century even a century apart, yet this is common place in Basketball and other US sports. Two sports that I have the longest history of following, Cricket and Australian Football, you cannot compare generations with great success given the changes in gameplay, but they do not exist in the heavily controlled environments that characterise Basketball and other USA centric games.

Many have been drawn once again to the NBA this year. I have heard more “water-cooler discussions” on it this year than I probably have in the last 10. How should this be viewed?

To look at it negatively; does this mean that despite my interest being pricked to continue watching this year's play-offs (and supporting the Bulls again), the fact that I cannot see any marked change potentially means that I'll tire of the sport like I did previously. Positively a generational consistency exists. If its true, you can genuinely ask the questions of whether Wilt Chamberlain could have cut it today, or Kobe Bryant in yesteryear; would the Celtics of the 1960s, Lakers of the 1980s and Bulls of the 1990s be successful at any point in history?

Image courtesy: argumentking.blogspot.com

Balanced Sports on Soccerlens; Has Cristiano Ronaldo Evolved too far?

Balanced Sports has once again been published on the leading soccer blog Soccerlens. Matthew Wood examines whether Cristiano Ronaldo has evolved too far to be credited as the World's best player.

Balanced Sports published on The Roar

Balanced Sports has been published on The Roar, a leading Australian sports opinion blog. This time, we examine how the NBA Playoff matchup between the Memphis Grizzlies and Oklahoma City Thunder is viewed in the Pacific Northwest.

Memphis Grizzlies vs. Oklahoma City Thunder a sad Pacific Northwest Basketball tale

This year's NBA Western Conference Semifinal series between Memphis and Oklahoma City is a particularly painful one for many NBA afficionados to watch. Not for the quality of the play: the Grizzlies cuurently may be playing the best basketball in the West, while Oklahoma City's roster includes superstars Kevin Durant and Russell Westbrook combined with feel-good role players like Serge Ibaka and Kendrick Perkins. It's hutsome - especially in my current home city - because it showcases two NBA franchises that relocated from the Pacific Northwest to smaller Midwest markets.

In 2008, the club formerly known as the Seattle Sonics bolted town after forty-one years ingrained into Northwest folklore. That span included twenty-two playoff campaigns, three NBA finals appearances and the 1979 NBA Championship where a three-guard rotation of Gus Williams, Dennis Johnson and "Downtown" Freddie Brown were anchored by the outstanding hair (and post game) of young centre Jack Sikma. It rankles Seattle fans so much that many now take no interest at all in pro basketball. Nearly three years since new owner moved the franchise to Oklahoma City, there's still enough ire for the man who sold the team, Howard Schultz, to eject fans from a book signing in upmarket Bellevue. Many of the disenfranchised Sonic Nation now boycott his company, Starbucks, for having the nerve to sell to a man whose known aim was getting the NBA into Oklahoma City.

Even though the city of Seattle refused to relinquish the Supersonics' name and the yellow and green which defined their jersey, Seattleites still seethe at the factors and faces involved in taking a young playoff team (comprising Westbrook and Durant) away from a staunch basketball city. even during periods of basketball droughts, the fans turned up. Key Arena, the Sonics' home for most of their Northwest tenure, is now home only to the Seattle Storm and the Rat City Rollergirls.

Vancouver's is a different story - the city simply wasn't given a viable chance at NBA life. They existed in their expansion form for only six years before Michael Heisley purchased the team and moved them to basketball purgatory, Memphis, home of exactly zero other pro sports franchises. The Grizzlies allegedly haven't been profitable since moving to the Midwest, which led to a series of costcutting moves and Heisley's consistent presence on "NBA's worst owner" lists. That their current roster is successful runs almost in spite of Heisley's ownership as time and again he has failed to pay the right players and forked over for the wrong ones. According to reliable hearsay, the decision to draft uberbust Hasheem Thabeet over almost every other draftee was his, overruling his personnel division. Only recently has he started to dig into his own capacious pockets, realising the only way to be profitable is to win. Even with this new fiscal policy, his lucrative extension to Zach Randolph (while bidding against no-one else) proves he still struggles to get it right.

While it's true that basketball has no chance to be the number one sport in Vancouver, it could well establish itself as a solid second behind a beloved Canuck team which consistently folds in the playoffs. Rogers Arena is a beautiful, state-of-the-art complex which could easily, comfortably and profitably house an NBA franchise (The Vancouver Pacers, anyone?). As someone who is a recent resident of both cities, there's certainly demand enough for pro basketball in both cities: witness the support that both cities' new MLS franchises have so quickly accumulated.

Seattle, however, is a basketball town. The list of great basketball players who grew up in Washington is remarkable: Brandon Roy, Jamal Crawford, John Stockton, Jason Terry, Detlef Schrempf, Doug Christie and Aaron Brooks all attended High School in the state. Shawn Kemp, Fred Brown, Slick Watts and Bill Russell, among others, all still reside on Puget Sound. During NCAA tournament month, bars go crazy with expectation for the Universities of Washington, Washington State and Gonzaga. Now, playoff time in Seattle is met only with the green and blue of Seattle Sounders scarves.

Game One was a typical Grizzly win, as the club rode Z-Bo's inside scoring. To even the series, Game Two saw the Zombie Sonic bench blow up behind young guards Eric Maynor and James Harden. The Thunder, even though they won 55 games this year, lost three of their four games against the 46-win Grizzlies this season, although key post defender Kendrick Perkins did not play in any of those matches. With the teams evenly matched, the series should be an exciting spectacle for the average NBA fans, especially in light of a pending lockout. Here in Seattle, there's a small, sad shrug and hope the Mariners don't suck as bad tonight.

Pro basketball's dead to this city. It's why all in Sacramento fear the Anaheim Royals. They should.

Image courtesy: http://www.thearch-info.com/Sports/Basketball/White_HOF.html