Carlos Tevez reality check, pro-United conspiracy and English spines

Gabriele Marcotti

3. Time for a bit of a Carlos Tevez reality check. The media are whipping this story into a frenzy, by describing what he said in his interview with an Argentine radio station as an "outburst".

Outburst? You be the judge. Tevez said: "I want to stay but the club have not made any offer. I've been waiting for them for a year and a half. If I have to quit the club, I want to quit on good terms. Now all clubs are on an equal footing. If a club comes to me and offers me a five-year deal, I will accept it for peace of mind." He also said: "It bothers me that I have to start messing about with the fans who give me their affection in each game. The club know this, but still I haven't received an offer. I will sign my last contract and then I'll go back to Boca Juniors in four or five years."

The above is NOT an outburst. Those are simply the words of somebody who will be unemployed in less than six months and has not received a suitable contract offer. Period.

What's he supposed to do? Even if he said nothing, the whole world would know his situation. It's not a secret that he's out of contract in six months and will need to find a new team if he doesn't extend his deal.

His frustration is understandable. Manchester United have not worked out a permanent deal with Kia Joorabchian, the man who owns his economic rights. And that's fine, negotiations take time, United are trying to pay as little as possible and Joorabchian is trying to maximize his investment. Screwy third-party ownership issues aside, this is pretty straightforward, with both parties playing their roles.

At the same time though, Tevez is entitled to ask himself how United could come up with £32 million for Dimitar Berbatov but won't cough up the £20m to £25m it would take to make his deal permanent.  Especially since Tevez is three years younger than Berbatov (which means he has genuine resale value) and arguably is every bit as good as the Bulgarian. Plus there is the fact that United have already paid somewhere between £6m and £10m in what was effectively a non-refundable downpayment.

If anything, this is one negotiation where both parties have acted honorably thus far (or about as honorably as clubs and agents can operate in these circumstances). The people who are stirring the crap are those of us in the press and the legions of middle-men, hangers-on and "friends of friends" who feed us scraps of information because they have ulterior motives.

2. While we're on the subject of United, there's something I don't get about Sir Alex Ferguson's conspiracy theory (having to play away from home first against nine of the ten teams who finished immediately below them last season). Unlike some, I'm not going to call him paranoid or rule out the possibility of a stitch-up a priori. But what I don't understand is this: isn't it to United's advantage to face tougher games (i.e. other big clubs away from home) in the first half of the season, when things are relatively manageable (no FA Cup, a couple of stiffs in the Champions' League group stage) rather than in the spring, when they'll have to deal with fixture congestion, the Champions' League knockout phase and various potential FA Cup replays?

1. Praise Martin O'Neill for taking Aston Villa into fourth place.

Praise him for assembling an exciting, young squad. Praise him for his tactical nous. Praise him for the feel-good factor he has restored to Villa Park. He's done a great job.

But if I hear another guy heaping plaudits on him for putting together a team with an "English spine" then I think I'm going to blow chunks.

Why is that praiseworthy? Because English players are somehow worse and so, therefore, winning with "an English spine" is more difficult? I don't think so.

Because having an "English spine" somehow makes Villa more genuine and a better reflection of its local ties? It's not as if this "English spine" is built entirely around local lads. Craig Gardner (who has yet to start a Premier League game for Villa this season), Zat Knight and Gabriel Agbonlahor are the only guys who can be described as local: most of the other English players hail from the South East or London.

Because having an "English spine" is a testament to a club's youth policy? Hardly. Except for Gardner, Agbonlahor and Barry, every English player who has received significant playing time at Villa was bought by O'Neill with cold hard cash. Villa do have a good academy, but the "English spine" has little or nothing to do with it.

The fact is that there is no inherent merit in having "an English spine". And that, in any case, an English spine can be assembled by any muppet with a big chequebook. O'Neill has done well, but his player's passports have nothing to do with it.

PLAY MY GAME: West Ham won the World Cup, as we all know, and it's their turn this week. Basic rules: which of West Ham's non-English players would get into a 23-man England squad?

Here's how I see it:
Valon Behrami - Plenty of ability, could be an alternate option on either flank.
Lucas Neill - I think his skills have been declining and, given the options England have, he misses out.
Jack Collison - Quickly becoming one of my favourite young players in the Premier League. But, no, he wouldn't get into my England team. Not yet anyway.
Craig Bellamy - When he's good, he's very good. And if he were having one of his blinding runs of form, you'd have to consider him. But, week in, week out? I don't think so....

As ever, would love to hear your thoughts...

Comments

[Ole Gunner]

When people talk about an "English Spine" it's a concession of technical inferiority. That's why some of us think all this braggado of English commitment, and communication and all that is the symbol of the mediocrity that has seen England seriously underperform at the World Stage. English Spine for me is shorthand for; "We're crap but we'll kick you black and blue".

Some might argue that's a part of the game but I see it as serious mental weakness. I want to see very technically gifted English kids. I want English players to outplay as well as outfight the opposition.

I don't buy the kind of culture of mediocrity in which a rather average Aston Villa team are treated like they are much better than they are because they have English players.

Zat Knight, Curtis Davies, Sidwell,these guys will never be England regulars, so what good does it do English football if they play or not. And if they were good enough I think they will already have a bigger advantage to succeed than any foreigner.

I know that's what you're getting at. Your statement asking why O'Neil should get any credit if we don't think English players inferior tells me this. But the fact is that we all know English players just aren't as gifted. But nobody actually comes out to say this.

[Gabriele]

Gabriele, I didn't miss your point, I just didn't agree with the way you put it across.

It has been quite apparent for many seasons now that the top clubs choose foreign players over english, because they believe they are better players.With regards to Chelsea, there were only 3 english players that were playing week in week out, and how many English players have left Chelsea because they had a lot of splinters in their backsides? I chose Ambramovich because he has been the only constant, and them not winning the past couple of seasons is because of his running of the club.

With regards to the players that have left Villa, they left of their own accord, because they were given no guarantees by O'Neill, and didn't want to work hard to earn their place in the first team, Cahill and Moore especially.

I don't think it matters were the English players in the Villa team come from, what I think is important is that it is only O'Neill giving them the opportunity week in week out to prove themselves in the premiership. Gabby is a good player now, because O'Neill played him week in week out and backed him. How many other managers would or have done the same?

What is important is that a side full of english players is showing that they don't need the flair of a ronaldo, tevez, drogba, ballack etc etc... and can be not only competitive, but a challenger.

This Villa team has outplayed both Chelsea 07/08 and Arsenal 08/09 on two occassions in the past two seasons with a team full of young english players, and they are only getting better.

[Gabriele Marcotti]

Brenton - I don't expect you to have read all the comments below. And I'm sorry you missed the point of the article. Let me reiterate it: O'Neill put together a very good team and deserves to be praised for it, as does the club who backed him and picked him as manager. What bothers me is the "English spine" argument. It's purely a by-product of putting together a good team. O"Neill signed players who he thought were going to help Villa win and it so happens that many of them are English (becasue - surprise! - there are a number of talented English players).

As for your other points:

1. Those five players you mention are a product of Villa's Academy which, as I wrote in the responses to various comments above, is a very good Academy. But that has nothing to do with O"Neill, in fact, while they are good players, O'Neill believed he was better off selling them, so maybe they are good, but not good enough for what O"Nell wants to do.
2. Sure, some of those other clubs have spent more than Villa. So what? I would argue that Villa has a better manager than those other clubs. And that's why they're doing better. Simple as that. O'Neill is better than his colleagues at those other clubs.
3. I'm not sure about comparing Abramovich (who isn't a manager) with O'Neill who is. But, beyond that, I think it's hard to argue that Chelsea did not have a core of important English players (Lampard, Terry, A. Cole, J. Cole) when they won things. As for Bentiez and Wenger, sure, they've often opted for foreigners over Englsh players. So what? I don't see how that makes them any better or worse managers than O'Neill.
But most of all, I don't see what the big deal is. O"Neill deserves praise for signing GOOD players, not for signing ENGLISH players.

[Brenton]

It's amazing how many people can put a spin on statistics/information, and use it to justify their argument, including this journalist.

1. You only mention a couple of Villa Academy kids in the first team, yet there's 5 others playing with other teams in the premiership this season (Samuel, Moore, Cahill, Myhill, Vassel).

2. People talk about the money O'Neill has had, yet teams like Tottenham, Man City, Portsmouth, West Ham, and Newcastle, have spent vast amounts, more than Villa, and look where their clubs currently reside in the table.

It's easy to have money and spend it, its another thing to spend it wisely and manage a team, and be successful.

O'Neill inherited a core of a good with team in Laursen (hadn't played for 2 years with injury), Barry (hadn't been picked for england for years, and now a regular), Bouma, Gabby (O'Neill gave him his opportunity).

He brought in A.Young (with 6 months premiership experience), Davies (who was playing in the Championship),Petrov (Scottish PL), Carew (Lyon, the only real quality signing), Reo-Coker, Sidwell (couldn't get a game for Chelsea, after a good season for Reading) etc etc..

The jouralist can play with words to justify his argument, he can say that they are not all Villa Youth players. At the end of the day, O'Neill has shown he can use a core of English players and be competitive in the premiership, something Wenger, Abramovich and Benitez have failed to do.

[Chris]

Gab i totally agree with you on the Aston Villa debate, and usually most other things you say, you have a clear view of the game in Britain because you've been elsewhere, but in England there's a mentality of superiority that is just unreasonable. Serie A is basically built with 80% Italians by my thinking, and i'm talking about starters. England spends a lot more money on the stars and the game in England is a Business, and i don't care what people say about the Calcio, it is a superior league on almost every level in terms of FOOTBALL, does the 60 thousand spoilt little boys in the Emirates make it a superior arena to play in? I'd much rather have 15 thousand fans singing all game and know that they'll still follow us when we're losing. The premier league seems too plastic, it's just not football IMHO.

[mark natan]

Tevez is entitled only to ask United how much is he worth if any for them and how much he thiks he is worth could come up with £32 million for him just because they pay Dimitar Berbatov

[reuben anderson]

I think the most interesting thing about the Villa team this season is the way they are clearly bonding as a unit. They're fantastic to watch, a balanced, pacy, varied footballing side.

Other than the real superstars like Ronaldo, Fabregas, etc.. in general I prefer watching English players. I don't know why, I just do. I like the physicality and the passion for the game. And I'm not english, and not a man u fan (and not Arsenal either, obviously)

[Gabriele Marcotti]

1. Bardoux - Indeed. Whether we like it or not, the Premier League has one functin, the national team another.
2 Hugh - Actually, and I think this IS a valid reason to praise O'Neill (though one which few seems to notice because talking about tactis is rather passe') is how O'Neill's Villa plays a very different style tactically and philosophically than his succesful Celtic teams. To me, that ability to adapt and be comfortable in various systems is the mark of a great manager and O'Neill should be getting praise for that.
3. Samantha - Once again, you start from the assumption that people can't have their own opinions without being jingoistic and you bring Italy into this. Before I get into it, let me just remind you that Balotelli got an italian passport because he was born in Italy and lived in Italy his entire life. If that does not make you Italian, perhaps you'd like to put forth other criteria. The reason he waited was that his parents emgirated to Italy and he waited before commiting.Using your rationale, is his being Italian dubious because he happens to be black?
Beyond that, as ever, the problem isn't O'Neill, and I think I've made that abundanlty clear. O"Neill did not set out to create a team with an English spine because he wanted to make some great contribution to the development of English football. He did it because he wantd to create a successful team. And so praising him for Villa's English spine is misguided. It's not as if all those English players would have disappeared off the face of the earth if O'Neill hadn't signed him. If you still don't get it, we'll just have to agree to disagree. But it might be wise to think twice before making ill-judged racially tinged comments.

[aidan]

Yeah, I bet Gab's really jealous of the England national team with our Italian manager and recent history of success. Serie A has nearly twice as many Italians as the Premier League does Englishmen. It also isn't the league it was though it is recovering and the forthcoming Anglo-Italian fixtures should prove very interesting.

[Samantha]

Sorry, don't agree with this column.

This IS the English Premier League and it is nice to see a team doing well with so many English players, unlike Arsenal, what is wrong with pundits stating praising O'Neill for this? O'Neill is not saying they are all home-grown from Villa's academy, so why mention this fact - he isn't.

We can still be a proud nation to see so many young English players doing well can't we or is that not allowed now?

I think Gabrielle is just jealous because in Italy the main team that is winning there has NO Italian players in the team, ie; Inter Milan.

Apart from some clever fixing on the part of 'Super' Mario's passport of course!

[Alex]

Good article as per Mr Marcotti - it's always refreshing to read realistic articles on the game, as all the sensationalised rubbish from many of your less than salubrious fellow journos really does begin to grate after a while.

[Hugh]

Gabriele,

I'm surprised no Celtic fan has been on before now to relate the story of O'Neil's pre-match team talks because they illustrate your argument succinctly. Apparently, Steve Walford and John Robertson would go round each of the players telling them how fantastic they were before O'Neil applied his two word coup de grace: Just win, he told them. It could almost be his motto. Winning is all that matters; nationality is irrelevant. O'Neil is not doing a weekly interview for the England job after all.

In many ways, his Villa team share some of the characteristics of a typical O'Neil team from the past: rugged and strong defenders alongside a smattering of players with something to prove due to (relative) failure elsewhere (Thompson and Sutton at Celtic,Sidwell and Reo-Coker at Villa). Where he has clearly developed as a manager at Villa is in his trust in youth. Despite giving Heskey his first games at Leicester, young players didn't get a look in at Celtic. Admittedly, this was due to local factors at Celtic: the constant pressure from fans to beat Rangers in the league precluded the necessary investment in playing time to bring young guys on. O'Neil's persistence with Agbonlahor and Young has been great to see but again probably fits with his overall philosophy (Just win): no defence likes to play against pace.

[Bardoux]

Praising English Spine is more suggestive for the English culture of "mediocracy", than anything else.
The more noise is to be made about it, the less good it actually does to the perception of English players.
Football is not about passports, it's that simple. And it may be difficult to accept, but the Premier League is not about the English national team. It doesn't and it shouldn't care a bit about that.

[Alex]

Posted by: Smith | 8 Jan 2009 12:53:48

I'm English through and through, and I don't see what's wrong with any of the comments about winning the world cup on home soil - it DOES diminish the victory, and it's what differentiates between teams like us and France and the real heavyweights like Brazil and Germany.

I also think it's highly offensive of you to question another person's nationality on the grounds that they've made a point you disagree with - we don't need little Englanders like you either at the games, or anywhere else for that matter. Either you have serious issues, or you have a lot of growing up to do.

[Gabriele Marcotti]

1. Lin - I see your point, but several players, including last year on the podcast Jamie Carragher, put forth a slightly different argument. Foreign players have increased the general level of the Premier League. So while it's true that English players have a more difficult time getting into starting XIs, those who do tend to face tougher opponents week in, week out, because the level is higher. And, ulitmatley, that makes them better players. I think that as long as you have a minimum of 50 or 60 players who are eligible for the national team, you're OK (and the Premier League has far more than that). Once below that number then it certainly becomes more difficult.
2. Tomo - Interesting argument. You're probably right, a number of those players might have ended up elsewehre if O'Neill had not had the financial backing to bring them in.
3. Chris - But that's exactly why in your scenario it makes sense for United to sign Tevez. If he sticks around 2 or 3 years and does well, United can sell him for a lot of money when he's 26, 27 if indeed he does want to go to Real.
4. Ty - I'm going to stick up for Cudicini (yes, I'm biased...) just a little bit. He only became a regular at age 27 (before that he had never been a full-time starter in the top flight). At the time, he had a backup's wage and he only signed his big contract in 2003, at the age of 30 (so it's not as if he's got millions stashed away).
More to the point, after Cech's arrival in 2004, Chelsea told him that they would not sell him to another English club. That meant he had to go abroad. But the best foreign clubs were not interested in him and the second-tier ones were not going to gamble on a guy who, by that point, was 32 and had a very good salary. I think that, if Chelsea had allowed him to, he probably would have moved to another Premier League club.
5. David - Totally agree.
6. Smith - Absolutely correct. It's very rare for a team to win a World Cup without some level of controversy. And every country fuels its own myths. 1966 had the Soviet linesman (who some people say "gifted" England a goal) as well as the mysterious last-minute decision to switch the England v Portugal tie to Wembley, which forced the Portuguese to make an uncomfortable train journey hours before kickoff. When I spoke to Eusebio a few years ago, he blames that as a conspiracy to favor England, the home side.
That's why, I think, we attach far too much importance to winning the World Cup. Judging a team by how well they perform while being able to look past the results is far more important, IMHO. At least when it comes to Euros and World Cups.
7. Nick - Couldn't have said it better myself

[Mohammed]

I have to say i'm an avid fan of you Gabrielle, so many of today's pundits pretty much say the same thing, triggering a sheep mentality among fans even when what's being stated is frankly just not correct.

You're one of the few people left who i take seriously, along with ppl like Philippe Auclair & James Richardson.

on Villa, im a long, long time admirer of O'neill, but arsenal should comfortably finish in the top 4 this year.

If Manu dont want Teves i think he will have his pick of teams, but more importantly i think it highlights the problem with this 3rd party ownership scheme.
He's been a significant factor in their success last year yet wasn't fully their player, he actually didn't belong to any one club, i think thats fundamentally wrong & it'll be disastrous if this practice expanded, Kudos to united for seeing & grasping the opportunity but Kim J is a shark & should be somewhere else, not helping ruin our game

[Nick]

In the all-English Champions League final, the starters included the following English "team"

Brown, Ferdinand, Terry, Cole
Lampard, Scholes, Carrick,
Hargreaves, Rooney, Cole

OK we are missing a goalkeeper. But to say English success is entirely built on "foreigners" is ridiclous.

I also remember that as the only non-English semi-finalist (Barcelona) tried in vain to score against Manchester United, the hopefuls on thier forward line involved Eto (Cameroon), Messi (Argentina), Deco (Portugal), and Henry (France).

Its an international game. Get over it.

[Smith]

"English players are so great that all they ever won us was a controversial World Cup on home soil 40 years ago when just 16 countries went to the World Cup."

I don't believe you're English with comments like that. It was less controversial than most world cup wins, with their history of diving, doping, bribery and various other cheating.

I mean, some countries won their world cups in the 1930s with the best teams in the world not participating (unlike 66) or with help from the refs, or with match fixers or foreigners in their team. Didn't they Gab?

[Dan]

O'Neill should most definitely be credited for creating an English spine. I believe that Arsenal, their rivals for 4th, are struggling because of this very deficiency. Chelsea (Terry, Lampard), Liverpool (Carragher, Gerrard) and ManUtd (Ferdinand, Carrick, Rooney)would be equally as flimsy without theirs. O'Neill realises the importance of having English stalwarts in the team (a reason why the market for England internationals is so grossly over priced), and has not only got the best out of Barry and Agbonlahor but has bought very wisely with Young and Milner. O'Neill's one 'weakness' at Villa has been not getting the best out of Knight or Davies. However, he's looking to get Upson in, who would compliment the excellent Laursen and form the bottom part of Villa's English spine.

[Gabriele Marcotti]

1, Ariel - Yes, that's my point, but I don't think I'm wrong. O'Neill deserves credit for building a young, successful side, which is what his objective is. The fact that many of them happen to be English may be a nice plus for the English game, but that wasn't O'Neill's goal and it's not O'Neill's job to go and help the Englsh game. It's just something that happened as a by-product of building a good side.
2. Ambi - Thank you.
3. Ole Gunner - Yes, Gerrard, Rooney and Lampard are all crap, aren't they? Carragher showed no bottle in Istanbul, did he? There is no sense whatsoever in generalizing about a whole nation, whether in a positive way or a negative way. Some English players are very good. Some aren't. Spain haven't won much in their history either, would you say that their players are rubbish as well?
4. Rob - Neat idea. Unquestionably, it's one of the benefits of having a largely domestic squad.

[David]

Although as an England fan I am pleased to see that O neill has got some excellent English players at his club, it has absolutyely nothing to do with thier passports, it is simply down to them being good players.In my view a large proportion of villa's starting XI would get into the established top four's first team squads. They are as follows: Friedel,Laursen,Davis,Barry,Young,Milner and Agbonlahor. This I feel proves that Villa have produced a good side, from good players who happen to be English, if they had been from Botswana they would still be good footballers

[Gabriele Marcotti]

1. Richard - O'Neill has spent a lot of money, but there's nothing wrong with that, because the owner made the money available and his team is progressing and he's hitting all the targets (in fact, he's ahead of schedule, IMHO). I was skeptical about Young, I'll admit it, and O'Neill was right. I thought Reo-Coker was a clever signing and I've always been a Davies fan.
But I think the point here is that O'Neill doesn't go around boasting about his English spine, it's others who go and heap that praise on him. O'Neill simply wants to put together a successful team.
2. Dan - Yes, you're right on Barry. Point taken.
3. Sean - I fully agree.

[ty]

I thought your comments on Cudicini were the most depressing I've heard in a long time. We know players are happy to pick up their wages and not play, but to have it confirmed so baldly.

And what's with Capello's and Baldini's comments this week to the Italian media? Are they getting cocky with a few good results? Things can change so swiftly..

[Chris]

Why would Tevez want to stay at United from a career point of view? Ok, big money, big crowds and playing alongside great players, but he could do the same at any number of big clubs, for a guy from South America not England I don't see his incentive, sign for united, win Premier League, win Champions League... that' all the boxes ticked then, go to Madrid and try for La Liga? That's where I'd be off!

[Tomo]

Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems the whole 'English Spine' at Aston Villa is more a result of their American owner than Martin O'Neil. If Aston Villa didn't have the financial muscle they wouldn't have kept Barry in the summer, would they have signed Milner? would they even have O'Neil as their manager? It seems Martin O'Neil is simply buying unspectacular established Premiership players, and some not so unspectacular 'established' players who will be shipped off as they look to establish themselves in the top four (Harewood, Knight). Would David Moyes not try to purchase, given the financial backing O'Neil has received, Steve Sidwell (proven at Reading), James Milner (proven at Leeds (ha) and Newcastle), Ashley Young (proven at Watford) or Luke Young (proven at Charlton). I'm not sure people would be praising Mark Hughes, if he qualified for the Uefa Cup with Manchester City with a team featuring Hart, Richards, Bridge, Wright-Phillips, Strurridge, Johnson, Upson and Parker. It seems that despite the current environment facing the premiership inevitably a number of English players will rise to the top and will then be pursued by the biggest teams in England AND the richest. These are proven players, players who have gained praise for their performances in the Premiership before, either with an England call-up like Nicky Shorey or Luke Young, or widespread praise from the media as in the case of Sidwell or Ashley Young. Right now it seems unlikely any of the 'English Spine' would move to a big four side, other than Barry and Agbonlahor who O'Neil inherited or Ashley Young. We can't ignore the fact O'Neil has groomed the seventeen year old Delfouneso in the Uefa Cup, but as promising as the kid may be, this is as much a sign of the shortages facing the Aston Villa squad right now in the shadow of their top four rivals. And this is where O'Neil will prove his true colours, will he still go out and purchase young English talent if he finishes fourth and faces champions league football, or will he look to Europe and beyond to add to his squad? Personally I don't see the English talent out there that will improve his squad to the level he will demand, and if there is, will Manchester United, Manchester City or Liverpool not be in their first given the new Uefa rules on homegrown players. Martin O'Neil is one of my favourite managers and I admire his honesty, and undoubtedly he's getting the best out of his players, but so would a number of other managers in his position, with his chairman.