Schwarzer speaks, and other ramblings
By: timmyg | May 22nd, 2009Old news perhaps, but I’ve always wondered what the Aussie sounds like. Well now I know.
Moyes’ has yet to announce whether he’ll mail it in on Sunday, which makes me a bit worried. There’s all this talk about teams pulling a Liverpool and field reserve sides, and how unsporting that is. Look at all the (non)news with Fergie over the past week.
Yet I still don’t see what Moyes’ stands to gain by playing a full strength squad. I’m not saying he should throw the match (well, the fan in me is…) but why risk perhaps ruining an opportunity to win some silverware? And beat Chelsea!
But here were almost are: season’s end. I’m hoping to release two podcasts to commemorate this special season. And a season’s end award silliness.
But I’m still looking to define the club’s identity. Several pundits say its our lack of injuries this term, and others its because we have a settled squad. But to me there’s some missing link.
Club’s do well through their identity, be it tactical or ethos (Bolton, Blackburn and now Stoke’s direct, muscular football has guided them to safety each year; United are always the inevitable victor; Chelsea spending money).
And without an identity (Is City built on offense through Ireland, Robinho, and whatever 19 year old forward they have, or are they defensive with a bedrock of Bridge, Dunne, Richards, and Given?) or a major flaw to your identity (West Brom playing “nice” football but defending like a youth team) you cannot succeed.
So what are we? I wasn’t around for Tigana, but it seemed to buy high and underachieve on the field. Under Cookie, we did what Wigan currently are: buy low, sell high, get by. LS: Overpay for rubbish, struggle under the long ball.
Roy has obviously proven his transfer acumen, with the only “flops” (Litmanen and Barnes) being so because of injuries, not lack of skill. And the football is pretty, but also compact and defensive.
But I think there needs to be more. Suggestions? Or is this a fool’s errand, as compact, tidy, and organized footy is an identity in of itself?
 |
EPL Match Schedule |  |
 |
Discount Travel to Fulham |
| Fulham Scores |  | Craven Cottage information & hotels |
Category: 
Subscribe
|
Print
|
Share
      |
Comments
-
I think it’s pretty harsh to say Tigana underachieved. He got us up at the first time of asking, playing beautiful football and took us to an FA Cup semi-final and the third round of the UEFA Cup. The fact that he had to contend with boardroom politicking, uncertainty over the club’s future and a Director of Football who bought players for him made his job even more difficult.
There’s a case for saying Coleman – as much as I liked the guy – seriously squandered the inheritence. He took Tigana’s team to ninth but failed to kick on from there. Bought a lot of dross in the transfer market, dismantled Tigana’s excellent fitness regime and changed the playing philosophy. The football had become very stale by the end and we were dropping like a stone.
The less said about Sanchez the better.
As for our identity, I think club’s have identities largely through traditions than the evolution of a team. I suspect the rest of the country might just (for the first time since the 60s) be giving us a second look now but we’ve got a gorgeous ground, steeped in history and tradition, friendly fans and we play attractive football. Isn’t that enough?
Posted from
United Kingdom
-
Hey Dan — I didn’t mean Tigana himself underachieved. But that was the image of the club while we were in the top flight and were saying how we’d be the ManU of the South. Again, I wasn’t a fan then but thats the jist I have been getting.
And perhaps you are correct about the traditions of the club being its image.
But then I would go as far as to say that Roy, maybe for just this year (who knows), has made the put some results behind the tradition. Rather than this ‘little old fulham’ image, perhaps it could be more.
I dunno, I’m going to keep my eye on it.
I think we’re both onto something though…
Posted from
United States -
Hello mate,
Fair enough. I think MAF’s ‘Man Utd of the South’ comment was one of those outlandish things he said when he brought in Keegan and Wilkins and sacked Micky Adams (unfairly in my view). The media used it as a stick to beat him with when we didn’t take the Premier League by storm, but to be mid-table in the top flight wouldn’t really have been considering underachieving by too many Fulham fans at that time.
Would certainly agree with you about Roy’s results. But to turn us into anything more than ‘little old Fulham’ we’d have to be producing regular top ten finishes and making more frequent journeys into Europe. If we can start outperforming our capital rivals on a regular basis, then maybe we’ll feature a bit higher on the London-centric media’s radar.
Personally, as you can no doubt tell, I’m a bit of a sentimentalist who likes the tradition, the history and the romance of the ground. Of course, when I was first introduced to Fulham, the football was so bad it was almost a sideshow. Look at how far we’ve come!
Posted from
United Kingdom
Comments are closed
Home 
