In the same edition of The Football League Paper, I also came across a rather frustrating guest column by Graham Westley.
The main article was one campaigning for the importance of dealing with head injuries swiftly and comprehensively, which is definitely a valid case to argue for. But my issue is with his five points to improve football, which preceded it.
They are as follows:
- Make score draws worth more than low scoring wins
- Make high scoring wins worth more than home wins
- Make away wins worth worth more than home wins
- Do more to reduce the cost of ticket prices for families
- Allow assessors to intervene and use their bird’s eye view to help referees from the stand in key situations to prevent them making catastrophic major errors in a game
“If those changes were made I think we’d get more entertainment, more goals, more open games, more fan satisfaction, and fewer pressurised decisions. All positive steps forward.”
So, I totally disagree with the first three points. They seem to be undermining the nature of football itself. Ticket prices are a political issue, and something I wholeheartedly agree needs dealing with. The assessors point is to do with improving an aspect of the game – not altering the fundamental rules, as we see in his ideas about changing goal and win values. But changing the value of wins, draws and goals? That’s just not football, is it?
1. Make score draws worth more than low scoring wins
Preposterous? To win a football game, with presumably a solid defence and effective attacking tactics, but earn less points than a team whose defence went AWOL but still scored plenty seems madness. It certainly sounds like disrespect to the art of defending.
2. Make high scoring wins worth more than low scoring wins
As above – I still feel like good defending is being overlooked in this point. The notion that a goal is more valuable than a well-timed block or goalkeeper save, is naive and a little depressing for someone who’s team cultivated the offside-arm-raise as part of Arsenal’s ‘famous back four’. Watching Raphael Varane blossom under Mourinho at Real Madrid was as beautiful as seeing Jese’s enthralling offence. They say beauty is in the eye of the beholder because what might garner “more fan satisfaction” for one person, won’t cut it for someone else.
I’ve watched Arsenal and Barnet more than most this season – and tactically they each have something very different to offer. What I love and admire about Barnet’s tactical play I don’t comparatively enjoy in the same way when I watch Arsenal, because I prioritise different critiques and expectations across the different groups of players.
At Barnet, I love a solid 1-0, 2-0, 2-1 win; Martin Allen bringing on a fifth defender and relieving the likes of creative Luisma, once the game is in hand. At Arsenal, in many cases, I hope for more goals and, frankly, expect to concede some too. In short, my appreciation of different aspects of the game alters in different contexts.
3. Make away wins worth worth more than home wins
I’d give a tiny bit more room to wiggle on this idea… and then say ‘no’ again, anyway. It’s all about the fundamentals – and as far as home and away advantage, that is on the effectiveness of the 12th man (the fans) and the quality of the pitch and facilities. A lot of the time, it is the calibre and noise-levels of the fans that is important in terms of inspiring the players – and that is the case for home or away fans; if they’re loud, they’re loud. I go to The Emirates a lot, so can tell you playing with 50k more fans doesn’t mean we are louder – it doesn’t mean we offer the audio-advantage for the players. Similarly, not every team automatically has a fantastic home-record. Charlton haven’t won at home since October 21st.
It implies games can’t be thrilling, unless they have a goal. (What about chances created?) It implies tactical nous is unimportant (for who would praise a team that concedes four goals, just because they scored four also?) Remember Mourinho’s comment’s after Arsenal’s 5-4 victory over Spurs?
“In a three-against-three training match, if the score reaches 5-4 I send the players back to the dressing rooms as they are not defending properly. So to get a result like that in a game of 11 against 11 is disgraceful.”
I’m not saying there is no value or joy to be had in a high-scoring game – they are thrilling every once in a while, and fan’s certainly leave feeling they’ve had their money’s worth. But that’s based on a one-off game/result. I can’t say I’d feel as happy about conceding four-goals on a regular basis. Simply, logically, one would have to look at the team and say: the defence needs tightening. But then, who would do that if winning 2-0 at home with good defending and forwards that take their chances meant taking home less points than drawing 3-3?
It adds ulterior motive to performances and results, and undermines the essence of tactical decisions and effective defending.
To give a little insight as to what you’d be missing with Westley’s ideas in place, here’s a review of the enjoyment of a nil-nil, after Luton v Shrewsbury’s encounter:
“I watched Luton play Shrewsbury on Thursday night. It was a 0-0 draw but it was an enthralling encounter. The game constantly evolved and it was a fascinating tactical encounter. Until, that was, Shrewsbury suffered a pair of really soft yellows and a resultant red in the 70th minute. I was commentating on the game and couldn’t believe what I was seeing. It was a terrifically enjoyable and competitive game. Tackles were hard but honest. And there was absolutely no need for a red card to destroy the match.
Please can we have some common sense in the refereeing of games? Small decisions should be made in the context of the big picture. Games that are getting out of hand need steps to be taken. But cracking contests between top teams should be decided by players not by debatable decisions.”
What we saw here was an “enthralling” 0-0; “a fascinating tactical encounter” that was “terrifically enjoyable and competitive”, despite the lack of goals – perhaps even because of it!
And who penned this praiseworthy commentary of a 0-0? Graham Westley of course. And not just that, it was printed alongside (thus totally discredited) most of his five points to improve football.
I rest my case…
Pursuit of Nattiness 