ON ROSS BARKLEY, AND THE FEARLESSNESS OF YOUTH

Courage is a term thrown about recklessly with regards to sport. One may attribute this to the role sport fills in our lives; an argument can be made that in the absense of armed conflict, games played on a court, pitch or field fulfill a primitive urge to compete, and to be victorious. The tribalism that accompanies sport is a by-product of this, and helps to explain the mania of supporters who feel intrinsically tied to a club by geography, heritage or social standing. This is why such words as 'courage', and 'heroic' are tied so often with athletic feats, as sport brings out an energy and passion that is perhaps only rivaled, albeit to a far greater degree, by war. We may say that 'battles' are fought on the pitch between rival clubs, but as fans we know this to be hyperbole, an overdramatization of something that has greater importance to us than perhaps it should.

ON THE VINDICATION OF THEO WALCOTT

If you follow English football, it is likely you've heard uttered the following phrase about the above-pictured Theo Walcott; "I just don't think he's got a football brain". That phrase was said by a reactionary former England international, Chris Waddle, after a dismal friendly wherein England narrowly scraped by an inferior Egypt side, and Walcott was thoroughly abject. That phrase, furthermore, stuck with Walcott for years; a haunting accusation recurrently mentioned following any sort of mediocre performance. 'He has the talent, he just doesn't have the mind for the game', his detractors claimed.

The above indictment was made by Waddle on the 3rd of March, 2010. Theo James Walcott was seventeen days shy of his 21st birthday. He'd already been written off by one of England's finest ever players, and moreover by much of the English media who viewed the young man from London as a luxury player who, frustratingly, would never fulfill his seemingly infinite potential. Three months on, he would (albeit surprisingly) be left out of Fabio Capello's 2010 World Cup roster, four years after traveling with the England squad to Germany for World Cup 2006. 

Walcott was 21 years old, and already a forgotten man.

ON BERBATOV AND SUAREZ, THE MOST ENTERTAINING PLAYERS IN THE PREMIER LEAGUE

A week ago a pundit on the Guardian Newspaper's exceedingly great 'Football Weekly Podcast', quipped that he would pay good money simply to watch Dimitar Berbatov bring down goal kicks, one after another. He then moved to state that Berbatov, with his languid brilliance and nonchalantly devastating play, is the most entertaining player in the Premier League at present. That statement has remained a point of interest in my mind since, not simply because it is a decent claim, but more importantly because the idea of 'entertainment' provided by a footballer is quite a difficult one to reconcile. What provides entertainment at a football ground? Surely, at the most basic and obvious level of cognition, goals (and the prospect of goals being scored) are what entertain the paying audiences of football matches. A player, whose skill set and aptitude for the game promises at least the opportunity for a goal to be scored, is surely someone who may be deemed 'entertaining'. Yet this qualification alone is not sufficient; for example, at the present moment I do not find Fernando Torres even remotely entertaining as a footballer, though he still holds the capacity to score goals. Furthermore, some quality midfielders, who may infrequently be presented an opportunity to shoot at goal due to their positioning on the pitch, have captured the imaginations of, and provided entertainment for, fan bases world wide. Claude Makelele in his Chelsea pomp was a quality example of this type of footballer. Therefore, the ability to entertain lies in another key facet, one essential characteristic, I would argue. And that ability is this; a player must look different in the way he plays football. He must move about the field and interact with the ball in a fashion that appears almost unnatural to the eye, yet is undoubtedly aesthetically pleasing. Unfortunately, paltry few men in the English Premier League fulfill this qualification, one of them being the man whose picture adorns the top of this post, and another who is almost universally distained...

HOW GARETH BALE AND ANTONIO VALENCIA ARE SAVING THE MODERN GAME

     For the past two months, Antonio Valencia and Gareth Bale have been simply unplayable. Today's fixtures in the Barclay's Premier League played host to two more marvelous performances from these men; Valencia's was against Stoke City, and led to two (converted) penalties for Manchester United as well as one woefully spurned chance by Dimitar Berbatov as the game died out. Gareth Bale put in a fantastic shift for Tottenham, scoring two fine goals against a hapless Wigan side. For the past 12 months, the Welshman in particular has been hailed as the one of the world's most devastating players; a man who, on his day, cannot be contained by even the best outside-backs the Premiership has to offer. Recently, however, there have been suggestions that Valencia, rather than Bale, may be the best out-and-out winger in England when on his favored right flank. In any case, what strikes me about both of these men is how similarly they play when in full flight, and how different their shared approach to the game is from the increasingly numerous, modern-day pseudo-wingers currently playing for top-flight sides (i.e. City's Adam Johnson). This increasingly popular type of outside midfielder embraces playing on the side of the field opposite their strong foot, and attacking towards the center of the pitch with the ball on their dominant side. Such play suffocates open space on the pitch and furthermore eliminates room for creativity. Valencia and Bale, however, embrace the notion that the field is indeed 75 yards in width, and they are willing to use every inch of it to their benefit...