The Importance of Sport (NEW CONCEPTS)

[Mick Harper]

Arsenal drop two points at no-hope Southampton, the Patriots are swept aside by never-hopers Chicago, and my book is being messed around with at the printers. It's what we litero-sporting types call a triple-whammy. Are we down-hearted? Yes.

[Mick Harper]

Salzburg 1 Chelsea 2

The Flowerpot Man has been addressing the key problem of top flight football, the one I have been banging on about and which no-one has been addressing. What does the attacking side, having arrived in the opposition penalty area in full strength but opposed by a defence in full strength, do next?

Not shoot, that's for sure. Shooting is always a poor option. Goalies have grown in size and ability whereas goalposts are still eight yards wide by eight feet high, as decided in an Accrington pub, August 1888. Also, at least two defenders will be hurling themselves twixt thee and thy goal. No, in this day and age, you have to 'walk it in' as we used to say.

Or at least the team has to by intricate wallpassing, dribbles and pre-practised movement. Chelsea were doing this to Salzburg on a regular basis except they hadn't quite got round to the coup de grace. What do you do when you, the ball, the goal and the goalkeeper find yourselves in close approximation? Not just smash it as hard as you can, that's for sure.

[Mick Harper]

The Milanese have cracked it. Forward No 1 comes steaming into the box, passes to Forward No 2 standing near the penalty spot. Forward No 2 airkicks the ball thereby completely wrong-footing the Zagreb defence. Forward No 1's momentum carries him past Forward No 2, allowing him to collect his own pass and he slots it home. One for the training ground, I think. Airkicking convincingly has to be practised.

Justice Cockelcarrot writes: Copenhagen get a throw-in up the other end. Full back dashes up, grabs ball, charges towards the byline and delivers a perfect long throw all in one flowing rapid movement. Only for the striker to head it onto the crossbar. Now here's my point. Freeze-framing shows the Danish thrower-in clearly with the front part of his boot touching the line in the act of throwing. If it had been a goal would it have been reviewed? We shall never know.

Celtic grab a point at home from war-torn, ten-man Shakhtar Donetsk. The future looks bright for Scottish rugby.

[Mick Harper]

Cocklecarrot Corner
Gentle ball comes drifting into the Ajax box to be collected by lone Ajax defender. He slightly misjudges the trap and ball springs up and strikes him on the arm. Pen or no pen? Yes, his arm was in a natural position and there certainly was no time to get it out of the way but... He was entirely the author of his own predicament. He trapped the ball with, as it were, his leg and his arm. Are we now to have defenders viewing their arms to be the next line of defence, safe in the knowledge they won't be penalised. No, I disagree with the ref and the VARman, a definite pen.

Notes from the Match:
Who is this Harvey Elliot? I had assumed he was some tuppenny-ha'penny import from Shrewsbury or somewhere to fill a gap in the squad, but he appears to have become integral to the team. Is he English? Has the Academy finally produced somebody? Nobody ever says, it's as though he was always there. And by the way, Liverpool, I don't want to worry you on your night of triumphant qualification, but Ajax could have scored five without breaking sweat.

[Mick Harper]

Manchester Utd vs Sheriff Tiraspol

One does not associate Moldova with racial harmony so it was heartwarming to see that every member of Tiraspol's side, apart from the captain and the goalkeeper, was black. One does associate Moldova with crime though, so it was no wonder the sheriffs are too busy to turn out regularly for the works team.

I do question both Man U and Arsenal's selection policy. This season is more than ordinarily exhausting because of a World Cup being spatchcocked in mid-season, so burn-out is certainly going to be a factor. In the old days there was a set policy for mickey mouses like the League Cup and the Europa: you had a semi-permanent team drawn from nos 12-25 in your 25-man squad and you did OK. You might go up the numbers for the semis and final but otherwise it was rest-day non-working for the stars of the show.

No more. The selected side is near full-strength and the other regulars come on as substitutes. Even if they don't they have burned themselves out flying hither and yon on Eurodays. Absolute madness. Guys, at least one of you won't win the Europa and either of you might end up outside the Top Four by dropping an exhausted point come April.

[Mick Harper]

Two things to say about the Antony-twirl. First, I've never seen it before and, judging by the reaction, nor has anyone else. Yet it seems blindingly obvious once you have. So where has it been for the last hundred and fifty years? Where did Antony learn it? Best thing since the Cruyff turn.

Second that reaction to it. The TV old sweats were predictably aghast but Antony's manager actually dropped him at half-time because of it. Ten Hag denied it of course, but his bluster didn't fool anyone. The youth will have to join Ronaldo training with the youth team. They'll soon all be doing it as well. Then they'll all have to train with the youth team. Where will it end? Look at Cruyff. Where is he now?

[Wile E. Coyote]

One of the dumbest rules in football is the 5 substitute rule. It's yet another measure that ensures the Premiership becomes less and less competitive, with only a few teams actually able to win. It destroys the logic and the continuity of the game, and is actually bad for fans and the development of players and managers.

Put simply, ManCity can now field a half strength team against a team in the bottom half, and be 0-0 at half time, only to then sub from the bench 4 or 5 fresh, world-class players, which will virtually guarantee them a win.

What do the Man City starters learn? What does Pep learn? That fresh world-class players are (err) better than tired opponents. There needs to be no innovation in strategy or tactics, although pundits pretend these substitutions are tactical masterstrokes by Pep.

Of course Peppie and Kloppie whine on about too much football, but here's the rub, guys, your squads are full of talented individuals who rarely get a game and, when they do, you often sub them off because as managers you are actually unable to win games without the intervention of your 40 million quid plus stars. You are not as good as your admirers think.

"Tactical substitution", my arse. You are just out-moneying the opposition, as you are unable to outhink them.

[Mick Harper]

Talking of daft managers and daft substitute rules, why is subbing allowed in the last few minutes? These are transparently time-wasting measures of teams one-up and hanging on. What makes them daft -- as well as vexatious for spectators -- is that refs are under instruction to add time on if they think a substitution is for this reason and always add on far more time than the substitution takes.

Furthermore (oh yes, he's unstoppable) what has happened to the idea that substituted player should make their way to the nearest touchline to save time? Anyone seen this applied lately? I believe it would be eminently sensible to have set times for ordinary substitutions (though not for ones following injuries and red cards). Thirty minutes, halftime, sixty minutes and seventy-five should do it. Incorporating the drinks-break in hot weather.

Or indeed Bovril when it's brass monkeys but I have not investigated Ofcom's product placement rules with this one. It may have to be warmed-over Robinson's Barley Water. But that's all from me, they're holding my number up. Good grief, they're bringing Martin Amis on.

[Wile E. Coyote]

It would be an improvement not to have subs (except head injuries, a disappointing but "must do" I am afraid) and VAR after say 75 minutes, that way you would get some real footballing excitement at the end of the game. But they won't as someone will then suggest it's simply a better game with only essential subs and no VAR.

[Mick Harper]

Yes, I see your point about late VAR. The celebrations on the pitch and in the stands at a climactic point, then the crestfallen players and suicidal fans is not pretty. And yet for reasons of equity that go far beyond mere questions of enjoyment, VAR must stay to the bitter end. In fact beyond the end at a Eurogame this week when the players were trooping off only to be recalled by VAR adjudicating a penalty offence had been committed earlier.

Justice Cocklecarrot writes: the penalty was saved by the keeper and the ball remained in play. The Laws of the Game state that a match can only be extended beyond its due time in order to take a penalty so the question arose as to whether the game had finished as soon as the penalty had been taken (and saved), and that therefore the ball was no longer in play. However that is not, as it were, the end of the story.

The offence had been committed during play not at the end of it, so the referee may have been within his rights to disregard the time between the offence and full time, and hence allow a brief 'extra time' after the taking of the penalty. In practice, there was an extended mêlée which was allowed by the referee until an attacking player ballooned the ball over the bar, whereupon the referee blew for full time, so this point remains judicio nullus.

[Wile E. Coyote]

It's a choice. I simply want to see great football, I couldn't care less about perfect refereeing decisions, sorry but we have no hope of seeing in the next World Cup a real classic like England/ Germany 1966, or a Brazil/ Italy 1970, as the rules won't allow it.

It's going to be.....

"What a magnificent setting"
"And we are underway!"
"What a great game, it's 1-1"
"The refs whistled for a drink break"
"Something is wrong Alan, he has got the timings wrong" " I thought it was a bit strange that Kane had gone down with heat exhaustion, shortly after scoring, that is most unlike Harry "
"Yes, the water break was called two minutes too late, it's going to have to go to VAR to see how much of the game was wrongly played"
"This could be bad news for England" "Harry is going to have his goal disallowed, he scored the equaliser during a planned drinks break"
"Wow, Harry doesn't look happy, but those are the rules, it is now Germany 1-0 up."
"Anyway, heartbreak for England fans, but we are back up and running again"
"Go on Harry!" "He has done it" "We are back level again!"
"Wait, they are checking it on VAR"
"Yes, it looks like Kane left his drink bottle on the pitch after being resuscitated"

[Mick Harper]

Never mind that, there's a more important World Cup going on right now and the lads are in trouble. First they get robbed by Ireland under the Haber-Bosch process and then their game against Pitcairn Island is rained off entirely and declared a draw. No, not Pitcairn Island, what's it called... Australia. Anyway the point is England are going out because the cricketing twats can't manage to slot in 'rain delay days' even though nobody is playing more than once every three or four days.

Can you imagine a genuine World Cup like footy's saying, "Oh, sorry, England, the floodlights have failed so we've tossed a coin and we're marking it down as a win for Iran"?

[Mick Harper]

But there would be no need for a rain delay day if only the wretched Australians had had the forethought to build a roofed stadium in Melbourne where they could have shifted the match to if it was found to be necessary. I'm envisaging something along these lines

[Mick Harper]

Talking of mickey mouse world cups, can you guess which sport this is?

[Mick Harper]