SPARE THE EXCUSES FOR EMBATTLED DAVID MOYES- HE'S AT MANCHESTER UNITED, REMEMBER

by Joey Davies 

WHEN Wilfried Bony nodded Wayne Routledge's cross past Anders Lindegaard to confirm only Manchester United's second third-round exit from the FA Cup in 27 years, it was difficult not to feel a degree of sympathy for David Moyes.

He stood alone on the sidelines with nobody to turn to, no experienced hand for comfort having sacked all of Ferguson's tried and trusted backroom team, and an Old Trafford crowd which had emptied faster than it did when Manchester City were scoring for fun there only 27 months ago. In many ways, the apathy and resignation from the loyal home support painted an even gloomier picture than if they had rebelled against their team and their hierarchy.

There are three key areas where David Moyes is failing right now at Manchester United. It would be a little harsh to say 'sack him now', but perhaps he warrants the opportunity to address them. At Everton, he successfully managed to convince Fleet Street's finest that the years under him were the best that Everton could accomplish, despite putting together some strong teams at Goodison Park and not winning a trophy with any of them. Just to put that into perspective even Alex McLeish managed to win one with Birmingham City. Steve McClaren, Harry Redknapp and even Kenny Dalglish after 11 years out of football management, were able to guide a team to trophy success in England. So why does regularly finishing in the top half at a club with nine domestic league championships- the fourth most in English football history, warrant being lionised as a messiah and the perfect candidate to succeed Sir Alex Ferguson, arguably the most successful manager since the game was created?

One of the faults he is displaying at the moment is his mentality. What followed Sunday's defeat were a smattering of puzzling remarks from 'the Chosen One' (the moniker bestowed upon him by the Stretford End) about United's performance. Moyes suggested that while they didn't do enough to win the tie, they didn't deserve to lose it. Now this comment would not raise an eyebrow at a club like say, Fulham or West Bromwich Albion, whereby mid-table Premier League solidity would be greeted with general satisfaction from both the top brass and the fanbase. But when you factor in United's squad even without Wayne Rooney and Robin van Persie still featured several internationals, some of whom cost eight-figure transfer fees, bemoaning bad luck at home to Swansea City is one excuse that simply doesn't wash and suggests a mid-table, safety-first mentality. This is Manchester United, a club of similar stature to Bayern Munich, Barcelona or Real Madrid. Complaining of bad luck after defeats at home to lesser lights simply isn't acceptable.

Tactics are another Achilles heel for Moyes at the moment. This is epitomised by his soundbite that they 'played well' because they had got to the edge of the box a few times. Almost like it was a huge achievement to even cross the half way line. When United did attack their opposition, there was only one tactic- pass it out wide, and put a cross in to the area. It worked once, when Alexander Buttner set up Javier Hernandez's equaliser, but most of the deliveries, if you could call them that, were aimless and epitomised United's display- lacking creativity, a plan B, and the kind of panache and imagination you associate with a Manchester United side. They looked like they were set to a rigid template, without an ounce of swashbuckling freedom. What's stopping him from attempting to change formation, system or even working on trying to play through the middle with quick, incisive short passes? The classic United teams could score beautiful goals, simple goals, headed goals from crosses, you name it- because they were multi-dimensional. Right now whenever I watch them, I struggle to decipher what the playing style is supposed to be- surely it isn't just 'rely on wingers to cross it in' because that would be so Sunday League, it'd make Mike Bassett look like a football genius, and justify the 'dinosaur' jibe that ex-Wales assistant Raymond Verheijen recently aimed in his direction.

Suggesting they played well also exposed another hole in his work at the moment- man-management. It is almost like Moyes is in awe of the players, and the club. It was down to Darren Fletcher to bemoan to the press on Sunday that it wasn't acceptable by the standards the club has set. Moyes made no such claims. He has won nothing yet is in charge of a dressing room that has accomplished pretty much everything- besides the FA Cup funnily enough, only Fletcher of the current squad was around when they defeated Millwall 3-0 in the 2004 final, and Rio Ferdinand was serving a ban for a doping violation. Yet if Moyes wants to be respected in spite of his lack of silverware, stamping his foot down like a true authoritarian is the only way forward. He can look to another young manager from these shores, Brendan Rodgers, whom when confronted with big names like Steven Gerrard and Luis Suarez, has oozed confidence and belief in his own ability not to be overawed by their stature. And he has got the best out of both this season, especially the Uruguayan.

Now while most would adknowledge this United squad might not stand up in comparison to the very best that Sir Alex Ferguson constructed, it is still a team that last season scored 86 league goals, and came back from behind on numerous occasions. Not to mention up until a ridiculous decision by a Turkish official by the name of Cuneyt Cakir, they were outplaying Real Madrid- with Ronaldo, Benzema and co, in a two-legged Champions' League knockout tie. Now while Ferguson's brilliance might be a significant factor, you cannot just suggest that the squad he has left is a rabble. Besides the obvious pair, David De Gea has established himself as a top European goalkeeper. Indeed without him, United might have suffered more defeats than they have already. Three of the back four have been ever-presents for years, although they have shown signs of ageing this season. Antonio Valencia has struggled this year, but has excelled in past campaigns. How many vital goals did Javier Hernandez pop up with in the 2010-11 season? These aren't a gang of duds.

Where those who want to see Moyes given time and the restless natives would strike a chord on is the lack of central midfield craft at his disposal. Michael Carrick is 32, so he may have a couple more seasons left to offer them, but besides him, who possesses the close control, ability to probe with the ball at feet, and the passing to unlock a defence? Anderson is more of a destroyer, Fletcher too, although he has not long returned from illness. But the most damning of these examples is Marouane Fellaini- and he is arguably even not a central midfielder. The Belgian excels when playing off a striker. In the derby at the Etihad, Samir Nasri and David Silva simply dismantled him with their technical superiority. Yet Moyes decided to pay £27m for him, possibly due to deadline day panic after a farcical transfer summer that in his defence, he alone cannot bear responsibility for.

The only ones benefitting from Fellaini right now are Everton, where James McCarthy's fine displays have ensured that the Belgian hasn't been thought of since the final day of the transfer window. Indeed without their former player and manager, Everton look like a refreshing, fluid attacking unit as Roberto Martinez's side travel to venues like the Emirates Stadium and Old Trafford and take the game to the hosts. A contrast to Moyes' claims that such an approach was like 'taking a knife to a gunfight' and Champions League football is a possibility at Goodison providing a small squad avoids injury pitfalls.

So where does this leave Moyes? At the end of the day, he always spoke like your typical 'LMA' manager when at Everton. There never seemed to be any long term plan, just a parroted myth of supposed overachieving and working miracles despite the fact smaller clubs than Everton with lesser resources were able to win a trophy in that time frame. Yet at Manchester United, he won't be able to get away with convincing the media that he is doing the same. Indeed, if a man with his inexperience had taken charge of Barcelona, Real Madrid or Bayern Munich and had churned out this insipid brand of football and mediocre results, they would be out of the door in a flash. In fact, his CV probably wouldn't even pass the first interview process.

Thus the necessity, for his sake, that as the head honcho, he puts his foot down on under-performing players, alters his mentality and standards in performance and demonstrates he can construct the kind of all-action creative football United are synonymous with. But at a club of this size, time is not infinite. Even if there is a bottomless pit of pounds to part with in the summer- unless he shows greater authority, mentality and tactical adaptability he may not get that far. Ferguson may have chosen him personally, and whether he has done so with honest intentions is another debate altogether, but he does not own the club. The Glazers recently sacked the head coach of their NFL franchise, the Tampa Bay Buccaneers- for not reaching the playoff round. Yet United are supposedly a patient club, despite the fact even under different ownership Wilf McGuinness, Frank O'Farrell, Dave Sexton and Ron Atkinson were all booted, and Ferguson himself was, by all accounts, a Mark Robins goal away from suffering the same fate.

No, Moyes hasn't got time. He has to adapt and quickly, because this is not 1986 any more. The biggest clubs are global brands off the field, but on it, they require world class coaching, powerful and dominant management, a defined philosophy of football and the very best players. Four departments that at this moment in time, Manchester United are distinctively lacking in. And unless David Moyes can initiate evidence of competence in the first three, it will be somebody else around in the summer to experience the fourth.

CHRIS FROOME ALWAYS HAD THE TALENT- MAYBE NOW THE RESPECT WILL ARRIVE

The 100th edition of the Tour de France saw a sunset finish in Paris- a race won by a German, Marcel Kittel, eclipsing sprint legend Mark Cavendish on the Champs Elysees. However, the sight of Chris Froome of Great Britain crossing the line with his trusty Team Sky lieutenants a few seconds or so later to confirm yellow jersey glory, is an iconic image that perhaps may sadly be overlooked in our sporting vault once the dust has settled.

Froome, born in Kenya to British parents, seems to have the 'Greg Rusedski' about him- in that some do not appear to identify with him due to his lack of a natural British upbringing. But Rusedski won the BBC Sports Personality of the Year in 1997 despite only reaching the US Open final. Froome has a Tour de France title, and were it not for team orders last year, would probably be sitting on two right now.

Bradley Wiggins' victory 12 months ago was epic. It was the unthinkable- a Brit crossing the line, in Paris, wearing the maillot jaune. It was the pinnacle of his career, and something sports fans in this country never thought they'd see- even an England World Cup victory or a homeboy lifting the Wimbledon trophy seemed a likelier pathway to national delight. Of course one of those has since happened, but for his historical achievement, 'Sir Wiggo' is lionised in these parts. A national icon, with a colourful personality. However, was his Tour victory all that impressive in cycling terms, when, as a fan of the sport, we don our analytical caps?

Of course, any Tour de France success takes phenomenal character, mental strength, skill and physical endurance, and Wiggins certainly proved himself. However it could be argued that the team won it for him in many ways, aside from his time trialling. Two world class TTs blew rivals out of the water, but on the mountain stages, where his climbing abilities are not the most natural, the Sky supporting cast protected him in a defensive shut-out. It was cycling's own version of catenaccio, in a field that was missing Andy Schleck (injured) and Alberto Contador (banned)

And this is not disrespecting what Wiggins accomplished, but Froome was a key man in controlling that peloton, and his feats this year have certainly added water to the theory that if Dave Brailsford had given permission for him to attack Wiggins, he may have left him behind on France's highest peaks, and won the title instead. Still, you could say it has all worked out for the best, with both men's names in the pantheon having conquered the world's most famous bicycle race. I must say it is rather disappointing that Wiggins himself has yet to publicly congratulate his teammate, or even show up in Paris after everything Froome did to aid his quest in 2012.

Because of the factors I have explained earlier though, this has meant less enthusiasm for Froome's bid this year. Wiggins withdrew from his Giro d'Italia bid halfway through through injury and illness, and withdrew from this year's Tour, leaving his teammate as the undisputed lead rider. But unlike the catenaccio of last year, this year has been the Tele Santana. Sure, Sky's lead rider has demonstrated his own time trial excellence- it seems so simple to forget he won bronze in the Olympic time trial that Wiggins won last year. But the clearest contrast between the two is that in the mountains 'FroomeDog' has been aggressive, swashbuckling and powerful, the most notable display of these traits coming when he produced a stunning ascent up Mont Ventoux to leave his rivals, such as Alberto Contador, trailing in his wake. Put it this way, if Wiggins had done it, they'd be playing it on loop at least once every day somewhere on British television.

Of course, Mont Ventoux was once the property of a certain Lance Armstrong. Perhaps the fact this was the first tour since the disgraced American's doping programme was outed publicly, was always going to make this a scrutinised Tour for the man holding yellow. But results such as that (Froome's time on this peak was only two seconds less than an EPO-ridden Armstrong's), are shock and awe. Hopefully, and although we cannot be certain, this is the story of a clean, likeable rider finally obtaining some long overdue respect, and bringing some good publicity back to a sport in need of genuine heroes. He did his job last year in assisting history, this year he has been rewarded by winning, and doing it in style. While 'Wiggo' will always capture more attention here, I hope Chris Froome is now appreciated as a great champion, and ambassador for sport. 

And after the manner of this year's triumph, who's to bet against him adding more Grand Tour titles in the future? Wiggins may return, but he is not the more naturally talented all-rounder of the two, not even close. Only the time trial is in his favour. There may be fireworks, but it will be a fascinating watch. Either way, the country has two road cycling heroes, and they deserve equal acclaim- from one and all.

MANCHESTER CITY WANTED A HOLISTIC APPROACH- AND MANUEL PELLEGRINI FITS THE BLUEPRINT

by Joey Davies

It has been just over a month since an incoherent, disjointed, unhappy Manchester City were out-thought and outplayed in the FA Cup final by a Wigan side whose squad cost less than a few City players' transfer fees alone and Roberto Mancini was sacked two nights later.

It was no secret that Malaga boss Manuel Pellegrini, a well-travelled Chilean coach whose round the world exploits have taken him to Ecuador, Argentina and Spain as well as his homeland, would be Mancini's successor, the only surprise being that it has taken this long for City to confirm him, albeit that was due to the La Liga season ending two weeks after the Premier League.

The reason Mancini lost his job despite the dramatic league victory two seasons ago had nothing to do with second place not being good enough, it was a multitude of factors that Sheikh Mansour, chairman Khaldoon al-Mubarak and the men now charged with running the football side of the club, former Barcelona sporting director Txiki Begiristain, and Ferran Soriano (once the general manager of the Catalan club) deemed unacceptable and warranted a change.

The eyebrow-raising words on City's official website after Mancini's exit was confirmed was that they were looking for a successor with a more 'holistic approach' to club management. To define this, they were not after a man solely obsessed with achieving results by hook or by crook, but somebody who could develop Manchester City as a footballing institution in all facets of the club.

For example, Mancini was a very stone cold personality towards his players, and never developed much of an empathy, or relationship with them. He publicly criticised the likes of Joe Hart and Vincent Kompany in recent months, a brave stunt taking into account both players' integral contributions to City's dramatic Premier League victory in the previous campaign, while his attitude behind the scenes alienated coaches and other members of staff. Former City kitman Stephen Aziz, who pulled a celebratory grin into the Sky camera on the touchline after Sergio Aguero's famous goal, left not too long after that afternoon. After Mancini's sacking, Aziz tweeted that he was glad to see the back of the Italian and described him as 'arrogant, vain and self-centred'- an opinion seemingly shared by many others working at the club.

Pellegrini's personality differs greatly, even if he can be a disciplinarian. Don't think he is a soft touch. He had no qualms in dispensing with his star playmaker Juan Roman Riquelme at Villarreal when he crossed the line one too many times. But he develops a bond with his players, and his methods enable them to relish their football, and enjoy going to training. He preaches hard work but with a softness and respect for those playing under him. When the Malaga players found they were not to be paid after he promised them they would be, acting as a mediator between the board and the squad- he threatened to resign. What happened? The wages were paid and Pellegrini remained. Mancini never gave much hint of being able to build such a rapport, at all.

Whilst City have grown notoriety in some quarters for their juggernaut-style investment, their hierarchy do not want the club's reputation to be of a big money evil of modern football. Begiristain and Soriano have been installed as jacks of all trades, to oversee all football activity and this includes the youth development programme. It is thought one of Sheikh Mansour's own priorities is to see academy talent brought through into the first team squad. Last season, only two made any kind of appearance in the league. Ivorian Abdul Razak made three substitute cameos and a Dutch full-back Karim Bekik made one appearance at home to Reading. He was subsequently loaned out to Blackburn Rovers. Now, whether these players were good enough makes no difference- it is a damning statistic.

However Pellegrini has always been an advocate of giving young talent a chance. At River Plate in Argentina he won the league championship whilst nurturing talented playmaker Andres d'Alessandro. He developed Lucho Gonzalez, who has since impressed at Porto, and the composed centre-back Martin Demichelis, who went on to excel at mighty Bayern Munich before rejoining his mentor at Malaga. He also introduced the terrier Javier Mascherano into the Los Milionarios fold, who has since gone on to become one of the world's most fearsome defensive midfielders. Also at Villarreal, it was 'the Engineer' Pellegrini who gave 16-year-old Santi Cazorla an opportunity to shine that he grabbed with both hands. Cazorla would also head for Malaga to hook up with the man who developed his game to the heights it is at now before being sold to Arsenal to pay off club debts. Indeed, Ferran Soriano elucidated Pellegrini's commitment to youth on Manchester City's website after his appointment was confirmed: "He shares the Club's approach to football and our ambition to achieve on field success, coordinating with the wider football support teams to ensure natural progression from the Academy to senior level."

Contrast this with Mancini who used the youth setup to give game time to his sons Andrea and Filippo, neither of whom have the calibre to play for a top club, despite their father complaining about the standard of players coming through the ranks. The lack of a defined philosophy may have been the epidemic, and is something Begiristain and Soriano are attempting to remedy, with Pellegrini's help. His style of football, if taught to the academy teams from schoolboy level up, may even aid the England national team further down the line. To put it simply, Pellegrini likes creative football. At Villarreal he regularly fielded two strikers, Guillermo Franco and Diego Forlan- getting the best out of the Uruguay hitman. Something even Sir Alex Ferguson was unable to pull off. He turned Forlan's career around, and the striker went from strength to strength at Atletico Madrid, winning a Europa League and shining at the 2010 World Cup in South Africa. Riquelme was his playmaker, pulling the strings behind them. 

At City, David Silva could be the man to play behind Carlos Tevez and Sergio Aguero, two forwards whose movement, ball control and intelligence make them tailor-made for Pellegrini's philosophy. Two holding midfielders usually protect the backline to allow the artistry to flourish. At El Submarino Amarillo, it was Marcos Senna, whose ability to hold fort was epitomised at Euro 2008 when Spain produced arguably their most swashbuckling football since the beginning of their major tournament monopoly. Shakhtar Donetsk's composed Brazilian, Fernandinho, has signed for £34m, and he will fit this role like a jigsaw piece, as that is what Pellegrini is about- constructing a fluid unit from back to front where the parts fit to perfection, and the product is designed to excite and thrill. At Real Madrid, he wanted to put together something similar- only for president Florentino Perez to offload players he intended to be key components of that outfit. Even then, with a side based around Galacticos, he acquired 96 points, a club record, only bettered by Pep's wonderful Barcelona, yet was sacked. Their obsession with glamour was never suited to his style, which entails the creation of foundation. 

The other management objective that Mancini failed quite spectacularly at was in European competition. Despite domestic success, all too often City resembled a group of individuals rather than a team the sum of its parts, and in Europe the latter is an absolute requirement in order to progress and develop. Mancini pointed to two 'Group of Death' scenarios as the reason they failed to advance to the knock-out stage in both of his Champions' League attempts at City, but the fact is his own tactical naivety reared its ugly head several times, none more so than in the penultimate group game of the 2011-12 campaign at Napoli's San Paolo. He felt he could go to Naples and take them on in a swashbuckling fashion in the same manner they were winning Premier League games at the time, showing them little respect whilst ignoring the danger the Azzurri posed. City were outplayed with the 2-1 scoreline flattering them. Unfortunately for Mancini, European success requires something he lacked- astute tactical and technical intelligence. Even in the Europa League, a tournament he led City in twice, he fielded strong sides on paper, yet they were bundled out by Dynamo Kiev and Sporting Lisbon. Hardly the most intimidating of opposition.

By contrast, Pellegrini has taken Villarreal to the semi-finals of Europe's premier competition, where Juan Roman Riquelme's penalty miss in the final minute of the second leg against Arsenal proved costly, and Malaga to the quarter-finals whilst players were sold off and wages were being delayed- and even then there was more bad luck as Borussia Dortmund's winning goal was offside and should not have stood. His fluid system encourages creative football, but attacking methodically, with the spine of the team being maintained to ensure no naivety in its defensive setup. His sagacious analysis of the opposition has enabled him to upset some of the more established clubs on the continent, having knocked Manchester United, Inter and Porto out of the Champions' League during his Spanish adventures. 

He speaks excellent English, 'an eight out of ten' according to Sky Sports pundit Guillem Balague, so that will not be a problem. He handles the media smartly and will not snap like Mancini did on several occasions- including a rant at the club's communications director. While some tabloid journalists such as Martin Samuel at the Daily Mail have been sceptical of the new man at Eastlands, I think most will be enamoured by his personality and approach- which features enough portions to match the desired 'holistic' direction Manchester City are intending to embark on.

The challenge has already been set. Soriano has implied five trophies in five years can be accomplished. Assuming bonus competitions such as Community Shields and Super Cups count, this is achievable by any of the top three clubs in the Premier League. But providing 'the Engineer' is given time to develop his vision for the first team and academy, the club derided for its monopolisation of the transfer market may change people's perceptions and subsequently its own reputation. A City team with youth graduates as well as established talent playing the club's footballing philosophy is the ultimate goal, almost like the Barcelona that Soriano and Begiristain worked at, or even like an Ajax. It is an admirable direction to take and one I hope pays off.

But in the short-term, City's holistic Chilean will face an intriguing Premier League landscape. The man he controversially defeated in the qualifying round of that memorable semi-final run at Villarreal, David Moyes, will be feeling his way into how an internationally elite club operates at Manchester United. And the man who replaced Pellegrini at Real Madrid, Jose Mourinho, is back at Chelsea with a point to prove after an unhappy final season at the Bernabeu. Aside from Arsene Wenger, the Portuguese is the only other man to have won the title in England and be managing there next season. However it will be a vastly different league to what it was back when his original Chelsea machine broke its points record in 2005. And that might just tip the scales in City's favour.

But it promises to be fun- as Pellegrini's own words to the supporters will testify: "My first message is to tell all the supporters they will enjoy the season. I am sure they will enjoy the way our team will play. We will play an attractive, offensive play." One thing is for certain, the loyal match-goers at the Etihad Stadium will not be bored at any point of his evolution project, which from afar, will be fascinating to follow when it begins, from pre-season next month to the opening league fixture in August.

The blue moon rose to new heights on May 13, 2012 when Sergio Aguero sank QPR to win Manchester City the Premier League, and for all Mancini's faults, his name is justifiably associated with that glorious triumph. However, this new direction can enable them not only to continue to obtain silverware, but plaudits, friends and admirers in addition to that as Manuel Pellegrini strives to feed the club the holistic medicine it demands. 

Let the healing process commence.

VIVA LA REVOLUTION! ENGLAND ARE THE DINOSAURS OF FOOTBALL AND IT'S TIME TO CHANGE

I watched England's friendly against the Republic of Ireland on Wednesday knowing what to expect in terms of both teams- commitment, hunger, desire, intensity and fair play and unsurprisingly we were treated to these qualities. Traits you'd associate with English football.

However, I also knew what NOT to expect of either team- ball control, patience, tactical fluidity, ball retention, ability to pass under pressure and simply being able to trap something other than a bag of cement.

Now the Irish have an excuse. Small pool of talent and limited resources. Yet the most technically sound performer on the night was James McCarthy, whose development under Roberto Martinez at Wigan is a real feather in the Spaniard's cap. The Republic punched above their weight by qualifying for Euro 2012, and if they reach the playoffs for World Cup 2014, they'll have overachieved again, especially with an improving Austria and Sweden in their group.

But England? Given the money the FA has invested in our national game? Whose FA has handed out some of the highest-paid coaching contracts in Europe to the likes of Sven Goran Eriksson and Fabio Capello? Which has its own expensive coaching courses and badges? That contains the most economically profitable league on the planet? 

There is not a single excuse whatsoever for the consistent failure to produce a national team that can actually construct a watchable brand of football. Instead, what we do see, nearly every England game, is a team attempting to play it, and failing miserably because the cohesion of the players is non-existent and the vast majority of them have not been taught some key attributes in their respective youth systems. They're taught to rigidly stay in their positions. You're a right-back, OK. Don't waver from your position. You're a winger? Oh. Stay on the wing and punt a cross into the box for the target man. Rigid. Zero fluidity, and zero flexibility.

Now I might sound scathing here, but in my humble opinion Roy Hodgson is a footballing dinosaur who has never left the Dark Ages and never will. However he should not be sacked as manager as he is exactly who the FA deserve to have in charge- they are equally prehistoric. What formation did we see on Wednesday? A rigid 4-4-2. Two banks of four. Ancient. Get with the times or disappear. In the recent past, playmakers like Paul Scholes were under-appreciated, and shunted out to the left side of midfield just so the imbalanced pair of Steven Gerrard and Frank Lampard could both play together. Despite their abilities, only one should have played alongside Scholes in the middle, because it fits the system like a jigsaw. Yet players then were picked on reputation. Today's version of the ginger genius, Jack Wilshere, who missed the Ireland game through injury, is a rare commodity. He has gifted feet, calmness and also a drive to control games. Pep Guardiola is a big fan of the Arsenal midfielder. When Barcelona faced the Gunners in the Champions League a few years back, he sung his praises. Only to add that he had two or three like Wilshere in their youth academy. Because in Spain, plus Germany and the Netherlands, players of his style are not the exception, they're the norm, albeit on varying levels.

Now, we live in a country where a lot of people don't care about the national team. But have you ever wondered why? It would be a complete fantasy to just assume off the bat that it is because they are all too infatuated with pursuing club success. Do you not think that the way our national side plays turns people off too? I watch more exciting football at League One level. But the difference is there, both teams play at high-intensity pace, don't keep possession and give it away, and that is why there is so much action at both ends. When it comes to international football against quality opposition, England don't get the same chances because superior continental opposition will retain it with swagger and nonchalance. An example of this was the Euro 2012 quarter-final against Italy, in which the Azzurri dominated possession 68% to 32% and completed 815 passes to England's 320. It was daylight robbery the game even got to spot-kicks in the first place, and it was one of those occasions that even a shootout exit could not be described by a spin doctor as a hard luck story.

And I think this could be why the Premier League seems to have no interest in helping the England team because the 150 mph pace of a Premier League game, while exciting, does not help English players' technical development. Indeed, the skill and talent comes from the foreign recruits. Yet all I hear is recycled UKIP-style rhetoric about how it's all the fault of these foreigners coming over here. No, no, no. It's our own fault for our staggering ineptitude in terms of producing naturally talented footballers. As Jose Mourinho once said 'in England you are taught how to win, in Spain you are taught how to play'- the only aspect of that I would argue with would be to add other European powerhouses to the latter. Here, there's too much of a focus on winning at a young age. Whether it's to please their pressuring parents whom many take youth football far too seriously, who knows, but too many kids are being taught a winning mentality without the skill and technique to go with it. I have seen an under-10s training session before casually on a local football field round the corner from mine. What activity were they doing? Running laps. WITHOUT the ball. At the age of nine. Jesus. To sum it up, we instruct our kids to be artisans and not artists.

Now, I'm not much of an influence here, and am just a sports journalist writing and commenting for a local radio station. But I think I have a grasp of how we can solve the problem, but it will require many people to put their egos to one side and unite in terms of a common cause. Just changing the age of which to change from smaller games to full sized pitches is not enough. Radical changes are required. Germany for years were like England- powerful, physical and robotic, just with remarkable mental strength and belief, as well as making penalty-taking an art form. When that belief elapsed, their results began to decline sharply, culminating in an appalling Euro 2000 where Portugal tore them to shreds and even Kevin Keegan's English boys scored a win over them. The champions of Euro 96 had put up a horrendous defence of their crown.

Yet what the DFB did, was study, analyse and see where they were going wrong and now they are reaping the benefits. Players like Mario Gotze, Marco Reus, Toni Kroos, Thomas Muller, these players love the ball. It sticks to them like a magnet. When marked tightly they will find their way out, and they will pass the ball with composure. Yet all it took to change their national style was everybody pulling in the same direction. A perfect example of how far the game has progressed in the Vaterland was the fantastic spectacle that was the Champions League final between Bayern Munich and Borussia Dortmund last week- two immensely talented teams with the ability to be constructive in their offensive game.

Now if I was England coach, the first thing I would be doing would be visiting as many academies as possible. Given the Premier League clubs tend to be in it for themselves, because it's all about the money staying up brings, and playing 'survival football' rather than develop young talent, I am not certain I would be welcome at these abodes. But what I would do at the academies if allowed would be to carry out some Q & A sessions and workshops. I would simply ask the players and coaches to write down on flip charts:

• How would you like the national team to play?
• How would you think the rest of the world would like to see you play?
• How would you think the English public would like to see you play?

These answers would enable us to create a national philosophy of football- our own identity, a way of playing that all of our young players from their primary school days up could be enriched in. If I was a young player, I would want to be part of a pro-active, technical style of play with emphasis on patient possession and fluidity, but counter-attacking with pace. A bit more in common with the Dutch and Germans than tiki-taka. I am certain though that a similar way of playing would be the answer drawn up if we presented these workshops. Jurgen Klinsmann and Joachim Low carried out similar research as the German restructure was progressing.

However the problem in this country is getting both the FA and all of the clubs in the top two divisions to sign up to it, because the egos are too big. The money matters too much to some people. Even though in the long term the improved quality of English academy products could enable them still to be sold on for much bigger fees than the overpriced, mostly overrated homegrown players that are on the market nowadays. Having our own philosophy and all of our clubs complying to teach it makes it easier for our youngsters to be comfortable with it, and can enable the national side and club teams to resemble each other like twins. An identity we could all be proud of. That would be a true legacy for St George's Park.

But it's getting there that is the problem. There'd be short term pain due to the transition. But the long term rewards could be ever so rich. As an Englishman, there's a side of me that always roots for the national team at major competitions- until I watch us play. And it's my firm belief that many others feel the same. It's not just a 'we're not English, we're scouse' or 'People's Republik of Mancunia' thing, as some Liverpool and Manchester United fans have a fondness of retorting when queried as to why they dislike the Three Lions. It's a lack of quality, identity and pride.

I'd love to, in 10 years time at the 2022 Qatar World Cup (don't get me started on that topic) be able to watch an England team that is interchangeable, skillful, composed and pro-active, and to have the ball stick to them like glue. But unfortunately, unless we initiate a revolution, and pile on the pressure for those who run our game, we'll still be seeing the same old giving the ball away cheaply, poor first touches, sprinting around like headless chickens and long hoofs into touch, no matter which manager is being blamed for the team's failings at the time. Steve McClaren was savaged for not qualifying for Euro 2008, yet he is saying the exact same things I am.

So let's get the following: the FA, the Premier League, the academy directors of all of the top two divisions' clubs, the PFA and the LMA to sit down together and unite. Let's build something exciting and let's get out of this Jurassic era of English football and create a new, innovative one.

SIR ALEX TRANSFORMED A CLUB FROM CHALK TO CHEESE

We are in the 23rd year of Liverpool's title drought. That seems like an unthinkable total were it not for the fact that their arch-enemies from down the East Lancs went 26 years without being English champions between 1967 and 1993.

Manchester United were always known as 'the biggest club in the world' for the latter stages of that drought. Which is beyond satirical because sustained success is an undisputed requirement for any club with a claim to such a moniker. Sir Alex Ferguson took six and a half years to finally put the first league championship on the board, but it was the way he achieved it and the patience his hierarchy demonstrated that are worthy of exceptional fawning.

There was a drinking culture at Old Trafford in the 80s. Players enjoyed regular nights out. Ferguson would be tipped off about parties involving many of his underachieving squad. He would confront them and deliver the infamous 'hairdryer treatment'- but unlike many strict disciplinarians, Ferguson was an advocate of 'tough love'- vicious when his players stepped out of line but full of pride when they delivered silverware and showing a warmth and compassion towards them on a personal level. Every player who walks through the doors of Carrington respects the culture of Manchester United, and embrace the winning mentality that has been instilled. Wayne Rooney may have handed in a transfer request, but his unhappiness is as a result of his hunger to fight for the cause and not being given the chance to do so.

He now leaves Manchester United stating a genuine case for being the biggest club on the planet. My own observation is that they are part of a quartet, with Real Madrid, Barcelona and Bayern Munich more than their equals. Ferguson has won every winnable club trophy, including the now defunct Cup Winners' Cup, and is the only manager to lead an English team to the Club World Cup. Aston Villa, Nottingham Forest, Liverpool and Chelsea despite being being kings of Europe have failed to achieve the world crown. Ferguson has achieved it twice under two different formats. And then there's the treble season in 1999, another unrepeatable triumph.

Another authentic output he leaves behind at Old Trafford is the Manchester United 'philosophy' that David Moyes will be expected to maintain. If Barcelona's blueprint is 'tiki-taka' then United's is relentless, attacking cut-throat football with an emphasis on pace and picking teams apart. Even if they were 1-0 up away from home, Ferguson's United teams would continue to take the game to their opposition. One fine example was in Turin in 1999 when Filippo Inzaghi's tap-ins had left them set for more European heartache when Roy Keane wrestled control and the Red Devils turned the tie around. Whilst there was more than a smattering of fortune regarding their victory in the final, both Keane and Paul Scholes were suspended which highlights how remarkable a triumph it was against a full strength Bayern Munich at the Nou Camp.

Whilst I can adknowledge Ferguson's treatment of referees, journalists and some opposition managers bordered on the crass and vicious at the worst of times, it was part of his DNA. He would use every trick in the book to gain an advantage for his teams. The ultimate irony is many of those media figures praising him this week also criticise Luis Suarez, who actually possesses many traits Sir Alex does- both men have veered away from morality and fair play in order to gain an edge for his team because they are on a crusade to win. And it may yet pay off for Suarez in the future. The 64 million pound question regarding Moyes is will he have the same hunger, the same obsession and the same backbone to fight outsiders to the death as his predecessor in order to make United number one. Given it is the retiring Ferguson who hand-picked him, maybe it's a yes.

Ferguson has created multiple great United teams and his tactical flexibility can be visualised by the differences between them. His first creation possessed the flair and inspiration of Eric Cantona to go with a rock-solid spine of Steve Bruce and Gary Pallister, and Roy Keane dominating all who opposed him in the centre of the park. He famously proved Alan Hansen wrong by building another successful unit based on youth. Scholes, the most gifted English playmaker since Glenn Hoddle, has been under-appreciated in this country for years due to its endless infatuation with artisans rather than artists. He broke through United's youth system and fit in like a jigsaw. David Beckham possessed one of the greatest deliveries of a football I have ever witnessed, and Gary Neville's reliable consistency at right-back lasted years, featuring in more than a few great generations of Manchester United. Jaap Stam was arguably the best centre-half the club had ever had on their books and proved to be the final piece of the puzzle that led to the Treble.

But his most impressive work on a player has to be that of Cristiano Ronaldo. The reason he is who he is now, is because of Sir Alex. He took a £12.25m gamble in the summer of 2003 on a player with great feet but a tendency to be a show pony and attempt one too many step-overs. This was Ronaldo at the beginning of his United career. The Gelsenkirchen escapade with teammate Rooney in the 2006 World Cup triggered outrage from the English media yet Ferguson kept faith with Ronaldo's talent and initiated his transformation into a monster as he single-handedly destroyed teams with not only skill and pace, but with explosive power, lethal finishing and excellent aerial ability too. To morph a skillful step-over merchant into the best player on the planet, which he unquestionably was in 2006-2008 before Lionel Messi peaked, is one of the great feathers in Sir Alex Ferguson's cap.

Will football miss him? United fans will, but supporters of rival clubs will be delighted to see the back of him, especially their competitors in the Premier League's upper echelons. His unmatched iron will to win was worth at least 10-15 points every campaign especially considering some of his recent title winning squads contained less talent than the likes of Chelsea and Manchester City had at their disposal. Did not stop him from conquering their challenge. 

One other unofficial accomplishment in which praising him may be going overboard was his appearance in New York last September when Andy Murray edged Novak Djokovic out in five sets for US Open victory, during the international break. His winning mentality being in Andy's presence may just have been the inspiration for the Dunblane man to break his Grand Slam duck and Britain's the same way Sir Alex ended the league title jinx in 1993.

Is he the greatest ever? He is among them. There is a top tier, a pantheon, that he is a part of. Rinus Michels invented total football. Bob Paisley's three European Cups given his reign at Anfield lasted nine years warrants inclusion. Brian Clough made unheralded Nottingham Forest champions of Europe. Helenio Herrera, the creator of catenaccio. Fabio Capello, regardless of what any England fans say, also has a CV to rival anyone in history. All of these men are a valid answer to a somewhat rhetorical question.

Either way the Premier League, which many call the best league in the world, and many others consistently deride, sometimes with justification, will be the most open competition of all the top divisions in Europe next season. La Liga will go to Barcelona or Real Madrid, Bayern Munich with Pep Guardiola and their nearest rivals' star player Mario Gotze, will almost certainly retain the Bundesliga and Juventus look ominously superior to all they face before them in Serie A. The uncertainty (given as I type this Roberto Mancini's exit from Manchester City has been confirmed) due to the top three clubs in the Premier League being under new bosses next season, will provide a sense of refreshing excitement. Nobody can accurately predict at this moment in time which club will grab the bull by the horns next term but I guarantee you if Ferguson was giving it one more season, he would almost certainly win his 14th even with Mourinho on the scene again.

So farewell Sir Alex. Will I miss him? No, because all great things come to an end at every club. But I admire many of his qualities. He is a socialist like myself. His decision to retire being compassion and love for his wife Cathy was extremely heart-warming. The way he would push all buttons and use every trick in the book to try to win, I even respect that. Had he always portrayed a nice guy image and shown a soft touch towards those obstructing his pathway, he would not have won 38 pieces of silverware. He was not a perfect individual by any means and many of his actions were objectionable, but the results speak for themselves and cannot be questioned.

Where United go now, will be intriguing, but next season's Premier League will be a fascinating watch. Bring it on.

SUAREZ MESSED UP- BUT THIS MORAL OUTRAGE IS GETTING TEDIOUS

by Joey Davies
@theonejoeyd

Luis Suarez knew it. Brendan Rodgers knew it. Liverpool's managing director Ian Ayre postponed a flight to Australia to deal with it. The Uruguayan maestro had made a serious heat of the moment gaffe.

His nibble on Branislav Ivanovic, unseen by referee Kevin Friend during the Reds' pulsating clash at Anfield against Chelsea on Sunday, has been punished by the FA with a 10-game suspension, which as I write this has yet to be appealed. Suarez pleaded guilty to the charge of violent conduct, but opposed a ban in excess of the standard three games.

Now, Suarez does have a seven game ban for a bite during his stint in the Eredivisie at Ajax, and the Patrice Evra saga on his record, but racist abuse and violent conduct are two completely different kettles of fish and what the FA have demonstrated beyond belief is that racist abuse is not as serious as a gnaw on the arm. Try asking a black footballer what they'd rather be subjected to if they were forced to make an on-the-spot choice.

Of course, Suarez received eight games for the remarks made in his confrontation with Evra, while John Terry was given four for his comment at Anton Ferdinand. Let's not even take into account the 'build a bonfire' song about the Ferdinands that was boomed out by sections of England's traveIling support at San Marino last month that the FA bizarrely seems to be denying actually happened. It's the inconsistency and the reasoning behind their decisions that puzzle me into confusion. Indeed, when Wayne Rooney was slapped down with a three game ban for yes, violent conduct against Montenegro in the final Euro 2012 qualifier, they desperately attempted every single form of defence ever witnessed by any country's football association including a letter from Miodrag Dzudovic, the victim of Rooney's kick. How can they appeal that, yet slap down 10 games on Luis Suarez?

What is quite clear from observing him in interviews and the friendship he has struck with many of his team-mates is that Suarez is not the devil incarnate. He is here with his young family and is adapting to a new way of life, still learning the language. This is not defending either the comments at Evra or the bite at Ivanovic, but he clearly has a short fuse and instead of castigating one of the league's most gifted footballers, why can't the PFA provide him with the emotional support and assistance in trying to cure the problem? Liverpool have already assigned club psychiatrist Dr Steve Peters with the task of trying to calm him down. Too often it's easy to ignore and sneer at those who have issues to overcome when a bit of warmth and assistance can be the most fruitful cure.

There is an infectious disease sweeping the country not just in sport but in all walks of life- the rapid speed it takes for people to scream outrage and jump on a moral high horse. For me, what Suarez did on Sunday while unpleasant, was nowhere near the worst behaviour I've seen on a football pitch. Roy Keane on Alf-Inge Haaland in 2001, Callum McManaman on Massadio Haidara this season and going back to 1982 Harald Schumacher on Patrick Battiston, there's three I can recollect immediately. Breaking a fellow professional's leg and in some cases ending their career is not as severe an offence as a bite that left no lasting damage, by the looks of things.

Also, the identity of some of those individuals sticking the boot in brought to me a great sense of amusement and disbelief. Graeme Souness was apoplectic in the Sky Sports studio after the match and laid into the Uruguayan. He was at it again before the Borussia Dortmund-Real Madrid semi final when the ban was discussed in the studio, saying 'he had never seen anything like it on a football pitch.' Chortle! The same Graeme Souness who stamped on an opponent's nether regions when at Rangers and produced some of the most cynical, sordid challenges seen on a football field. The same former Liverpool manager who sold his story to the Sun newspaper, still passionately reviled in Merseyside, on April 15 of all days. Stop throwing those stones in your glass mansion Graeme.

And then we have the Prime Minister, David Cameron, who said the FA should take into account that 'high-profile players should be role models.' What, like expense-fiddling MPs? The same PM who appears to have vetoed Tanni Grey Thompson's Sport England position due to her vocal criticism of his austerity measures? Focus on your own problems, Dave.

Roy Keane, by all accounts, has not commented on the situation but I don't see his current employers ITV or any of the national tabloids bringing up the fact he deliberately set out to hurt someone, as his confession in his autobiography confirms. Is Suarez really more abhorrent and intolerable than that?

Luis Suarez has his baggage, and his behaviour on Sunday let his club and his manager down. But seriously, let's stop with the lynch mob mentality, and instead allow qualified people to aid him with his problems. If the Premier League wants to continue to keep pace with the ever-impressive Bundesliga and the already established La Liga, it cannot afford to lose its prized talents. 

I only hope Suarez sorts his personal issues out, the FA weed out the hypocrisy and inconsistency over its disciplinary process, and the general baying mob of outrage wind their own necks in. However, my observation is that only the former is a realistic proposition.

THE RUGBY TORCH IS ALMOST LIT

by Joey Davies
@theonejoeyd

Rugby, and I include both codes in that, has always been thought of as a sport for English speaking countries with the exception of France. It was formed in Britain and played in its former colonies- Australia, New Zealand, the Pacific Islands and South Africa, as well as the states that make up the United Kingdom.

However, the sport itself is going through some sort of an expansion. Argentina has always embraced the union code since British immigrants first played it there, but recently its national side, also known as Los Pumas, have improved their results and standing immensely, with victories over the likes of England, Scotland and France, not to mention a third place showing at the 2007 World Cup. Plus in the league format, Super League and Australia's NRL have never had such sizeable television audiences and even France is warming to the Catalans Dragons at last.

But there is an exciting prospect coming over the horizon for rugby fans that will diversify the game even more. Back in 2009, the International Olympic Committee (IOC), voted two new sports to be introduced to the 2016 Olympic Games in Rio de Janeiro. One was golf.

The other? Rugby sevens, a version of union that differentiates enormously from the traditional 15 vs 15. The minutes of each half? Quite aptly, seven! The pitch size remains the same as it would be for a full union game. This favours slick passing, possession and exciting attacks. But what the inclusion of rugby sevens does for the sport as a whole is open it up to a whole new audience worldwide. While there are many regions around the globe with no interest in rugby, the opportunity to compete for their country and claim a prestigious Olympic medal could change all of that in one swoop.

By including rugby sevens in the Olympics, it could create a boom for the traditional form of the sport and those countries who use the Games to develop its rugby infrastructure may end up profiting from the experience and the education it will provide the young players. The rules provide an excellent method of developing a player's game- agility, passing and handling before making the step up to the more physically demanding 15 vs 15 format. It's a bit like youth football where it is mandatory to play five-a-side till a certain age, and then seven-a-side after that.

Of course, the sevens form of rugby has its own important competitions. The IRB World Series is held over a season beginning in autumn, through New Year into the spring and beyond. Nine countries, mostly the traditional rugby heartlands, host a tournament each over two days, with the final point totals dependent on the finishing position in the table. Whichever nation has the most points at the end of the ninth two-day competition is the World Series champion. New Zealand has been the dominant force, having triumphed in 10 of the 13 editions since its inauguration in 1999.

It's not just those nine hosts who compete though. A few interesting additions are present that are not even thought about when it comes to 15-a-side rugby union- the likes of Spain, Portugal, Uruguay and even the United States, where the use of an egg-shaped ball inclines solely toward the gridiron fields. With the confirmation of sevens in Rio de Janeiro, expect the sport's participation to increase, especially with the dream of Olympic gold something to aspire for. Indeed the host nation Brazil will be entering a team at the Games. With a population of over 190 million, there will be plenty of natives chomping at the bit I would imagine. It might create a rugby boom in the country if the team produces an impressive performance.

The other major cornerstone of the rugby sevens calendar is, or was, the World Cup held every four years. This is also a two-day contest, however it consists of a pool stage and then a last 16, quarter-finals and so on. Unlike the league format of the World Series, New Zealand have not been able to dictate the knock-out format. But the 2013 tournament in Russia, held this June, will be the final instalment with the Olympic competition effectively replacing it in three years' time.

But it should be an enthralling conversion (pun intended) when rugby sevens hits Rio. It could open avenues to brand new destinations in the governing bodies' attempts to expand the sport, it can provide an excellent learning curve for those who want to improve their overall rugby union skills, and most importantly of all it will allow youngsters' childhood dreams to become reality.

I for one am fascinated by its Olympic incorporation, and I look forward to seeing it in action.