Tuesday, January 26, 2016

Not the Devils I know

The battle of the Reds - a game that Juergen Klopp calls a derby (not many disagree though it technically isn't one) - came and went last night. As a sports spectacle, it was not one of the best. There will be no pundits calling this game one of their top 10 clashes between the two sides whose names dominate the list of winners of the English Premier league, dating to when it wasn't even called that. I'm not really going to offer an analysis having heard too many already to feel an upchuck coming on when I see another suited and booted individual starting to move his hands over a giant screen teeming with brightly collared figurines and several dizzying arrows and circles.

What went wrong? Well, let's just say this is not the Liverpool v Manchester United clash of titans most football fans are used to watching. This was a game between two mediocre teams battling for the rights to stay in the collective attention of an audience that is losing any feeble interest that remains in this particular match-up. Give us a North London derby any day, but not this.

Liverpool was certainly the better team, but do I agree with one of the commentators who bravely said - United did not deserve to win? Well no, and if there was a way both teams could get no points at all, that would have been a fair result. Sure, the Merseysiders had the better chances, but they couldn't get past the only class act in the United team. De Gea shone again, making saves like nobody's beeswax, and made Emre Can, Lallana and Henderson look like chumps. United scored with their first shot on target, which is not the first time we've heard that phrase where United is concerned this season. The dismal number of shots taken and the ratio to goals scored makes me want to wish I ad never heard of the Red Devils.

What ails the Devils? Various learned and more-qualified-than-I gentleman and ladies have put forth their theories. Or wait, no I don't think there are any theories. Most have just stated facts. United are slow, ponderous, Boring, pass the ball more backwards and sideways than forwards. Yes, but why? Apparently Van Gaal wants them to play that way. Possession 9/10ths of the law and all that. Well, the last two games, they've been losing the possession game, and came out not-losers, but they could have easily lost those games too. So - repeat question at the top of this para.

Lets look at the facts as they are. Defence - the best in the league in terms of goals conceded and clean sheets. That's good right? Well, I don't have any stats that take a closer look, but I'm willing to bet there could be something worth looking into at an individual level there. Van Gaal has gone through multiple combinations of his central defence. Smalling has been his rock, staying out of the injury list long enough, and putting up several match saving performances. Along with De Gea, he is one of the two players whose performances has received praise. So why hasn't he made it to any fantasy eleven's or team of the week X1's. His most consistent partner in the heart of that defence is Daley Blind. This does not inspire confidence in me. Blind is a trier, and at times distributes the ball like a God, but he's slow, and I'm yet to see him play in a position that he can call his own. He has, at various times of his brief United career played at left back, winger, central midfield, and now central defence. He does what he's asked to the best of his ability, and the trouble with that of course is that ability is severely limited. I still think he has his utility, but his best position may be holding midfielder just in front of the back four. He's no Matic, but his skill in long range passing might just work in his favour.

The others (Jones, McNair, Rojo) either spend most of their time on the injured list, or when available don't convince anyone with their abilities. Jones seems to have been so overwhelmed by Sir Alex Ferguson's claims a few years ago that he was the next big hope, that he's lost that edge he used to have. He's a ghost of his former self, and one only hopes someone can talk to him and get him back to performing as he can. He's young, and hopefully will give himself the chance to get back to being a true United player. He is one of the few that I feel still retain that quality. McNair is young enthusiastic and sometimes makes stirring runs into the penalty area, but his defensive game is seriously flawed, and even if he wants to make an impact as a defender from the flanks, his crossing is woeful. Rojo has his good days, and if he can stay fit, should develop into a great defender, but its a stretch to think that he will.

The wing backs or full backs then. Luke Shaw is a class act, but even he hasn't really shown any sign of a resurgence of the Southampton form. He was beginning to have a say in games before his horrific injury though. One can only hope that when he comes back, he does so with the success that Aaron Ramsey did. It is never easy to come back from long term injury though. Just ask Jack Wishere. Antonio Valencia, also a trier, also injured, but effective at times, and at best. Damian made a good start to his United career, for a long time proving to be Van Gaal's best signing, till Martial came along, but even he's had an uncertain time down that right flank. His crosses still leave a lot to be desired, and defensively, a lack of stature and pace has been his bogey. I feel he is still getting used to the pace of the EPL, though if he ever will attune himself enough to form an integral part of this team, I'm not quite sure...Did have a decent game against Liverpool though, was one of the few who did.

Ashley Young has been used as a full back, and wing back this season, with mixed results. The best attacking defender of the lot, he hasn't been able to command a place in the midfield, though his performances in the defence have been better than one can expect. The problem with him is that he requires space to operate in, and when pressed, like he was by Moreno yesterday, is not that effective.

So, an average defence at best. Best lineup for me - Smalling and Jones/Rojo at center, Darmian/Valencia and Shaw/Rojo at the flanks. Do we need to buy? Yes, one center, and one for the right full position.

The midfield still remains a problem. I had hoped Schneiderlin would at least prove to be part of the solution, either as a holding player, or as someone breaking up play in the midfield. He's been OK in part, but mostly he looks like a slightly faster version of Carrick, without the passing ability that the former Spurs man had. He doesn't dictate play as he used to when at Southampton, much like Shaw. The transition to a higher level of club play hasn't quite happened for him. Shweinsteiger was less of a disappointment, as I, like most followers of the game, had known that this was a downgraded version of the German midfield maestro. Apart from waving him arms around a lot and making some misjudged tackles, we've not seen all that much from him. Carrick himself hasn't played all that much, but when he does, its hard to see why he doesn't. He's about one of the only people who can still pass through a crowded midfield with some accuracy, but his speed is representative of the overall team's. This could very possibly be the last season for him at United. It will be sad to see him go, but if United want to challenge for titles in the near future, his must be a back we will be forced to see.

We've seen Fellaini play in central midfield too this season, and Herrera at times, but I don't think that's even worth discussing. Some say Rooney might slot in there soon, and that is eminently possible, but this area remains a sore point, right from the point Scholes called it a day. With what we currently have, in a 4-2-3-1 set up, I'd have Schneiderlin and Blind play here with Lingard, Rooney and Ashley Young in front of them. I love Mata and Herrera, and in a 4-3-3 could see Herrera, Blind and Mata slot into the midfield 3, but this is not a structure Van Gaal plays with a lot.

I stopped writing here for a few days, just because it seemed like I was in the middle of a futile exercise. Which would be fine, but someday when I read this back, I don't want to say I couldn't quite say what I wanted to. In that time, we've had another frustrating game, losing to Southampton, LVG thus losing (once again) to his once-protegee Koeman. No matter how you describe it - boring, insipid, uninspired, staid....it still doesn't begin to describe how desperately bad they have looked this season.

So, again, what's the problem. Is it the team, that is inferior, or is it the manager's fault for not being able to coax a consistent performance from the team. Its a bit of both, IMHO. the team as it stands does not have a single player that I'd have in any World XI. De Gea just about makes the cut, Smalling and Martial have had a few good games, but most of this team just doesn't cut it. But that has never been a problem with United teams. United have never had a team that were world beaters in the vein that we see the Madrids and Barcelonas of old, but they have been United teams. Manchester United teams are used to winning, used to scoring goals, used to having things their own way. And the players carried that swagger onto the field, played above themselves, blew our minds with their come from behind, score in the Fergie time wins. Players like Roy Keane, Eric Cantona, Denis , Gary and Phil Neville, Andy Cole, Ole Gunnar Solskaer, Dwight Yorke...the list can go on. You wouldn't find any of these names on the top 10 of most football fans, but ask a United fan of the 90s and these names will figure every time in the team they wanted to see at the OT. Players that gave more than their all, and excelled in pressure situations, came up with moves that would seem impossible for players of their limitations. Which of the current crop fits that description? Teams arrive at Old Trafford not fearing the XI that face them; instead they find a group of players good on paper, extremely expensive, but as effective as nuts and bolts would be (suspect that's what the fans are calling most of the players these days).

The spirit of the United player needs to come back, and that won't happen with LVG in charge. He knows nothing about inspiring the players into giving more than they can, and he knows little about what United players used to stand for. Listening to him expressing surprise at how the fans are reacting is enough proof of this. It may sound naive, but technique and process can only account for so much. In the end, it's what is inside the footballer that loves being called a Red Devil that will lead this team back to days of yore. 

Wednesday, January 13, 2016

That name!

Premam! what a misnomer. The image that this word generates had me convinced that the movie by that name would not be much more than a sappy love story, albeit with high production values. Well, that taught me, didn't it? Saw the movie and was overwhelmed by how wrong I was in my assumptions. Premam is a modern, light, funny, breezy  look at life and love. Ostensibly, it tries to reason out the meaning of love, but it ends up talking about everything around as well.

To summarise the plot to a sentence, it is a story of a young man who falls in love, loses it in crushing manner, almost to the point of thinking life was over, only to find it again, and discover that one love is not the only thing in life. I would be tempted to call it a common of age movie but that's not quite it. Yes, it delineates the trials of love in three distinct stages of his life. The school romance, the college love that seemed to be 'the one', and then the one he engages in at a more 'mature' stage. The film doesn't make judgments, no messages about maturity being the final catalyst of true love, it just takes us through the journey of this particular young man. His life may or may not be the norm, it may not reflect everyman's journey, but it belongs to George, it involves his friends at every stage, it showcases the change in the thought process (though many things remain the same) as he ages. As a young boy studying for his plus 2 (11th to 12th-not clear which), his love for a girl he sees in one of his rare forays into church is childish, innocent, and impossible to all but him and his do-all friends. This is the one phase of the film itself that drags a little, even though it does introduce some interesting characters, generates situations that are identifiably amusing, and lends our hero his first taste of rejection.  The second phase sees George bulldozing his way through college, then stumbling into love, this time with a substitute teacher. At least this time, there is reciprocation, and everything is hunky dory, nice and pink. The end to this love story is not pleasant, a lot more crushing to the spirit than George had ever bargained for, and this seemingly toughens him for the next phase of life - one where he is more responsible, less of a 'bore', as his childhood buddy remarks. This love seems destined to fail too, unless...

I liked this film a lot, not having had a lot of expectations, even though this has been uniformly well received -both a commercial and critical success. I can see why though. There is a nice young feel about the movie, a certain freshness that emanates from every gesture, every song, every irreverent dialogue. It feels real, though  not when when you stop to think about it. It makes no heavy conclusions, the director keeps it light at all times, even with the seemingly serious stuff - like that interaction between a drunk George and friends when they argue energetically about his plan of going back  and declaring his 'truth' to his amnesia struck 'true love'. And when (in what is a delightful little cameo by the director himself) an abusive ex fiancee receives his comeuppance from George and co, and is not sure what he's got it for at the end of it. There are many moments like this, several cameos, and so many small sub-plots that you could get distracted easily. But I think that was the point Alphonse was trying to make. Love isn't the be-all and end-all. Life goes on all around it. The little events that keep happening around him are not distractors, they're just there. George, and his friends and love at the time aren't the only things that happen in George's life. Speaking of which, some of the stuff felt anecdotal - the balding inept professor, the PE instructor with a large appetite, the long list of suitors for one girl (she's not that hot either), the unrequited loves in college, the cool father - all felt a little personal. And not out of place - though that bit about the love-lorn suitors milling around the gate of the young school girl was pushed almost to the level of creep.

So, good film, one I've enjoyed in this language after a long time. Alphonse did Neram before this, which was quite a good effort, and now this, so this makes me hopeful of more to come. With that thought then...