Aloha to women with no ties to men that I know well that way there’ll be no lies (or they’ll just be comparatively fewer). We were all watching (except me since I was watching the Proteas trying to level the ODI series against the Aussies- which we did, in style, SUCK IT MATILDA!) on that ‘dreadful’ day when world football was turned on its head and the ‘minnows’ of Manchester chewed the asses off their much more favoured big brothers of United. Shock? Maybe. Undeserved? F*ck NO!
Vidic’s absence, Evans’ red, Mancini’s somewhat fortuitous De Jong/Toure swap which in turn gave rise to City’s fluidity in ball movement (all of which contributed to the score being as huge as it is, as opposed to the victory itself which was never really in much doubt) yadi yadi yada is not what this is about. I’ll leave that to the ‘experts’. What I’m more concerned with is what this victory means to world football. At the risk of sounding exactly like I said I wouldn’t, here goes I. In the context of the attainment of victory, what is the link between coaching tactics and talent on the field? Before I answer this question I feel it necessary to clarify that I’m in no way trying to imply, insinuate or suggest that the amount of talent at Roberto Mancini’s disposal on the field exceeds that which Sir Alex has. I AM SAYING IT OUTRIGHT, IT DOES.
Sir Alex has always had the ability to find the perfect combination of skill at playing a certain position and money to buy the particular player symmetry with the rest of the squad. Now this is not really a substitute for pure talent and general ballplaying skills, but he’s always been able to make it work bar a few exceptions. It can also be argued that the likelihood of victory is exponentially increased if the ‘team’ plays as a ‘team’ as opposed to being a conglomerate of really good players who cannot gel.
Having said that, I will say this, MONEY CAN BUY YOU HAPPINESS (or at least success, plus, not having money also won’t buy you happiness). With FIFA’s financial fair play rules being the joke that they are and all the financial muscle at Man City’s disposal as well last season’s performance at the business end of their league campaign which saw them qualifying for the Champion’s league, this is really not much of a surprise seeing as their biggest obstacle in attracting big players was their absence in the Champion’s league.
Tactics can only go so far, the rest is up to the players. That’s when it becomes really important to have a Sergio Aguero in the opposition box than a Wellbeck for example. Apart from the obvious gap in experience in the top level, ball playing skills and pace Aguero would probably be a good bet in producing the goods due to pure footballing (not a word by the way) ability.
Which begs the question, where is football headed? What with football clubs allowed a lot of leeway under the ‘you can only spend as much as you make’ guise (which I must admit is kind of fair) and all the paradigm/power shift(s). The answer- I’ve got absolutely no idea, but as a gunner (an Arsenal fan to the football challenged) I am inclined to say it’s going to be intriguing either way.
For now though, I do not really think that the shift in the balance of power is big enough to be considered a significant paradigm shift. As a side note, I really do believe that Liverpool will get back to the ‘top four’ and Manchester City, Tottenham Hotspur and Aston Villa will go back to being considered ‘threats to the top four’. Time will tell.
*This post was written by gameless after the game but never posted*