James Milner held 'amicable' talks with Aston Villa on Monday and will travel with the Midlands club on their pre-season trip to Portugal.
Villa boss Martin O'Neill revealed last week that the England midfielder wanted to join long-time suitors Manchester City.
The big-spending Eastlands club had an initial £20million rejected before the World Cup.
Milner was reported to be upset that O'Neill had made public his desire to leave Villa Park.
However, the pair and several representatives held face-to-face talks on Monday before the club released a statement.
"James Milner trained with the rest of the Villa squad today at Bodymoor Heath," it read.
FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast. FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast.
By subscribing, you agree to receive newsletter and marketing emails, and accept Valnet’s Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. You can unsubscribe anytime.
"He and the manager, along with chief executive Paul Faulkner and the player's representative, Matthew Buck, had an amicable conversation and, while James will not play in tomorrow's game at Walsall, he will fly with the squad to Portugal on Wednesday ahead of the Guadiana Cup in which Villa will compete with Benfica and Feyenoord this weekend."
Milner, who still has two years remaining on his existing contract, has made 90 appearances for Villa since arriving in a £13million deal from Newcastle United in July 2008.Subscribe to Football FanCast News Headlines by Email
Blackburn have put an £18 million price tag on the head of star Junior Hoilett in an attempt to fend off interest from potential suitors Newcastle and Tottenham the Mirror reports.
Rovers boss Steve Kean is desperate to keep the winger at Ewood Park after his impressive performances this season as the club continues it’s battle to avoid relegation.
The 21-year-old’s contract runs out at the end of the season and has yet to commit to a new deal with Tottenham and Newcastle both keeping tabs on his situation.
Spurs boss Harry Redknapp has been a long-term admirer of the Canadian whilst Magpies manager Alan Pardew reportedly made an enquiry about his availability during the summer.
The clubs Indian owners aren’t prepared to sell him unless their hefty valuation is matched whilst Kean is convinced he can talk Hoilett into prolonging his stay at Ewood.
Negotiations over a new contract have hit a snag with a dispute over over the size of a potential sell-on fee causing the player to renege on signing a deal worth around £2 million-a-year.
FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast. FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast.
By subscribing, you agree to receive newsletter and marketing emails, and accept Valnet’s Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. You can unsubscribe anytime.
It’s thought they are prepared to let his contract run out if they have to and take the risk of going to a tribunal to determine what fee they will receive should he decide to move clubs.
Blackpool manager Ian Holloway has insisted he will send his team out to attack when they host reigning league champions Chelsea on Monday.Chelsea suffered a dip in form around the new year period but appear to be nearing their best again after beating English Premier League leaders Manchester United at Stamford Bridge on Tuesday.Blackpool were hammered 4-0 by Chelsea in west London in September and also shipped six against Arsenal in August.But despite those heavy defeats, Holloway will not encourage his side to sit back when they host Chelsea.”I’ll have to come up with something to try and hurt them and obviously we’ll try to attack because we want to win the game,” he said.But Blackpool will be without top scorer DJ Campbell and captain Charlie Adam, who are both suspended for the clash.And Holloway admitted: “I don’t think we’re the same team without DJ Campbell or Charlie Adam so I’m going to have to look for some different strengths in the players I’ve got left to pick.” “If you watched us last Saturday (when Campbell was sent off early on and Adam was suspended) we didn’t look anything like our usual selves and we weren’t playing the usual diagonal balls without Charlie.””It’s a good job we’ve still got him. He’ll be back in after this game because he’s an integral part of what we do.”On Chelsea’s mixed form, the Blackpool manager added: “I think they’re in fine fettle. They had a sticky spell.””The club has moved on and have just bought somebody (Fernando Torres) for 50 million pounds. Do I agree with that? Probably not. Can I argue with it? No. But they have and I have to deal with that.”There is good news for Holloway regarding some of the squad’s injured players. Defender Stephen Crainey could return in time for the clash after recovering from an ankle ligament injury he suffered in January.Meanwhile, midfielder Malaury Martin and defender Chris Basham are also in contention after featuring for the reserves during the week.
At this World Cup so far it’s been easy to see the impact that one attacking fullback can have: Philipp Lahm in Germany’s 4-0 group win against Australia, Maicon against North Korea and Chile, and Sergio Ramos in last night’s match against Portugal. The advent of attacking fullbacks goes back to the 40s and 50s but, for the younger generation, it is Cafu and Roberto Carlos who best represent the type and their memory certainly lives on in the game today.
In 2006 it was Grosso and Zambrotta, in 2002 it was Cafu and Roberto Carlos, in 1998 it was Lizarazu and Thuram, and in 1994 it was Jorginho and Branco. The team winning the World Cup has boasted the two fullbacks in the finest form – albeit a circular argument. It was Brazil who first shocked the world football consciousness by outmoding the W-M following their 1950 World Cup final defeat to Uruguay and shifting to a four-man defence. A natural progression of having four defenders resulted in at least one of the full backs being responsible for complimenting attacking play.
What’s interesting to note is how opposing formations of the era facilitated the attacking forays of fullbacks i.e. when a flat four-man defence lined up against a 4-4-2 or 3-5-2 it was the fullbacks who had the space to run forward, relatively unopposed. But now less and less teams field a 4-4-2 (especially a flat one) and it has led to a diminished capacity for both fullbacks to advance. So what we’re seeing, again, is something similar to the 1970 Brazil outfit; the advent of one attacking full back and another more disciplined one, tucking in when the former is out of position to provide balance is precisely how Brazil operated in 1970 (Carlos Alberto moved forward and Everaldo tucked in). Lahm/Badstuber, Ramos/Capdevilla, Maicon/Bastos and (to a lesser extent) Van der Wiel/Van Bronckhorst all work in a similar mode.
Players like Roberto Carlos needed to be addressed, tactically, and the natural choice was to deploy an attacking winger in a bid to pen the fullback to defensive duties. But as we can see from Manchester United’s 2003 encounter with Madrid at the Bernabeu, the danger is for the fullback to continue his attack regardless. Madrid played supremely well, beating United 3-1. When it works it is devastating but the dangers are very clear: Walcott dismantled Croatia’s attacking left back Pranjic in Zagreb two years ago by pushing up very high and utilising his frightening pace. The prominence of attacking fullbacks has led to a second method of dampening their threat; the deployment of defensive forwards. Park Ji Sung and Dirk Kuyt have grown in stature over the past three or four years because they are specialists, to a degree, and are prepared to track the forward inclinations of a Maicon, Alves, Lahm, Cole or Evra.
What is intriguing, from a defensive point of view for the fullback, will be how a team wishes to address the issue of Robinho in the current Brazil setup. Instead of being a left sided winger he operates as an auxiliary forward out wide with zero defensive responsibility. The danger for a team will be if they try to call Dunga’s bluff on that flank and push their right back forward to gain the numerical advantage in attack because it plays into Brazil’s counter attacking strengths. Or the fullback may be instructed to sit defensively, leaving others to contribute in attack. There is also the option of a three man midfield shifting laterally to address the lopsided shape, creating very interesting choices for Van Marwijk; Kuyt will probably be used on Maicon’s wing and Robben on Robinho’s side, leaving Bastos and Van der Wiel to marshal the most important areas on the pitch.
The fullbacks’ ability to maraud has lessened since the 2002 Brazil World Cup victory but Roberto Carlos and Cafu are still very much in the memory of every team that utilise the tactic.
If you enjoyed this, you can follow me on Twitter
FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast. FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast.
By subscribing, you agree to receive newsletter and marketing emails, and accept Valnet’s Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. You can unsubscribe anytime.
Early on in the summer when it was clear that Liverpool were in the market for a quality left-back a number of names began to arise. There was Arsenal ’s Gael Clichy who ended up at Manchester City and Celtic’s Emilio Izaguirre who suffered a serious injury and probably won’t be back before Christmas. Then there was more left-field choices like Benfica’s Fabio Coentrao who ended up at Real Madrid.
Although most of the names listed in conjunction with the left-back position at Liverpool belonged to quality players, I believe that they ended up signing the best possible player for the job in the form of Jose Enrique .
He was absolutely superb once more against United at the weekend, showcasing both the offensive and defensive side of his game.
Defensively he’s been a rock. He’s very difficult to get past, well built and will usually win in battles of strength and determination and can also put in a good tackle. Despite his stocky build he’s surprisingly pacey and can usually keep up with whoever is attacking him down the wing.
This in combination with his excellent reading of the game and his technical ability make him very difficult to contend with.
I’m particularly impressed with his crossing ability. It was my belief that Downing and Henderson were brought to the club to provide ammunition for the likes of Andy Carroll, but it seems the man actually providing the chances is Enrique. He flashed in a couple of great balls at the weekend and I’d like to see more Liverpool players making runs into the box to attempt to connect with his crosses.
It may well be early days in his Liverpool career but he already seems to have improved on his Newcastle days and he must be up there with Leighton Baines vying for the role of number one left-back in the Premier League.
Considering that Enrique was said to have cost Liverpool around £6m and Baines would have cost upwards of £15m I’d say the club picked up a genuine bargain. He’s got real quality and I struggle to see any player who could have been brought in for a similar price and provided as much as Enrique has and will do.
Surely he’s Liverpool’s bargain signing of the summer?
Article courtesy of Harry Cloke from This is Futbol
[divider]
FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast. FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast.
By subscribing, you agree to receive newsletter and marketing emails, and accept Valnet’s Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. You can unsubscribe anytime.
So if you want the opportunity to win this fantastic prize on Saturday then click on the banner below – what have you got to lose?
Stoke boss Tony Pulis has blamed a ‘shocking’ decision from the linesman for his side’s 1-1 draw with West Brom on Monday.The Potters led 1-0 after a Rory Delap header on 53 minutes and looked set for victory until on-loan striker Carlos Vela equalised for West Brom with three minutes remaining.
However, replays suggested both Vela and fellow striker Peter Odemwingie were offside in the lead-up to the goal, something which drew Pulis’ ire.
Pulis told Sky Sports: “We’re disappointed but we’ve not played well tonight. I thought that’s as poor as we’ve played all season.”
“Give West Brom credit for coming back at us after we’d scored the goal but then looking at their goal, it’s a shocking decision by the linesman.”
“If he (the linesman) can’t get that right then what’s he doing officiating at our level? It’s a poor, poor decision.”
“If it’s on the other side or far away whatever then fine but when it’s that close and he’s looking at the line, as he is – I’ve just seen the pictures now, he’s looking at the line – they’ve got to get those decisions right, they’re very, very important decisions.”
Vela could have won the match for the Baggies late on, forcing Stoke goalkeeper Asmir Begovic into two excellent saves, and West Brom manager Roy Hodgson said his side had deserved a point even if their goal was controversial.
“Whenever you have a goal like that against you, you consider yourself unlucky,” Hodgson said.
“I couldn’t say whether or not it was (offside) but whenever you concede that type of goal you have the right to be frustrated or angry.”
“With the number of chances we created and the number of opportunities I think one goal is the least we could expect for our efforts.”
Hodgson is yet to have a win since replacing Roberto Di Matteo as manager at the Hawthorns, but the former Liverpool and Fulham boss said he was happy with the result which keeps West Brom one point above the relegation zone.
“I think you have got to be pleased when you come to Stoke and get a point,” Hodgson said.
“At times you thought we could have even taken all three points, but it was a good team performance and I am very happy with that.”
“I am happy with a point also because at least it keeps us going in the right direction.”
After the Chelsea Pitch Owners defeat of Roman Abramovich’s plans to buy back Stamford Bridge in order to redevelop the stadium are Chelsea fans considering it a victory or a missed opportunity? And do fans have the right to put sentiment ahead of the progress of their club? The vote on the issue, which required 75% of the vote for Abramovich’s plans to be ratified, fell short by around 15%, showing that the majority were still in favour of selling the land to the oligarch.
The issue of sacrificing history for the sake of the expansion of the club is something that Arsenal fans know only too well. When the plans for Ashburton Grove were proposed they were met with mixed feelings. The abandonment of Highbury, a beautiful art deco stadium steeped in history, was not a happy thought for many fans but the desire to be able to financially compete with their rivals lead many to believe that it was a decision that had to be made.
If you ask the fans now I think that you’ll find that most wished they were still in their old ground. However this could be for a number of reasons: they haven’t won anything since they’ve been at The Emirates, ticket prices are higher than ever and they haven’t yet reaped the financial benefits because they’re still paying off the loans taken to fund the stadium. At the end of the day though it has arguably secured the future of the club. Arsenal have always been a big club but their form in recent years could have had more lasting effects were they not to have a stadium that would always make them an attractive club to buy, and a club that can guarantee big revenues. I feel that the complaints about the stadium will be long forgotten in twenty years time when the new stadium will have its own history and the club will be more profitable than ever.
However I think that the circumstances for every club are different and the decision to move on is not always going to be right for every club.
[ad_pod id=’unruly-2′ align=’left’]
Chelsea
The Chelsea Pitch Owners originally bought the club in an effort to safeguard the security of the club, originally from property developers and now from any other potential suitors that may not have the long-term interests of the club at heart. I must say I think it’s an admirable attempt by the CPO to stand up for themselves in the face of one of the most powerful men in football and a man who has guided Chelsea to the most successful period in their history. On the one hand it may seem as though they are preventing the progression of their club by confining themselves to an average sized stadium but on the other hands they appear to be taking the responsible angle. Should Abramovic decide at any point that he no longer wants to own Chelsea and sells the club then had the CPO given in they would almost definitely regret their actions. There are definite dangers in being owned and run by a singular wealthy individual and in retaining their stake in Stamford Bridge the CPO have retained an element of power amongst the supporters.
Tottenham
Tottenham’s plans to obtain and redevelop the Olympic stadium have obviously ended in failure. And many of the fans are not disappointed. That is not to say that all of them are, but a majority appeared to be in opposition to the idea of moving the home of their club: something they constantly like to remind Arsenal fans that they did when they upped sticks and left Woolwich for more northern pastures. Tottenham’s is an interesting situation. Their progress in recent years seems to merit a larger ground. They are one of the most improved teams in recent years but they run the risk of sliding back down if they cannot financially guarantee their place at the top. They have arguably the best squad they have ever had but it will not last forever and when players do start to move on they need to ensure they are in a position to compete financially both in terms of transfer fees and wages. The obvious answer to this is to move stadiums; but where to? The ideal situation would be to redevelop White Hart Lane but for numerous reasons this has not taken off. What’s more: where would they play whilst this was being redeveloped? At the Emirates? Unlikely.
People have accused Spurs fans of being sentimental in their aversion to moving further east and whilst it does make sense financially it would truly be a shame for the club and its supporters. Football clubs are about more than just football. They are the pillars of local communities, they have come to define certain areas and supporters, with the exception of most Man Utd fans, have strong ties to the area in which the club exists. To abandon north London would be to abandon a large section of the fan base. Arsenal was fortunate enough to build Ashburton Grove next to Highbury. Not all clubs will be so lucky.
Liverpool
FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast. FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast.
By subscribing, you agree to receive newsletter and marketing emails, and accept Valnet’s Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. You can unsubscribe anytime.
Liverpool chairmen Ian Ayre stated in July that due to numerous environmental, property acquisition and statutory issues the redevelopment of Anfield into a 60,000 seat stadium is extremely unlikely to happen. The redevelopment of their current ground would have cost the new owner s a considerably lower amount than the proposed move to Stanley Park. Liverpool fans will be reluctant to leave a ground that is one of the most famous throughout the world, both for its atmosphere and its history. It is totally understandable that fans would have reserves about moving. However I think that Liverpool are in a relatively fortunate situation in that their ground is not as small as someone like Tottenham’s. the immediate future is not such a pressing issue and despite not winning a league title for over twenty years they have managed to maintain their competitive level. Moreover, they have an extremely large fan base abroad, which provides revenues that other teams definitely lack.
The decision to move grounds is never an easy one. Particularly for supporters who have been going to their beloved ground their entire lives. The prospect of moving to a new stadium after fifty years of going to your favourite ground is not enviable. However fans have to realise the sentimentality and history do not guarantee you a future at football’s top table. Every club must find its own solution, and every fan must be willing to compromise.
Follow Hamish on Twitter @H_Mackay
[divider] FREE football ad that pays you to view ads [ad_pod id=’qs-2′ align=’left’]
A wonder goal from Wayne Rooney sealed victory in the Manchester derby and extended their lead at the top of the Premier League. Elsewhere West Ham came back from 3-0 down to grab a point at the Hawthorns, while Tottenham’s 3rd win on the trot sees the North Londoners move back into the Champions League places.
In the papers this morning there have been a mixed bag of stories that include Fergie out to land his man this summer; Chelsea eye Arsenal’s chief scout to replace Arnesen, while Julian Dicks to join the Hammers coaching staff.
*
Fergie out to land his man – Sky Sports
Chelsea want Arsenal scout to replace Arnesen – Daily Telegraph
Manchester United’s £1.8bn asking price a put-off for Qataris – Daily Mail
Dicks to join Hammers staff – Sky Sports
Spurs lead the way in summer fight for Ipswich starlet Connor Wickham – People
Massey walks line again – Daily Telegraph
West Ham to face Olympic Stadium fight over moving into Orient’s patch – Daily Mail
Roma lining up Ancelotti as Ranieri eyes Prem return – Mirror
Exclusive: FA Cup Final switches to 5.30pm start in 2013 – People
Baines focused on self improvement – Daily Telegraph
[divider]
FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast. FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast.
By subscribing, you agree to receive newsletter and marketing emails, and accept Valnet’s Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. You can unsubscribe anytime.
The latest England squad announcement has thrown up few surprises, and you can guarantee there was a whole host of players left disappointed at the decision of Fabio Capello, as they were overlooked once more. It has been suggested in the past that there is somewhat of a ‘big club’ bias in regards to England selection, but does it really matter what club you play for?
Scott Parker suggested that his recent move to Tottenham was down to his need to be selected for the England Euro 2012 squad. He made huge strides with the international set-up last year, despite the fact that West Ham finished bottom of the table, but he believed that he needed to play Premier League football to be a genuine contender for selection. The gulf is not really that massive between the two divisions, but history does suggest that not many players from the Championship have earned an England call up. However, playing Premier League football is no guarantee that you will get a chance with the international side, even if you merit a place, as players from certain clubs seem to be continually overlooked.
Parker was selected in the latest squad, but others have faced rejection once more and will wonder what more they can do to impress Capello, and get a chance at international level. Stoke’s Ryan Shawcross has been exceptional for the last two seasons, yet he has never received an international cap. He has captained his side into Europe, dominated and led from the back during their superb start to the season, and has been playing consistently well for the last two years, but he has seemingly not impressed Capello. You have to wonder if he had moved to Liverpool-one of the clubs linked with him over the summer-whether Capello would have come calling.
[ad_pod id=’unruly-2′ align=’left’]
Shawcross believes that his clubs success this season could push him into Capello’s Euro 2012 squad, but past history would suggest he is destined to miss out. Unfortunately players at certain clubs just don’t seem to get the recognition they deserve. It is also interesting to note that Peter Crouch has been overlooked in the latest squad and it will be interesting to see if he gets a look into the squad if he impresses at Stoke.
Capello seems to have prioritised youth with his selections, with players like Phil Jones and Danny Welbeck selected in the squad. Going with youth and giving the future players a chance is definitely a good move, but the players must at least merit their place. When players like Tom Cleverley and Chis Smalling were called up after barely any time on the pitch for Manchester United, you have to question if there is a ‘big club’ bias, especially when you have the excellent Roger Johnson, Scott Dann and Matt Jarvis who barely get a look in.
Players who are in form and playing well should be picked, regardless of who they are playing for. Sitting on the bench at a top four club should not give you a divine right, or pass into the England squad. Surely it is better for Capello to select somebody like Shawcross, who is playing week in week out and impressing, than someone who is constantly in and out of their side, or someone who is not in form.
It seems as though players at the bigger clubs have an automatic path into the England squad, while players at other clubs can have years of good form and often get overlooked, or take considerably longer to earn a call up. If they were to play for a bigger club, they would be considered on a much more frequent basis and it is a shame for certain players that they never get a chance with England, because of where they play their football.
Do you think there is a ‘big club’ bias with regard to England selection? Let me know your thoughts by commenting below, or following me on Twitter @LaurenRutter for more comment and debate.
FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast. FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast.
By subscribing, you agree to receive newsletter and marketing emails, and accept Valnet’s Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. You can unsubscribe anytime.
Holger Osieck was left to rue missed opportunities after Australia fell to Japan’s extra-time goal in the final of the Asian Cup.
The Socceroos enjoyed plenty of chances over the course of 120 minutes at Doha’s Khalifa Stadium, but were unable to breach Japan’s defence.
A technically accomplished volley from Tadinari Lee in the second half of extra time proved the difference, and Australia’s German coach could only watch on helpless after his players failed to find the net.
“We had our opportunities and what is always encouraging is the way we play and we create opportunities,” Osieck said.
“However, it is crucial to convert them and later on in the game it backfired and that is a problem. We had to be more clinical in our finishing and it’s not enough to win a game if you don’t score.”
“I’m very proud of my players, their performance and their attitude. I give them credit and really feel sorry for the boys that they didn’t get the reward for their efforts.”
“You can imagine in our dressing room it’s not a great atmosphere, everybody’s really sad.”
“All in all, our team represented Australia in a great way.”
Sanfrecce Hiroshima forward Lee found himself unmarked inside the box to strike the late winner, but Osieck refused to point fingers after the lapse.
“It was late into extra time and there was fatigue and it was probably the only positional mistake that we made,” he said.
“It was a very costly one and I don’t want to blame anyone. It was definitely not our regular defensive positioning but to have a go at any of the players is inappropriate.”
“We had six games in an intense tournament and twice we had to go into extra time so if there was no fatigue, then the players must be robots.”
FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast. FootballFanCast General Stay ahead in the world of football analysis, commentary, and fan insights with FootballFancast.
By subscribing, you agree to receive newsletter and marketing emails, and accept Valnet’s Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. You can unsubscribe anytime.
Australia captain Lucas Neil echoed the thoughts of his coach after seeing the team’s efforts undone by a single, costly error.
“We didn’t punish Japan when we had the half-chances and then one lapse in concentration punished us,” Neil said.
“It was probably due to fatigue in extra time but at this level it’s probably only going to take one mistake to win or lose the game.”