Money is: power, success, fame, notoriety and the worst thing to happen to football.

The transfer window closed amongst a sigh of relief for many football fans this summer. It's ironic that the very window brought about to help clubs build and maintain their squads is now fast becoming a destructive force. At any point if you pick up one of the shoddier tabloids you find their back page laced with large sums of money being splashed throughout the world of football. Much as a reflection of the world today, whilst the richer clubs continue to get richer, the poorer (for use of a lesser word) clubs fail to catch them. 

So what's the solution? Well, unless you know a Sheikh or a Russian oil baron there's very little other option. In any case, where does the line of control between the owner and manager end, or for that matter start? The whole situation of ownership is problematic in its very ideals. It seems almost pathetic that football has in fact become closer to it's American counterpart sports, where franchise clubs rule all and consistent movement of players is a given (Something too I will later address). In June 2003 Roman Abramovich initiated this ownership trend by buying Chelsea Football Club. His initial spending the next summer was close to £90million. Incredible figures, yet we have become accustomed to see far superior from the blue side of Manchester. 

The point I'm trying to raise is how this spending has actually started to affect the modern world of football. In fact the reason I was finally persuaded to write something on the matter lay in the hands of a certain Zenit St. Petersburg and the Brazilian, Hulk. He was quoted saying to various media sources earlier in the summer that the door was open for a transfer, fair enough. What he also mentioned, however, is that he wanted to play in either England or Spain for what he reasoned to be their global audience and popularity. Ironic then, that after Chelsea were reported to have chased him all summer (which could possibly be rumours) he ended the summer being a 50million euro signing for Zenit. Try telling me it's not about the money. Unsurprisingly the figures for his new contract have yet to be released, ground-breaking as I'm sure they may be; what baffles me further is how his dream move can suddenly change so vividly. In some way this proves how far, backwards perhaps, football has come. When a matter of money alone can solely determine a players intention then a real problem is truly at hand. It's all well owners offering the money but it's something else for the players to actually grab at it, and how. How can a player of Hulk's obvious talent turn down the European Champions' interest for position in an albeit lacklustre league in Eastern Europe. Where, can you tell me, is the real ambition there? Apparently he has yet to rule out a further move, and this somewhat makes the whole situation worse. Far from developing a loyal bond with fans, he wishes to use Zenit as some sort of leapfrog. To be that big fish in the ultimately tiny pond that he has now joined. 

This recent move encompasses almost everything wrong about the modern ideals of football. Has player power truly got to this stage? Money rules now, that's evident for after Abramovich came the Sheikh revolution at Manchester City. As a United fan even typing the rival name stings still; for what they 'achieved' last season is built on false ideals. The current argument against United supporters claims that the Red Devils spend just as much money as their big budget-ed rivals. This, according to recently released figures is far from the truth though as a recent 'BBC Sport' article shows: 

• 1. Chelsea 673

• 2. Man City 572

• 3. Liverpool 414

• 4. Man United 352

• 5. Tottenham 350

• 6. Arsenal 214

• 7. Aston Villa 201

• 8. Sunderland 187

• 9. Newcastle 174

• 10. Everton 129

• 11. West Ham 123

These are the spending figures for Premier League clubs over the last ten years. Now, as you look at it one can assume that money directly equals success as the leaders of this table would suggest on last seasons Champions League winning form. Yet, does one title and an FA Cup for City really justify spending £572million pounds? In that time Manchester United spent £352million and have won several League titles, a Champions League, one World Club Championship, one FA Cup and three League Cup titles too (I won't mention the various Charity Shield victories). True United had Ferguson, and it has only been recently that City have finally settled on a manager in Mancini, something they appear to be sticking by too. Looking at the list in third position we encounter an incredible anomaly in the form of Liverpool. The Merseyside club show that money definitely is not everything (Aquilani for instance). Okay, that was a bit of a tangent, but you see the point. Chelsea's success can only be accounted for by their spending, with exactly the same going for City. 

Does money, therefore equate to success? Without the case of Liverpool, it could be apparent. It's hard, however to call something that has had so much money thrown at it in some cases a 'success'. Does winning so little in such time make the situation any better? I think not, others would strongly disagree. It's true there has been a turnaround at Manchester City, but could any manager with a seemingly endlessly deep pocket to pick out of achieve exactly the same, if not better? What City have done has, in many senses ruined football for true football fans. Money shatters 'loyalty' and drives forth the greed from inside. Take Nasri and Clichy, were they fazed to move after Wenger brought them onto the world stage? Not a chance, not a bit grateful. How many players in that City side could you truly call loyal? Joe Hart, Micah Richards perhaps, yet in the case of Adam Johnson his loyalty was his downfall as he postponed his move away from the Etihad in the pursuit of an eventual breakthrough. It would seem that, although it attracts superstars, money makes the very grass roots system largely ineffective. Why bring up hot prospects when you can buy anyone you want.

So where does this leave us? This post is fragmented in itself but maybe that reflects the nature of the game today. I would, for one, never have thought players would be going for £30million plus on such a regular basis. Shocking, is probably the easiest word to use for this whole scenario. When money is thrown around at will by various billionaire's simply to satisfy their real life game of 'Football Manager' then we truly have hit rock bottom. Maybe I'm just being idealistic in my points, but the various cash injections all over Europe have created this money grabbing trend. Why did Lucas Moura go to PSG and not United? He may argue the style of football, or the manager or even that he wanted a different challenge; but I feel the extra £9million paid out to him probably softened his will in the end. So with such young prospects choosing money over success, surely somewhere somebody really got it all wrong.

Subjectivity of sadness. A post far from football.

Quite often I find it hard to elaborate on true feelings in any other way rather than by writing. It's through words that feelings truly can be elaborated upon. By this, therefore I've found myself yet again in front of a screen, my fingers constantly tapping keys to produce whatever comes of it.

Big events in a person’s life have more impact than, I think, we are willing to admit as individuals. If you are happy, it is subjective to wherever your happiness stems from, or rather from whatever causes you to be happy. If you are no longer happy for that reason then you forget why you were happy in the first place, understand? It's even more so difficult to get out of being sad. Sadness is a pathetic word in itself. Children of a nursery age are taught to grasp the idea of 'sad' and thus for me to ever say 'I feel sad' makes me feel childish. It's the connotations that arrive hand in hand with being 'sad' that are what get you down.

That moment where you think nothing can ever make you consider being happy again is something so inconceivable that it hurts some to even think about it. How can your feelings, something you supposedly create, make you feel at quite literally an all-time low? I hate that when this shroud of sadness takes over it runs everything you do. You feel sick to the point that eating is not even an option, not even something you'd usually be crazy for; even though you know you're hungry beyond usual reason. Being sad is confusing, for everyone has their own grasp of it and hence they deal with it in different ways. I'm sure anyone reading this can familiarise themselves with a low point in their lives and remember what they did, or rather didn't do. It can quite literally make you not want to do things that would usually make you happier beyond belief.

Confusion shrouds a sad mind. It's true. Talking can help but there's only so much you can expect someone to say to anyone in a sad situation, especially if they cannot empathise with your situation. Like I said, each have their own opinions. Sadness is subjective in itself, it's a feeling and thus derives from yourself and can only be extinguished by yourself too, as difficult as that sounds. Then comes anger, which travels with sadness in many cases, being sad beyond belief could make even the most reasonable person feel like they are boiling up to the brim. Being unhappy makes you feel scared, the darkest considerations of your mind appear and at times they are all you can think about. That queasy, nauseous feeling you unfortunately receive is a stark reminder that your emotions can really run you. You can't be sick, and yet you feel it; devastating.

Writing this makes me feel quite foolish, I hate blog posts from other users that crave attention by deriving some sort of reasoning towards human emotion. I'm not trying to do that, rather I'm putting across my opinion, for is that not all we have at times? I hate that now as I continue to create this piece I feel like the so many points I wished to put across are now meaningless. Maybe that is a result of how I feel, or maybe that's just true to an extent at this moment. Sometimes it's harder than you imagine to put how you really feel down into words, and in all honesty I felt it easier to write about a feeling rather than how I feel as it helps me consider the eventualities and results of some emotions. It's easier to detach yourself from a situation you may be in than to share it with everyone possible. All in all, the most problematic part of feeling sad is the confusion that you feel, trust me.

RACISM WRONGLY RULES THE ROOST?

Far too common this season has the subject of racism largely overshadowed the actual playing of football matches. Like a terrible disease it looms ever present before every game played by a select few teams, causing a  media frenzy where applicable. It's true to say that, as the supposed most popular league in the world, the Premiership is failing to justify its place at the top of the modern football word right now. It's also true that the select few individuals involved with the racist incidents have not only caused their teams anguish but have only tarnished their own name as players forever.

Once again, I find myself writing about what should be such a medieval issue, it's as if a whole generation has skipped back to the days of Luther Blisset where it was seen as 'a done thing' to call monkey chants onto a pitch and exclaim racist slurs towards anyone of other ethnic origins. We now have fans consistently being spotted doing very much the same, take one such recent Liverpool fan who thought they would project their views of racism in an albeit disgusting manner. I guess the real question here is, when does it end, or rather why has it suddenly re-started? Any footballer of different ethnic origin has probably experienced racism from grass-roots level all the way up, including myself. I treat it as a low blow, it's something that is all too easy to be picked at by the moron playing for the opposing team, something they somehow think will affect me deeply. They're wrong, yet that doesn't make racism any better.

Tom Adeyemi, an Oldham defender was reduced to tears when he was quite literally berated with racist abuse against Liverpool. I can empathise, imagine playing for a lower league team and fulfilling a dream of getting to a stadia such as Anfield only to be abused and picked apart by mindless imbeciles that could never even dream of being in your position? Unfair. Are Liverpool a scapegoat after the Suarez issue? Or has racism really returned that badly to football? If the second is the case then why do we not hear of Championship teams throwing racist remarks left right and centre? The fact of this is that racism affects people, from those who wish to enjoy the game to the players actually performing for the masses. As a spectacle in many respects part of the game is ruined. How devastating must it be to have to witness a team mate break down on the pitch in front of you, one cannot even comprehend.

I have no solution for this, how can we dispose humanely of those who wish to commit crimes against humanity whilst watching their favourite sport? It is impossible, surely to spot a racist from any other man, you can't spot check someone in case they carry a swastika or a white hood and therefore it makes the task seemingly impossible. Fortunately, and this is why incidents of racism are so well documented nowadays, offenders are shamed in newspapers and on television. The use of CCTV at matches amongst many other things allows Police and ground staff alike to find the devilish culprits and bring them to the attention of the world.

Players committing acts of racism however is a totally different matter. Luis Suarez was handed a tidy eight match ban for his foolish language towards Patrice Evra, something he has shown little, or rather no, remorse for. More disgusting still is a certain John Terry who in many's eyes clearly too performed a racist attack on Anton Ferdinand whilst still harbouring the honour of being the captain of the England football team. Something that now has been deservedly stripped away from him, may I add; for the second time. Racism contradicts everything a professional should be, not only a role-model but a respectful individual, for football is a team sport and thus the other twenty-one players on the pitch deserve the respect of you as a professional. If making the peak of your footballing career really means that little that you'd chose racism over football then surely you don't deserve a place amongst the other greats that stand beside you? It's ironic though that Ferdinand was never given his chance to respond to Terry's comment by way of the usual Premier League handshake when the teams next collided. Surely someone who has been abused in such a disgraceful manner deserves the chance to snub a handshake live on television too? After all Terry's lovely outburst was seen by all too.

There is no condolence for racism , it's prehistoric and proves the true worth of anyone who chooses to use it on a football field, or for that matter anywhere. To think that it was all but eradicated from the beautiful game and now has returned with a terrific vengeance is almost heartbreaking. There is no place for this abuse in football, not least from those who are called role-models. The FA is trying with it's bans and yet also contradicting themselves with the 'punishment' for John Terry, when Suarez was given his trial immediately. Everyone should feel the true force of the footballing law against racism immediately for any hope of getting rid of this torrid, backwards method of abuse. The only glimmer of hope is that at least the media seem to be on side with their continuous calls against the matter. Here's to a racist free game... 

The Midfield General R.I.P

The 21st of April 1999 lives strong in the memory for most football lovers. It's not often nowadays you see an inspiration amongst the tantalising workers on display at various football stages across the lands, however this has not always been true. Being an inspiration in football means leading, albeit at times by lifting your team by the scruff of the neck and carrying them through sheer passion and determination, thus reflecting on those around you. Traits that many can only aspire to. Roy Keane performed this against European giants at a certain Turin stage. Far from possessing the exotic turns and shimmy’s of other greats around him, nor the ability to turn a whole team inside out Keane brought forward, in perfect demonstration, a supreme showcase of will and grit to revive a struggling United side on the night.

I write this piece, not as some sort of commemoration of the match itself but as evidence to back my ultimate point. For players such as Keane are no longer existent, or rather needed on the world stage. It was true to say that on the night Keane made even Zinedine Zidane (a man who only the previous summer had rocked the world stage and crushed Brazilian hearts in the world cup final) look almost average. Biased as I may be, Keane was magnificent as a player even when he produced moments of unrivalled controversy (see: 'Alfie Haaland') he also produced pure passion.

For that is possibly what the old midfield general was built on, love for the game, for his club, and thus the on-going persistence to perform and lift the team they played for. The premiership would simply not be a world leader if the unparalleled rivalry between Keane and Patrick Viera was not ever present. They were two similar players, absolute midfield engines who collided like two locomotives on many occasions. It was this beauty in the positions involved that made the role of the 'midfield general' itself so entertaining for the game. I imagine even the most ardent of 'beautiful' football worshippers would agree that football has always needed it's 'grafters' that is, until recently.

Xabi Alonso recently spoke about the use of tackling, claiming it is not a skill, or for that matter an attribute in itself. Is he right, is he wrong? I'm sure many have their own opinions and yet it's true to say that in essence tackling has almost be removed from La Liga itself, possibly at reason for his comments. He proceeded to note that instead teams should defend by keeping the ball; something easy to say when you're included in a line-up that harbours Cristiano Ronaldo, Mesut Ozil and other such galacticos. Yet the fact still remains, at the very top level of football, there is currently no space for what we once perceived as the 'midfield general'.

Bryan Robson did it, Paul Ince too, Keane was to follow, Gerrard capitalised on it and now it remains only slightly in rare amounts with players such as Scott Parker at top levels. It's true to say even now that the old style midfielder, box to box with a desire to win the ball with a tantalisingly crunching tackle cannot exist amongst our current football climate. It has henceforth become apparent that this 'midfield general' has now been replaced with a generic building block structure to suit the current climate of football. This entails a defensive midfielder, take a certain Claude Makele for instance, who instead of being a box to box ball winner is simply a bulldog ball winner. Nipping ankles and consistently collecting the ball to offload to the next block, the playmaker. Barcelona pull this off to dazzling effect. Busquets is hardly a world class player and yet his role allows him to be forever fitted into the best team to currently grace the planet (possibly ever). In this case it is either Xavi or Iniesta who receive the ball and create, darting runs or ghosting through the opposition and providing full game assistance to the strikeforce. The art of this, of course, comes from having the stability of a defensive midfielder who is always present and thus can break an onrush of a counter attack or possibly produce one from his own half.

Claude Makelele brought this defensive role to centre stage with his performances amongst the galacticos at Real Madrid, being an essential link in a midfield that boasted Zidane himself. His move to Chelsea then allowed him to produce this on a Premiership stage, allowing Chelsea, under Mourinho, to become title winners for two successive seasons. It was true that his ability in the position allowed Lampard to go forward and grab his (quite phenomenal) twenty plus goals in a Premier League season. He was then replaced with a similar player, one Michael Essien who did very much the same role, rarely venturing out of the midfield third; instead simply winning and giving whilst providing consistent cover for his back four.

It's true that the defensive midfielder may be better for football, but by no means can it create better entertainment. It's also true that the breed itself of a 'general' figure has all but died out. It's saddening to realise once great figures may never be replicated, and that far from the Premiership as a supposed 'English' global superpower being able to influence with its previously English roles, it is now quite the opposite. It has been subdued by Platini and Blatter's endless concordance to deliver what Europe wants and this instead has rubbed off on the English game with the influx of different owners wishing to buy what the European game requires. Not that this is bad, mind, if you were a certain Sheikh oil baron wanting to buy Football's most coveted club competition then why not simply invest in what everyone else considers to work? Not everyone can replicate Barcelona, and ever more evident it seems is that there shall never be a true English team at the peak of European football anymore. No treble winning master class, no Liverpool of the eighties, instead of the bacon, hash brown, eggs and black pudding it's all gone a bit continental.

Even a certain Steven Gerrard, the man who almost single handily defeated a marauding AC Milan side in the Champions League cannot muster up enough to produce the sort of form that led him to be one of the most desirable centre midfielders of his generation. Although more attacking minded, he was quite possibly the last of a generation in terms of motivational midfielders. Although he did have cover in his role in the form of Xabi Alonso and more recently players such as Lucas, his finest shows of performance came when he took control of the game itself, note also the FA Cup final versus a very surprising and resilient West Ham side.

Evolution happens, I bet thirty years ago it probably seemed improbable that the 'inside out winger' would be so popular in the modern game so it's only natural, therefore that the midfield has progressed towards its current state. It's ironic though that a game that requires so much in the way of energy has appeared to have removed one of its most energetic roles.