Ravel Morrison should NOT play for England

This is a plea in the national interest to the senior England team NOT to choose Ravel Morrison until after the World Cup.

After that breathtaking trip to White Hart Lane, which now seems like a foggy dream after a rare international break of actual importance, the name on everyone’s lips is Ravel Morrison.

Suddenly, after being ditched in the depths of football’s bad boys and labelled a thuggish outcast, Morrison has been linked with a new contract, a glorious return to Manchester United, and a seat on the plane to Brazil.

Many people have been credited with the early stages of Morrison’s rehabilitation - Sir Alex Ferguson and his Manchester United set-up for having the foresight to let him go, Sam Allardyce for patiently working with him, Lee Clark for nurturing him during his loan spell at Birmingham City and, of course, Morrison himself.

One of the most positive elements of West Ham at the moment is what seems to be a strong and united dressing room. It is fair to say Kevin Nolan’s lack of mobility in midfield may earn him some criticism, but his leadership skills are evidently some of the best we’ve had for some time. The English domination of the dressing room must also create a greater sense of comradeship than other recent groups we’ve had.

This background atmosphere is highly likely to be a major reason why Morrison has begun to flourish. Suddenly he feels part of a team, whom he is equal with, who are relying on him to focus and work alongside them. It has been widely reported that Mark Noble in particular has built a protective bond with Morrison and made gestures such as inviting him into his home for dinner in an attempt to help him to integrate with the squad.

No longer is he the problem child, confined to a special support unit in what is a huge, unforgiving and assumedly overwhelming machine in the form of Manchester United. Morrison has been freed of that boarding school environment, which he so easily rebelled from, and is now affectionately ‘one of the lads’.

The faster Morrison’s reputation elevates, the faster this cosy set-up will disintegrate. The organic support system now surrounding Morrison will protect him from himself until his own ego transcends his perception of the club. Stars such as Rio Ferdinand tried and failed to tame Morrison’s wayward attitude, so Nolan and Noble deserve credit.

Both having had distinguished Premiership careers, these two players have yet to attain an England cap and it looks increasingly likely that neither will get the opportunity to represent their country. Particularly for Nolan, who has consistently scored a high volume of goals in the Premier League, an England cap has remained an illusive pinnacle of his career which, frustratingly for him, it seems he will never reach.

I would not like to suggest either Nolan or Noble would begrudge Morrison of a chance to play for England, but human nature would suggest an element of envy would certainly affect the relationship if Morrison was handed a call-up just a few good games into his career. In addition to this, Morrison’s past psychological problems suggest that he may then begin to see himself as superior to the pair who have taken him under their wing, and the relationship in its current form will thus be destroyed.

I have been personally surprised by Morrison. I don’t think it his quality which is surprising but his personality. I imagined him to be far more boisterous than he has been. It seems it may have been a little unfair, but the ‘gangster-wannabe’ stereotype has inevitably been associated with Morrison.

After a couple of goals, I’m sure I’m not the only one who expected him to bowl out of the changing room, snatch the bottle of champagne from Geoff Shreeves and declare himself on par with Lionel Messi in a rap-infected dialect. But whether it is due to good advice or his own judgement, Morrison has remained impressively quiet.

It is, finally, his football thrusting him in the limelight. He is undoubtedly a player of immense quality and his penetration in the attack is very special; his ability to glide past players and complete the move with a finish was shown against Spurs and repeated for the under-21s on Tuesday night.

But the FA are already drawing intense attention to Morrison. In his few days with the under-21 squad they released a video of his skills in slow motion, set against a dramatic, operatic soundtrack, and also leaked footage of him scoring an ‘outrageous chip’ in training. West Ham have also used Morrison’s image to promote today’s game.

2 goals for the under-21s will not help us quieten the Morrison hysteria - but a heated exchange with Manchester United’s Wilfried Zaha was a reminder that his maturing transition from hot-headed prospect to world-class is not yet complete.

I don’t wish to put a downer on the Morrison revelation. He is a player of immense quality and has been a breath of fresh air and much-needed creativity in our team. It would be great to keep him as part of our progress as a club into the Olympic Stadium, but if not, dependent on contract clauses, we could make a huge profit on him enabling us to propel the club upwards, much like how Tottenham have profited from Gareth Bale.

But Morrison is a complex issue. It may seem selfish from a West Ham perspective, but, at 20 years of age, I think at least a season focussing on domestic football, off of the international stage, would be beneficial for everyone. Undoubtedly Roy Hodgson and Allardyce will speak about Morrison, time will tell if they feel the same way.

Follow me on Twitter @RichMaher93

Signing older players like Ambrosini could be the way forward for Allardyce’s West Ham

A minority of West Ham fans have expressed some dismay with Sam Allardyce’s transfer policy after rumours emerged that AC Milan veteran Massimo Ambrosini is in London for talks with the Hammers.

In his recent interview with the Mirror, David Sullivan spoke glowingly of Allardyce, arguing that ‘he is intelligent, he prolongs careers and he is brilliant in terms of maximising players’ potential’. Prolonging the careers of older players thus seems to be an attribute which makes Allardyce a valuable asset for Sullivan and co-owner David Gold.

The prospective Ambrosini deal is not one which is out of character for Allardyce. The man affectionately known as ‘Big Sam’ has taken a number of international superstars and squeezed a few extra years out of their careers at the highest level.

Jay-Jay Okocha, Youri Djorkaeff, Gary Speed, Fernando Hierro and Ivan Campo are just a few footballers who were entering the twilight of their careers when Allardyce utilised them at Bolton Wanderers.

Many Irons supporters also doubted Allardyce’s choice to rely on 38 year-old Juusi Jääskeläinen for the first season back in the Premiership following Robert Green’s departure but have gone on to be proved wrong by the Fin who was eventually voted runner-up Hammer of the Year ahead of the likes of Andy Carroll, Momo Diame and Mark Noble.

Although his image may be moulded into that of an old-fashioned, unforgiving ‘gaffer’, Allardyce is famed for his focus on fitness and the cutting edge technology he uses to maintain this. Just recently West Ham were featured of ‘Sky Sports News’ for their use of an ice chamber to aid muscle recovery.



Allardyce and aging players can thus have a great relationship. They can use him to prolong their careers and he can use them to add quality and depth to his squad.

Another important factor for Allardyce, and of course the owners, is that he is extremely unlikely to pay for these players despite the competitive market. Razvan Rat, the recent acquisition from Shakhtar Donetsk, came on a free transfer, as will Ambrosini if the deal is completed.

Saving money on players like these to fill out the squad allows Allardyce to spend large bulks of his transfer budget on quality players for the first eleven, who also have re-sale value. If Allardyce wanted to spend £6-7 million on additional centre-midfielders and left-backs with no experience of the Premier League, there is no way a £16 million deal for Andy Carroll could be financed, especially with the new Financial Fair Play regulations.

The intent shown by West Ham and Allardyce to sign Carroll proves that they are not manipulating supporters by sexing up the signings of over-aged ‘has-beens’. As an English striker under the age of twenty-five, Carroll is in the most expensive bracket of footballers. If fans worry that Allardyce is creating a short-term team of OAPs they need only look at the genuine ambition shown to get Carroll permanently.

Additionally, the experience, attitude and aura of a multi-Champions League winner in the squad who has played over 300 times for one of the world’s biggest clubs can only be positive for a team like West Ham. In order to grow as a club it is important to have experienced winners amongst the ranks and whilst West Ham linger in the mid-table zone, they will need to accept those coming towards the end of their careers.

How any football fan can moan about having a few aging players in the squad on the back of Sir Alex Ferguson’s legacy at Manchester United is beyond belief. Ferguson continued to use the likes of Paul Scholes, Rio Ferdinand and Ryan Giggs well into their thirties and persistently won trophy after trophy. Many of Ferguson’s veterans will continue to be utilised by David Moyes.

Also, Ferguson wasn’t shy to bring in aging players in order to strengthen his squad with quality and experience at a low price. Henrik Larsson was drafted into his title-winning squad of 2007 at the ripe age of 36. Ferguson even wanted Larsson to continue at Old Trafford but due to family promises in Sweden, the former Celtic and Barcelona striker felt obliged to leave.

Finally, some West Ham fans are often desperate to hang on to their proud reputation with regards to producing young players in Tony Carr’s academy and therefore scoff at the idea of an older recruit getting first-team chances ahead of youth players.

If Allardyce and the staff around him felt that a player was good enough to step up into the first-team, there is no doubt that he would get the chance. Why would Allardyce waste any of his budget on a player if he had a younger, hungrier version sitting in the reserves for free?

Signing older players will actually benefit the youth players at West Ham. Not only do they gain from the experience of a man with a magnificent career behind him, but there is a place in the squad with a nearing expiry date which they could step into.

Short-term options therefore actually give enough time for young players to develop and show whether they will make the cut. For all we know, Allardyce could have big plans for the likes of Ravel Morrison next season. By bringing in Ambrosini, he provides a young midfielder like Morrison with a role model, competition and someone who plays in the same position, which can relieve the sense of pressure on a young footballer who is likely to burn out if he is heavily relied on for 38 games a season.

Similarly, Ambrosini is unlikely to be able to play two games in one week so he would benefit from having a young protégée to take over for certain fixtures in what will inevitably be a congested schedule. It is a win-win situation for everyone. If West Ham had a decent youth prospect but signed a 25 year-old midfielder in his position, the chances the unproven youngster would play are likely to be far more limited.

Therefore signings like Ambrosini should be looked at very positively. Moreno Roggi, Ambrosini’s agent, confirmed that there is an offer on the table for West Ham. Let’s hope all parties agree as contrary to popular thought, this is a forward-thinking decision rather than one rooted in the past.

Follow me on Twitter @RichMaher93

Mourinho; Moyes; Allardyce

I have an embarrassing image in my mind of Jeremy Nicholas innocently cueing a rapturous round of applause for Sam Allardyce’s new contract this afternoon and instead being met with a disgruntled mixture of jeers, boos and of course, a number of justified cheers.

As Allardyce’s second term in charge reaches a climax, it is fair to say he still hasn’t won the support of everyone. That is despite an immediate return to the Premier League, a trip to Wembley and a mid-table finish in the top flight.

Much like you are probably bewilderedly wondering why Manchester City have dismissed Roberto Mancini just one season after he snatched the league title from the red half of Manchester, plenty of football fans will be scratching their heads for as to why any Hammer could legitimately oppose Allardyce’s reign.

Whilst I am not arguing Allardyce is an inflated, northern reincarnation of Pep Guardiola, I do think that to suggest his style of football is far different from plenty of other successful coaches is a myth.

Last Saturday we were beaten comprehensively. Allardyce himself admitted that the players looked distracted and has also stressed the need to improve away from home next year. Thus we should hold back on whining about away form and give Sam a chance to rectify it over the Summer. After all it was our home form which was criticised last year and our away form celebrated. Some people have short memories.

Apparently Saturday’s game was one of Everton’s best performances of the season, undoubtedly sparked by the emotional exit of David Moyes who will succeed Sir Alex Ferguson at Old Trafford.

Moyes’ eleven years at Everton are considered successful because they were stable. He has managed to operate on a tight budget and still wedge the club firmly in amongst the top seven. If Allardyce has already broke into the top ten in one year (assuming we hold on to that place today) then what makes you think he cannot replicate Moyes’ success?

It is also important to remember that Moyes has been criticised in the past for similar to reasons to why Allardyce has been. Brendan Rodgers, Steven Gerrard and even Ferguson himself, the man who recommended Moyes as his heir, have labelled Everton long-ball merchants.

With reference to Marouane Fellaini in Manchester United’s game against Everton this very season, Ferguson argued “it was just difficult to handle him when they were knocking these balls up to him. He is a handful, a big, tall, gangly lad, and they just lumped the ball forward to him, that's all they did”. Sound familiar?

Fortunately for Moyes, these jibes have been brushed off whereas for Allardyce, the label has stuck like fluff to Velcro. This is probably because Moyes has become somewhat of a media darling for the longevity of his time at Everton whereas Allardyce will always be 

Moyes' new 'image' at Man U

associated with an unfashionable Bolton Wanderers team.

When questioned about these criticisms back in November, Moyes was unfazed. He argued that “we are beginning to compete better against most of the top clubs now so that’s perhaps why these things are being said. I’d sooner get that, them having a dig, than people being nice about us because we’ve lost”.

Moyes makes a valid point. West Ham went through a stage of being continually praised under Gianfranco Zola, and whilst it was flattering, we were a far weaker and unstable outfit back then. You must first become hard to beat in the Premiership to earn the right to attack with fluidity.

Anyone who saw Everton against us last Saturday, or at their best during the season, must admit that they play an attractive style of football, and most importantly a successful brand of football. However they set up for games very similarly to us.

They have a solid back four, two deep-lying central midfielders, two wingers, one striker and a goal scorer sitting just behind him in the form of Fellaini (our Kevin Nolan). The only difference between us and Everton is that Moyes has had the time to acquire quality players and to have them play with each other regularly.

Allardyce is in a fantastic position to do the same. In Andy Carroll we already have a superior target-man to Victor Anichebe; if we can hold on to him we can work on improving our squad to a similar standard.

As useful as Joey O’Brien has been this season, Leighton Baines is obviously a better attacking force. Similarly a goal-scoring winger in the form of Kevin Mirallas was the difference between the sides on Saturday, he is far better than Ricardo Vaz Te.

Allardyce has admitted “we need better players” despite the fact that the squad is already strong. If we support him and give him time to upgrade the team in a similar manner to how Moyes has, we could be rewarded with a team regularly competing in the top-half of the league.

Allardyce is perhaps in a better situation than Moyes was as he has greater funding, the prospect of a large new stadium and the attraction of London which is likely to appeal to some transfer targets.

Another coach likely to be plying his trade amongst the Premiership’s elite next year is managerial superstar Jose Mourinho. Unlike Allardyce, when you think of Mourinho, you do not think of the long-ball, you think of trophies, a fashionable foreigner and ‘the special one’.

When compared to English coaches, Mourinho’s career has been rather fortunate. It was Mourinho’s short success at União de Leiria, a side now in the Portuguese third division, along with his charisma, which convinced Porto to appoint him.



The English equivalent of Porto would have undoubtedly looked abroad for their manager whereas Portugese coaches have a greater chance of managing the major clubs in their home nation. With just one year’s managerial experience Mourinho got the Porto job; Allardyce had four smaller jobs before his eight-year spell at Bolton but he was still inevitably leapfrogged by foreign coaches for the top jobs.

In reality it is the image of Mourinho which makes him so attractive to employers. He is charismatic, lovingly arrogant and above all a winner. In just two years at Porto, Mourinho was fortunate enough to inherit a good group of players and dominate the Champions League in a particularly weak year. Porto eventually overcame a distinctly average Monaco in the final and the rest is history.

I am not trying to criticise Mourinho. I am just pointing out the opportunities he has had in his career are because of his image and his nationality. If he was a somewhat overweight, Worcestershire-born bloke named Sam I suspect his career would’ve panned out extremely differently.

Mourinho is actually extremely similar to Allardyce in terms of tactics. He is a pragmatist and his teams are predominantly reactive rather than proactive, even when they do include the likes of Cristiano Ronaldo as opposed to Kevin Nolan.

His favoured 4-2-3-1 is similar to the way Allardyce lines up as it can smoothly transform into a 4-4-1-1, a 4-5-1 or a 4-2-1-3. These rapid transitions are the reason that 4-4-2 is rarer in modern football; it is simply too rigid to adjust quickly when a team wish to change the emphasis and speed of the game.

If Allardyce hadn’t been alienated from so many other coaches via his reputation, perhaps he would be better appreciated like Moyes. The fact is that Allardyce has become an iconic image within the game, but he represents everything which has become unfashionable.

Allardyce represents the antithesis of the stylish manager, but in reality he may not be so different. We should appreciate finishing the season in tenth position in the capable hands of Allardyce and I hope next season is another one of many stable, successful campaigns under his guidance.

 

Follow me on Twitter @RichMaher93

A Rivalry Steeped In History

The ship which sits proudly above the red devil on Manchester United’s crest often goes unnoticed, such is our familiarity with the global brand that the logo has become.

The ship represents the Manchester Ship Canal; it was completed in 1894 and meant goods were able to bypass Liverpool’s ports and be transported straight to Manchester, resulting in substantial job losses on Merseyside and great resentment from the Liverpudlian population.

This is popularly cited as the root of a bitter rivalry which exists between the two industrial cities; a rivalry which is always evident when Liverpool F.C. meet Manchester United F.C. and has led many experts to label it the biggest game of football in the world.

Liverpool dominated English football for the 20 years between 1970 and 1990, a period in which they won eleven league championships and four European cups. However, from that moment up until the current day, Manchester United have responded under the guidance of Sir Alex Ferguson.

They have now overtaken Liverpool’s famed 18 league titles and, although they are still two trophies behind them in terms of the Champions League, they remain England’s biggest football club despite surges of success from Arsenal, Chelsea and, most recently, another vicious rival in the form of Manchester City.

Manchester also retaliated culturally. Liverpool’s famous music scene, led by ‘The Beatles’ who took the world by storm in the 1960s, was replicated in Manchester with the emergence of ‘The Stone Roses’, ‘The Smiths’ and ‘Oasis’ to solidify their position as the leading city of the pair.

The rivalry has become so bitter that when the sides met last Sunday, there was a fear that Manchester United fans would disrupt Liverpool’s tributes to the 96 supporters who died in the infamous 1989 ‘Hillsborough disaster’.

The case relating to the scandal was finally closed this month when an independent panel concluded that multiple failures by emergency services should be held responsible for the deaths. Sunday’s game was the first time Liverpool had played at their home, Anfield, since the ‘justice for the 96’ campaign was granted its wish, allowing those who suffered to rest in peace.

It seems extraordinary that football would lead any fellow human beings to dishonour the practices which would take place in Liverpool on Sunday, but United boss Ferguson still felt the need to distribute letters to the travelling fans, encouraging them to respect the remembrance service.

Of course there were still an idiotic few who jeered as ‘You’ll Never Walk Alone’ was emotionally bellowed out by 40,000 sympathisers; the minds of some fans are so polluted by rivalry that their loyalty clouds their judgement of what is simply right and wrong.

Similarly in the past, a few Liverpool supporters have crudely taunted Mancunians about the Munich air disaster which killed 23 people, including much of the team nicknamed ‘The Busby Babes’ alongside journalists and supporters.

However, crucially, a memorial bouquet of flowers was placed outside the stadium, signed ‘The silent majority at M.U.F.C.’; it was certainly a humbling and truthful image which reflected the many who were able to lay their bitterness to one side in favour of humanity.

Liverpool striker Luis Suarez rightfully accepted the hand of United captain Patrice Evra before the game, despite allegations of racism between the pair.

The match didn’t continue as smoothly, it maintained the rivalry between the clubs by featuring a sending off and a late goal from Robin Van Persie which gave the visitors the victory and epitomised their ability to go one better than their rivals in recent years.

However, the rivalry on the pitch is something that no football fan wants to lose. The united front between the majority of both sets of fans as well as staff and players of the clubs was a truly proud moment for English football and both cities.

The feud will remain, but Sunday showed that, in the face of adversity, thousands are able to put the most intense of differences aside in order to respect justice.

West Ham vs. Blackburn Preview

It’s quite absurd as to how Avram Grant remains in a premier league job. Now, even Osama bin Laden has been terminated before Grant’s contract. The American authorities had searched tirelessly for almost ten years before finally tracking down their target, whilst Grant has been on show at Upton Park for the last nine months, sporting an embarrassing league record of a mere 20% win ratio, must we remind our owners that they have the ability to eliminate him? Perhaps in bin Laden’s killer we have finally found someone more ruthless than the acrimonious Karen Brady.

British football experts continually convince English clubs that they must continually adhere to the manager they have appointed, stating the few obvious case studies of David Moyes, Arsene Wenger and most notably Sir Alex Ferguson as examples of the fruits of long-term leadership. What they fail to recognise in the case of West Ham United is that, instead of appointing a young, enthusiastic, inspiring candidate wielding previous honours and success, such as that of the three names mentioned above, our owners somehow saw it fit to employ the dull, inadequate and recently relegated; Avram Grant.

It seemed rather strange of David Gold, at the time of the appointment, to describe Grant as someone who had “been there, done that and got the T-shirt”, when in fact, his Portsmouth side, albeit with a points deduction, had already sunk into the second tier of English football. In fact, his record with Portsmouth was even worse than it currently is with West Ham, so to blame their relegation on this penalty would be ridiculous. David Sullivan also agreed with his co-owner at the time, claiming; “we have taken our time over this appointment and are certain we have got the right man”. Perhaps this is the perfect statement to epitomise how much our owners actually know about football.

At the time, Gold also added that “the bottom line is the relationship between the manager and the chairman is critical. In our case it’s two chairmen so it’s even more difficult as you need to have a relationship between three people”. It is now evident that what Gold actually meant by this statement is that by handing the position to an innocuous, lifeless excuse of a manager, there was enough room for him, and Sullivan, to squeeze their inflated egos onto the scene.

Prior to the Manchester City game, the frustratingly irritating Sullivan couldn’t resist the attention of opening his mouth once again by announcing that the Hammers only have a “25% chance of staying up” and labelling the players “spoilt”, claiming most of them are more interested in “where they will be next season” than keeping West Ham in the premiership. Sullivan certainly has a warped view of motivation if he believes deeming the players fickle mercenaries will give them the inspiration to battle for some much needed points.

And then, in an act of comical hypocrisy, Sullivan (and Gold) failed to show at the City Of Manchester Stadium, justifying their disloyal absence with the impact of “watching our poor away performances week after week”. If his comments were not rich enough, he went on to compare his motivational skills to that of Winston Churchill. It’s no wonder as to why he was unable to secure the services of an established, dignified manager in Martin O’Neill in January, as he continues to embarrass himself, and thus the club, with these sporadic outbursts.

It’s also worth noting that Sullivan stated; “I do think that a manager needs that fear factor. You look at Alex Ferguson, Arsene Wenger and Jose Mourinho. The players are a little bit frightened of them”. Obviously he completely ignored this belief when he appointed Grant as, with the omission of his eerily zombie-like demeanour, he would fail to strike fear, or any emotion for that matter, into anyone.

Even Demba Ba admitted that, in the brief February period in which we began to consistently win some games that “we had a new team … and other teams were surprised by us. Now they know how to counter us”. Clearly even Grant’s players recognise that he is tactically inadequate and that, even in the very few games he has won, it was not his ability as a manager but the fact he was able to spring a few new faces upon his opponent, before their traits were identified, assessed and countered by genuinely Premiership-quality managers, and it was back to square one.

Grant has tried to use this hopeless tactic all throughout the season, meaning West Ham have used more players than any other squad in the Premier League. Quite astounding considering the lack of depth in quality we have in some departments. Seeing Grant’s notebook fall apart and flutter around the pitch in Manchester last Sunday was quite symbolic of a man whose plans have completely crumbled. Seeing his hopeless attempt to collect them back together was perhaps even more significant in suggesting the lack of answers he has to the undeniable problems.

Seeing the emotion and joy on the faces of Norwich fans on Monday evening, following their promotion, sparked wonderful, nostalgic memories of our play-off success in 2005. However, it also provoked the epiphany of the immense value of premiership status, and the fact that at the moment, we are sickeningly throwing it away. Surely, whether he completes this demolition of another premiership club or not, Grant will be fired and disappear into the wilderness, as bin Laden did all those years ago. Inevitably he will never again have the chance to manage a premiership club, not that he was ever capable or worthy of doing so in the first place.

Grant’s career will be reflected on in bewilderment, as it was effectively based on absolutely nothing. However, I still believe that the team will remain in the premier league due to fortuitous fixtures, the incompetence of those around us and the personal brilliance of the likes of Scott Parker. That will leave us with yet another summer rebuilding job which must be done correctly this time. Where it leaves Grant is debatable, with a football director’s role rumoured to be lined up at Chelsea, he could unbelievably stroll into yet another lucrative contract. Grant’s secret is certainly beyond me, it’s certainly not his charisma or his ability, but as long as he’s nowhere near West Ham United next season, I’ll be a happier man, and so will 34,000 others.