99.94 not only the Don's average but also the percentage of positive Strauss sentiment.

Tributes roll in for skipper Strauss

Nearly everyone had positive things to say about Andrew Strauss. The class with which he handled his departure speaks volumes about the man, as do the tributes paid him by players past and present. His no nonsense attitude is illustrated by he fact that he doesn't have a Twitter account. However many of his counterparts do and below are a selection of their tweets.


The current crop, AKA the Straussites, unsurprisingly heap praise on the leader so integral to their England careers. They also hint at his golfing abilities.

Stuart Broad ‏@StuartBroad8

Awesome guy, great leader, dependable batsman and a solid 1 slip catcher. Cheers Straussy you'll be playing scratch golf within a year

Graeme Swann ‏@Swannyg66

An emotional day with Straussy hanging up his boots. What a great captain, brilliant player and most importantly fantastic bloke.

Matt Prior ‏@MattPrior13

I know a lots been said already but I have to say I'm so sorry strauss has stepped down! Fantastic leader player and most importantly....Person! Took over when we were at the bottom in '09 and took us to Ashes victories and no 1 in the world! Unbelievable effort and will....Go down as a legend! Congrats on a fantastic career and all the best for the future (on the golf course) #strauss

James Anderson ‏@JimmyAnderson9

Really sad to hear Straussy has called it a day. He's done so much for this England team not just as captain but also as a player.......He will be missed but he hands over to a very fine replacement in Alastair Cook. Best of luck to Cooky and to Straussy in his future

Alastair Cook via BBC Sport "Obviously I've got huge boots to fill. It feels like I've spent all my England career walking out to bat with him. Unfortunately it might mean I have to take the first ball now."

The ex-players focus on the level of respect there is for Strauss the captain.

Michael Vaughan ‏@VaughanCricket

A.Strauss....3 Ashes wins...2 as Captain.. 21 Test 100s... Debut at Lords.. 100th Test at Lords.. 50th as Captain at Lords.. #righttouch

Matthew hoggard ‏@Hoggy602

Andrew Strauss has been a fantastic servant to the game of cricket I am lucky to have played with him and one game as him as captain. I wish him all the best for the future !!

Phil Tufnell ‏@philtufnell

Wishing Straussy the best of luck in retirement. He's been a great player, a credit to England and got them to number 1 in the world...I was surprised by the news. Thought he might go on to another Ashes series, but he's had a brilliant career.

David 'Bumble' Lloyd @BumbleCricket

Looks as if A Strauss stepping down .Great time to go .Ashes Captain, 100th Test at Lords .doesn't get better . Done a brilliant job. Sure the cricket public will see Strauss in a very good light. An excellent leader, respected throughout the crick world by opponents.

The fans - give probably more interesting thoughts on Strauss, as is customary of non-celeb tweeters. A dig at KP, a dig at footballers and allusions to Strauss' potential political career. He's too nice a bloke for politics if you ask me.

Tom Harper ‏@TomJHarper

Don't forget #Strauss was appointed England cricket captain to solve another crisis caused by Kevin Pietersen's massive ego

Ben Monro-Davies ‏@benc4

Dear andrew strauss. If u want a career in politics wait for a safe seat. You will get one. Marginals always lead to defeat. #strauss

Andrew Slade ‏@aksqprfc

What a gent #Strauss is. Triumphed at highest level home & away. Dignity intact. Footballers take note (yes you, Joey) #cricket

The 0.06 % - there is no I in team. End of story.

Kevin Pietersen @Kevinpp24 - Nothing (not even when asked directly by a reporter on Sky sports). In my opinion this came across terribly. If you can't bring yourself to say something nice just say, "I wish him all the best", simple.

Piers Morgan ‏@piersmorgan

Good capt, wrong re KP. 

I only half understand Andrew Strauss' decision.

Andrew Strauss: a captain we can all be proud of (2009-2012)

His decision to stand down as England captain today was not a surprise, especially to those close to cricket.  Strauss won his 100th Cap a fortnight ago in the final game of the series defeat to South Africa, to whom England lost their number 1 ranking. With Alastair Cook having been groomed for the role of captain, Strauss' poor form with the bat and England needing fresh impetus if they are to regain their number 1 ranking, now is the perfect time for him to step down as captain. 

People will naturally speculate as to whether Kevin Pietersen's public fall out with Strauss had anything to do with the decision. I'm not privy to the chatter of the England dressing room but I believe Strauss when he said that the KP issue had nothing really to do with his decision. The departure of Strauss does seemingly make the much needed return of Pietersen more likely. Hopefully Cook, Flower and KP can move on from the ugly mess which KP created and rebuild the harmonious dressing room which was a cornerstone of Strauss' captaincy.

I think you'd be hard pushed to find an England cricket fan with a bad word to say about Andrew Strauss. Strauss always conducted himself in a professional and dignified manner both on and off the field. He has always been level-headed, calm, articulate and is a credit to the game of cricket. Much like Michael Vaughan who lead the side with distinction in collaboration with Duncan Fletcher, Strauss formed an effective partnership with team manager Andy Flower. There are 4 other similarities between the two 1) they both left the job with the team in a better state than they inherited 2) their lack of batting form hastened their departure 3) Their last tests were both against Graeme Smith's South Africa and 4) They are both the kind of people who have extremely bright futures upon retirement.

Strauss' career Highlights

2004 Scored a century on his debut at Lords

2005 Was part of England's Ashes winning side

2009 Appointed Captain for England's tour of West Indies

2009 Captained England to Ashes win

2011 Captained England to Ashes win in Australia

2011 Captained England to number 1 test ranking with series win against India

2012 Retires after playing 100th Test

England's Ashes win in Australia, Strauss' finest hour.

Half his decision

I agree with Strauss that it is the appropriate time to hand over the captaincy to Alastair Cook. It is the perfect time and he has earned the right to go out on his own terms. What I struggle with, and this may be because I am not a professional sportsman, is his decision to retire from cricket. 

You have to love cricket in order to become England Captain but if you love cricket why would you want to stop playing? It could be argued that he has other things to do, or that he might want to spend more time with his family but surely nothing beats playing the game you love. Its not like he couldn't be a top performer at county level or in the IPL, why not spend some time enjoying cricket without the weight of the England captaincy? Its not like he is a fast bowler with masses amounts of wear and tear on his body. He is only 35, which is not at all old for a batsman.

I hope that Straussy doesn't ever regret his decision to retire from cricket. As i've said, he'll have plenty of attractive career opportunities ahead of him and i'm sure he'll do well. I disagree with his decision but with all he's done he's earned the right to make it and I wish him all the best. 

Lance, Team Sky and a man named Paul.

Cycling's leading lights must take the lead in cleaning up the sport

If Lance Armstrong didn't win the Tour de France between 1999 to 2005 then who did? Below is a graphic produced by By Alan Mclean, Archie TSE and Lisa Waananen for The New York Times that shows the top 10 finishers in the Tour de France from 1998 to 2011. Faces of riders with solid links to, or convictions of, doping are shown. It is an interesting chart but it is very conservative in who it links to doping. On checking the top tens for myself, I found many more of the riders had been on doping teams or been associated with doping directeur Sportifs and so the true chart would surely show far more riders than this one. 

Figuring out who is to be credited with winning all those tours is really of little consequence now, and I use it purely as a lead in. What is most important is that cycling makes progress in it's battle to become clean. Although the general assumption is that cycling, with the rise to prominence of clean teams like Team Sky, has turned a corner, some, including Paul Kimmage, still worry if enough is being done.

Paul Kimmage is the man to look for if you want to read more about doping in cycling. The award winning, anti-doping, sports journalist is the most vehement opposition to doping in cycling that i've come across. Kimmage, a former cycling pro himself, loves cycling. Where he differs from others is that he isn't willing to hold his tongue on doping 'for the good of the sport'. Kimmage, the author (Rough Ride, 2001) believes that cycling's governing body the UCI needs an overhaul and that people within cycling should be willing to talk about it. In the wake of  Lance Armstrong's fall from grace it is worth noting how few people from within cycling have chosen to pass comment on it.

Armstrong and Kimmage's famous confrontation at the 09 Tour of California

Team Sky are one of cycling's youngest teams having only been formed back in February 2009. However with the likes of Wiggins, Cavendish and Boasson Hagen in the team and cycling guru Dave Brailsford at the helm they are by a distance the number 1 ranked pro team in the world. Cycling is booming in Britain at the moment as a result of the successes of Team Sky and the GB track team and I am a massive fan of what they are doing.

Sky though are not above criticism and I agree with the sentiments of Kimmage and others, that Team Sky should be more vocal and transparent when it comes to doping. When Team Sky was launched they admirably had a zero tolerance approach to doping, refusing even to hire anyone with a suspicious past. They even rejected the chance to sign the now reformed and anti-doping advocate David Millar, despite the fact that he is British, world class and a personal friend of Dave Brailsford.

Team Sky at the 2012 Tour de France

If Team Sky have this anti-doping policy why didn't they use their dominance of this year's Tour de France to speak openly about doping? Why haven't Brailsford, Wiggins or Cavendish (my cycling hero) made any comments about Lance? Surely, if someone has disgraced your sport, lied to the world and denied clean riders the chance of winning to that extent you would express your pleasure at justice having been done.

Team Sky's refusal to address doping questions at the Tour de France can be justified, but was the wrong tactic. On the one occasion that doping was brought up Wiggins launched into a passionate rant

“I say they’re just fucking w*nkers. I cannot be doing with people like that,” said Wiggins. “It justifies their own bone-idleness because they can’t ever imagine applying themselves to do anything in their lives.

“It’s easy for them to sit under a pseudonym on Twitter and write that sort of s**t, rather than get off their arses in their own lives and apply themselves and work hard at something and achieve something. And that’s ultimately it. C**ts.”

It's great that Brad is passionate about (not) doping but he could've used his position as race leader for good and banged the drum for clean cyclists. By choosing not to speak about an issue so pertinent to cycling he falls into the same trap as all the others, that of believing that cycling's doping problem can be swept under the carpet.

I'm not trying to stir up anti-Team Sky feeling, I just want to state that keeping quiet is not the answer to cycling's doping problems. They might argue that Top teams or stars from other sports don't have to preach to the media about these sorts of things. This is true, but the unfortunate reality is that cycling has been tainted by so many scandals in the past that surely clean riders have to play a part in cleaning it up and restoring its image.

The current crop of clean cyclists must have the guts to stand up for the good of the sport, it's millions of fans, themselves and their colleagues. I know that comes with the risk of upsetting their friends, colleagues and the UCI but in order to make the sport clean it would be worth it.


This is probably the last i'll write on this topic for a little while. If you want to read further here are links to some of the most interesting current articles.







Kimmage in Velonation speaking about Wiggins and Team Sky http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/12357/Kimmage-disappointed-in-Wiggins-and-Team-Sky-over-transparency.aspx#ixzz24rSnYHKx

The epic 7 hour interview between Kimmage and 2006 TDF Floyd Landis. This is the full transcript, so only read if you have a spare hour and a half. It provides a fascinating insight into Landis and all things doping 
http://velonews.competitor.com/2011/02/news/complete-transcript-paul-kimmages-interview-of-floyd-landis_158328

Kimmage on Lance http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/12721/Paul-Kimmage-Interview-Armstrong-the-UCI-and-the-true-winners-of-those-Tours.aspx

Video - Check out Armstrong vs Kimmage press conference at  http://vimeo.com/3214776. Available on other video sites also. 

Lance Armstrong "Pain is temporary, quitting lasts for ever"

Lance Armstrong forced to accept loss of 7 Tour de France wins

Lance Armstrong issued his decision not to contest the USADA's doping charges in a short statement late last night. In doing so, all but the most staunch Armstrong supporters will be forced to accept the conclusion that he did use doping products in order to win. Faced with the USADA's charges, Lance was finally backed into a corner, and forced to pick his poison. Most people believe that, in accepting the charges, he has chosen the least worst option, when compared to admitting his guilt or spending lots of his time and money fighting a losing battle.

In his statement Lance said that he was "done with this nonsense" and sick of "fighting to clear his name." He dubbed the USADA's case against him as being "heinous" and "unlawful" and reiterated his belief that it was a "witch hunt" lead by USADA chief executive Travis Tygart.  He went on to say that he "would jump at the chance" to defend himself in a fair hearing.

Tygart added in a statement released by USADA: "This is a heartbreaking example of how the win-at-all-costs culture of sport, if left unchecked, will overtake fair, safe and honest competition, but for clean athletes, it is a reassuring reminder that there is hope for future generations to compete on a level playing field without the use of performance-enhancing drugs."

Fairness

There were in my opinion some interesting snippets in Lance's statement. Firstly, he said "I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in winning my seven Tours since 1999." I have to question whether he actually did have an unfair advantage against his main rivals, I'm not saying everyone in the peleton was doping but most of those at the the front of the races were. If Armstrong could dope and get around the tests, surely others could and did. In those days of the Tour de France, you simply wouldn't have been able to compete, if you hadn't been doping. 

He also said "The bottom line is I played by the rules that were put in place by the UCI, WADA and USADA when I raced." This is a serious point because during his career he passed hundreds of tests. The UCI (cycling's governing body) introduced a rule which said that if a rider returned an haematocrit value (red blood cell count) of over 50% then he was not allowed to race. What this succeeded in doing was to encourage riders to artificially boost their haematocrit levels to 50% using blood boosting EPO. By doing this cyclists could go harder for longer; this is shown by the fact that the Tour de France has actually slowed down over the last few years, as new measures of testing have finally made it harder for dopers to exist. 

Win at all costs

According to Forbes, Lance Armstrong is worth $125 million dollars. Coming from a tough background, surviving cancer and succeeding to the point where he is a champion cyclist, an author, CEO of his own charity and a global mega star tells you all you need to know about Lance Armstrong's determination and will to win. It also gives you an answer to the question, why would he cheat? More interestingly, how did he get away with it? The answer to the second question is that he made lots of people and companies lots of money, and he helped a lot of his team mates make careers for themselves as part of his winning teams.

His unprecedented success is ultimately what led to his downfall. Had his career been more modest then he could've faded into the background after his retirement. The truth is his success stuck in the craw of many people. No one liked the way he played by his own rules, took all he wanted from cycling and gave nothing back. The idea of one man rewriting the history books, becoming a multi-millionaire and a global icon whilst getting away with doping and being a hero was too much to stomach. The strength of feeling he provoked in the non-believers was so great that they couldn't let it go and finally his past has caught up with him.

Lance's Legacy.

After all that's been said about Lance Armstrong he remains for me one of the most difficult sporting icons to weigh up. On the one hand you have this fiercely determined and talented individual who fought the odds and lived his dream. On the other you have a controlling and ruthless individual who would do anything to succeed and who cheated his way to the top. Its very easy to sit in your ivory tower and judge Lance Armstrong harshly, in a black and white world cheating in sport is disgusting and its unfair on honest competitors and their livelihoods. We all know however that in this world, and especially when it comes to doping in the cycling world of that era, then really its shades of grey that we are looking at.

Note: EPO stands for Erythropoietin, it helps increase the amount of red blood cells in the body. This allows more oxygen to be carried to the muscles, thus enabling an endurance athlete to perform at a higher rate than usual for a longer amount of time.

Decision day for Lance Armstrong.



Lance Armstrong; why people don't care about one of sport's biggest ever stories.

Lance Armstrong celebrating his record breaking 7th Tour de France win in  2005

Thursday, August 23rd is the day when Armstrong will enter his decision to either accept a lifetime ban and the loss of his 7 Tour de France titles or defend himself against the USADA's extensive doping charges in court.  


The US Anti-Doping Authority, USADA, charged Armstrong and 4 others with being part of a sophisticated conspiracy in which they used banned drugs and blood transfusions to gain an advantage. 3 of Lance Armstrong's associates; team doctor Luis Garcia del Moral, Jose Marti and hugely controversial consulting doctor Michele Ferrari have already received lifelong bans after deciding not to contest USADA's charges. Armstrong and his former directeur sportif, Johan Bruyneel decided to question the USADA's jurisdiction and lodged an appeal to block the proceedings against them. The appeal was thrown out with derision; "This court is not inclined to indulge Armstrong's desire for publicity, self-aggrandisement or vilification of defendants" wrote US district court judge Sam Sparks. After rewording their appeal, they were granted a 30 day reprieve, but a U.S. federal judge concluded that Armstrong must answer the USADA's charges.


Hero
Lance Armstrong is a hero to millions of people the world over. In 1996 Lance was diagnosed with testicular cancer which spread to his brain and lungs. Not only did he survive and recover from this but he then went on to return to pro-cycling and dominate the world's most gruelling sport's event, the Tour de France, winning it in 7 consecutive years. People, thankfully, survive cancer every day but few can doubt that Lance's story is truly remarkable. Lance details his story in his autobiographical books 'It's not about the bike' and 'Every second counts', both of which I enjoyed reading. If you can get over his American brashness it is impossible not to be inspired by Lance Armstrong. He is the poster boy of cancer sufferers and survivors everywhere. He has helped raise millions of pounds for his cancer charity Livestrong, most memorable for it's iconic yellow wristbands.  For his story, for his accomplishments, for the way he rode his bike and for the people he's helped, he will always be a hero.

Controversial Dr Michele Ferrari 

Tyler Hamilton accused Armstrong of doping

Controversial
The Armstrong story however is not that simple. Armstrong's career has never been far from controversy, not helped by choosing to associate himself with numerous controversial figures including the above mentioned Ferrari and Bruyneel. Dr Michelle Ferrari's name became synonymous with doping in the mid nineties and Johan Bruyneel has worked with numerous cycling dopers including 2 times TDF winner Alberto Contador and Tyler Hamilton. Lance Armstrong's ex team mates 2006 TDF winner Floyd Landis and Tyler Hamilton publicly accused him of doping in their own doping hearings. Their accounts, much chastised by Armstrong for being the words of convicted liars, are thought to make up some of the evidence against Armstrong, alongside the testimonies of other former temmates Levi Leipheimer, George Hicapie, Christian Vande Velde and David Zabriskie. 

Cycling journalist Paul Kimmage's story featured heavily in an excellent book 'Bad blood' by Jeremy Whittle, about doping in cycling, which focused much of it's attention on Armstrong. It was an illuminating insight into the personality of Armstrong. His brash, alpha male, me-against-the-world personality never helped endear him to the sceptics and by all accounts he used to rule the peloton with an iron fist. Kimmage was one of a number of sceptical journalists who were barred from Armstrong press conferences by his support team. He also raised objections to the UCI (cycling's governing body) acceptance of a $100,000 donation from Armstrong 8 years ago.

During my research for this article two things stuck in my mind and I'll leave you to make up your own mind about them. The first comes from former doper and now anti-doping advocate David Millar's book 'Racing through the Dark'. Speaking candidly after receiving a two year ban for doping Millar said that the moment he doped he became more professional, meaning that because of using EPO he put a new pressure on himself to train and win races. I thought to myself, who was the most professional rider out there? The answer I came up with was Lance Armstrong; the man who'd ride up mountains on his own on Christmas day, the guy who'd weigh out his food and leave nothing to chance. 


The second was the story of Italian cyclist Filippo Simeoni, and his feud with Armstrong. Simeoni spoke out against Dr Ferrari, claiming that he had administered doping products to him. Armstrong called him a liar and Simeoni began legal proceedings against him for defamation. In the 2004 Tour de France,  Simeoni got into a breakaway with other riders who were no threat to Armstrong's overall race lead. Armstrong followed Simeoni, which meant that the peleton would have to chase him, and the breakaway riders would lose their chance at winning the stage. In exchange for the breakaway being able to stay away, Armstrong made Simeoni return with him to the peleton, where upon Simeoni was abused and spat on by some members of the peleton. Armstrong claimed that Simeoni wanted to destroy cycling by speaking against it but sceptics believed that Armstrong wanted to deny Simeoni the air time a stage-winning press conference would give him. 

Armstrong and Simeoni 2004 Tour de France.

So why is this huge story gaining so little coverage?

There are numerous reasons. Some people are sick of the constant speculation over Armstrong and whether he doped or not. Others have long since made up their minds and feel that the USADA's inquiry will not prove anything either way. There are also those to whom Lance is such a hero, either because of his comeback story or his charity work, that they don't care if he doped or not. After all, one might think, didn't all cyclist dope? 

People within cycling are fed up with the whole affair and don't want it to overshadow their sport, which in my opinion is far cleaner than it was. For a long time there has existed an 'omerta', silence, amongst professional cyclists. The idea being that if you get caught you carry the can on your own and you don't implicate your fellow professionals. After years of scandal and controversy this approach is not surprising, after all, there are careers and vast sums of money at stake. For these reasons there is not much noise on this story coming from within cycling.


Decision time

Lance Armstrong must now decide; he can either contest the charges and take his chances in court or accept the charges and face losing his titles and also his right to compete in Ironman triathlons, his current occupation. Armstrong knows that public opinion is what holds weight in his current situation. He has always been a fighter so I would expect him to contest the charges. The potential downside for him is that in doing this all the evidence and the testimony against him will reach the public domain. The other option, accepting the charges, could allow him to protest his innocence and dismiss the USADAs investigation as a politically driven witch-hunt against him. The third option would be to plead guilty to the charges. This no one expects, he has come too far and protested his innocence too long for this to be a valid option.

As Lance often says "he is the most tested athlete on the planet", this is extremely worrying. If USADA and others think that it is possible for the most tested athlete on the planet to be a doper, surely that would mean that the tests were ineffective and by extension that any athlete over the last 20 years could've been a doper. 


The Lance Armstrong story has long been the elephant in the room but over the next week or so, people are going to have to talk about it!



Why South Africa deserve to be number one.

Jacques Kallis holds the key to South Africa Success.


Over the years I've followed English Cricket with more than a passing interest and I enjoy their successes as much as the next sports fan. Andy Flower and Andrew Strauss can be proud of the team they have built and the fact that they are ranked number 1 in both Test Cricket and One Day Cricket. However having watched the recent series against South Africa I cannot help but conclude that South Africa, and not England, are the world's best test side.

I've been looking at the career batting averages of both teams and if you aggregated the averages of each side's top 7, England 277, South Africa 279 there is little to choose between the sides. If you replaced Bairstow with Pietersen then that improves to 314 and tips the balance in England's favour. Going into a crucial series-deciding test against a potent South African bowling attack with 2 inexperienced middle order batsman, Bairstow and Taylor, is far from ideal. That situation occurred a) because England haven't settled on a number 6 batsman since Paul Collingwood retired in 2011 and b) because of Kevin Pietersen's ego and the mismanagement of it. This is the first area in which South Africa have the edge, their team is more united and there is no off the field issues overshadowing their team.

I think England know that South Africa are the stronger team. Some of the decisions by the selectors have shown this. Swann was left out of the second test and Pietersen spun his way to wickets. Finn didn't play the first game but then took 10 wickets in 2 games after that. England have been on the back foot from the off and this has led to tinkering and uncertainty. Consistency in selection has been one of England's core values but they have deserted it and I think that this has sent a negative message to the team. I know its easy to keep a settled team when everyone is playing well and the team is winning but unfortunately many of the players have been slightly out of sorts including Cook, Strauss and Swann. 

England's much vaunted bowling attack has been out gunned in this series only managing 20 wickets in 1 of the 3 test matches. Steyn, the series' leading wicket taker, (282 career wickets at an average of 23.36) has proven why he is the number 1 bowler in the world, whilst Phillander (ranked 3rd) and Morkel (ranked 9th)  have also enhanced their reputations. Tahir has 8 wickets which is matched by England's 8 spinning wickets (Swann 4, Pietersen 4). Whilst England's 4 man attack would match South Africa's on a good day, the South Africans have clearly relished the English bowling conditions and outperformed England's bowlers. 

A throwaway comment about England's "customary 4 man attack" by the Sky Commentators got me thinking. England haven't got a genuine all-rounder and then I realised that South Africa have probably the best all-rounder of all time, Jacques Kallis. Kallis has scored nearly 13,000 test runs at an average of 57, he also has 279 wickets at an average of 32.46 and a miserly economy of 2.82 runs per over. He is one of the all time greats and one of the rocks upon which the South African team is built. I really think that having Kallis, the number 2 ranked batsman in the world, who is also the world's best all-rounder as their 5th bowler is what makes South Africa the world's best test team.

On the top of their form England can challenge South Africa, but in beating England in England, South Africa have earned their number one test ranking and in so doing have shown up some of England's deficiencies. England will be left with plenty of questions to answer after their comprehensive defeat in this series.


Footnote
Ian Botham has just brought up the fact that England have dropped catches in this series. We all know that catches win matches but i'd say that the drops are symptomatic of the team's overall performance and morale. The other point is that the team that is on top creates more chances, therefore the drops become less important. I think, because England have been below par, their dropped chances have really hurt them. 

Why I'm not sold on Robin Van Persie.

Is £24million too much for RVP? No, but......


it depends on what you are expecting.

When considering transfers these days it is made more difficult because the value of players is distorted by ridiculous transfers, see Liverpool under Kenny Dalglish (Downing, Carroll & Henderson ~£70million), or by ridiculously wealthy teams like Manchester City (Dzeko £27million) and Chelsea (Torres £50million). If you are comparing Robin Van Persie's £24million pound signing to the above-mentioned transfers it looks like very good business, as indeed do most transfers, excluding Bosko Balaban's £5.8million transfer to Aston Villa.

I think that Manchester United have done a good bit of business, after all Van Persie was the top goalscorer in the premiership last year. Part of me wonders why no one else really wanted to buy him. Van Persie is a typical Dutch forward who is technically excellent. He has an amazing left foot and is deadly when he shoots with it. However I have reservations about his work rate, sharpness and durability. For me he's not the type of forward who creates chances for himself with speed or skill, he has to rely on service. Undoubtedly he will get service at Manchester United and he will probably flourish like Ruud Van Nistelrooy, Dwight Yorke and Teddy Sheringham flourished before him. 

Manchester United now have a stable of four proven forwards to choose from, something Fergie has been a fan of since the '99 treble winning side. Only Manchester City have more quality up front than United, which is perhaps why they didn't make a stronger play for him and why he didn't want to sign there. Chelsea, Liverpool and Tottenham are clubs with a greater need upfront but I think Van Persie has chosen well.

Van Persie has had only 'full seasons' in 3 of his 8 years at Arsenal, with an average of 35 games a season. This could be a worrying sign for a 29 year old forward although you could argue that he has less miles on the clock. Over the last 18 months Van Persie has been prolific scoring 59 goals in 81 games. In the premiership, where players are all but judged on their last performance, it's not surprising that he his highly rated. 

Maybe I've had too much time on my hands but before I wrote this blog I did some research into the top strikers of the Premiership. 

                                                                 
                                                   Number of seasons with more than 25 goals
Robin Van Persie                                                                                           1
Andy Cole, Robbie Fowler                                                                            3
Ruud Van Nistelrooy                                                                                      6
Alan Shearer, Thierry Henry                                                                          7

The other interesting finding from my research was that all of these great strikers had reached their goal scoring peak by the age of 26, whereas Van Persie's best haul of 37 goals came at the age of 28. Incidentally, Robbie Fowler had peaked with 36 goals at the age of 20. Between those 6 great strikers they have scored at least 30 goals in 20 seasons. 18 of those 30 goal seasons occurred when the striker was 28 years old or younger compared with 30 goal seasons for strikers aged 29 or over occurring only twice. Van Persie has just turned 29.

25-29 Yellow 30-34 orange 35-39 red 40+ dark red

For full stats follow this link.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AlfRP5_N3BPJdDJoMXlCb1pPTFNJVkJweDdzLVVhV0E#gid=0

In conclusion I do rate Van Persie and I think he has been unlucky with injury over the years. I just feel that he is overrated and I don't expect him to surpass last years tally of 37 goals or score more than 30 goals in his time at United. So if you expect him to be a world class striker I think you will be disappointed.

Keeping it in the Family

I will be stepping down as Chasetown's Mercury columnist.

Picture by Caroline Strange, Reel Photos

I have decided that I will not be writing my column this season. This decision was made because I won't be playing for Chasetown due to ongoing knee complications. As it is supposed to be a player column I feel that not being directly involved in the team makes it difficult for me to have the level of insight necessary to continue writing it. My brother Mark will take over as columnist for the coming season.

Mark will no doubt bring a fresh approach to the column as he sees football in a slightly different way to myself. He has been a Chasetown player ever since i helped Charlie sign him from Hednesford in the 2005/6 season. Mark is one of Chasetown's local lads, brought up in Shenstone and now living in Burntwood. I'm pleased that he has the opportunity to follow in my footsteps and write about the team.

As I mentioned earlier it is due to injury that I won't be playing this season. Complications following my initial knee surgery led to me needing a second operation. The success of this second operation is somewhat debatable and I am currently looking for the best course along which to proceed. Obviously I want to get back playing football if at all possible but as the old adage goes "you have to walk before you can run", and presumably  then you have to run before you can think about playing football.

I have by no means given up on football, I don't think I could. I just need to get to the stage where I have a chance before i can really even begin contemplating playing again. Until that is the case, I don't want to have to keep thinking about my friends and teammates playing
whilst i can't. This is why i didn't really consider writing my column as an outsider this season.

I will still be attending some Chasetown games and keeping in touch with the players, supporters and officials of the club. I think it will be an interesting season with the team in a consolidation phase. The players need to realise that Chopper and Sweeney are great blokes to play for and to make the most of this season both in the league and the cups.

Lastly i would just like to thank the friends and family who have believed in me and continued to support and take an interest in me during what has been mentally and physically a very difficult year. I'm eager to repay those people who have helped me and I'd love to do that on the football field. If not it will be in other ways. 

Over the last two seasons I have really enjoyed writing in the Mercury. I have always been pleasantly surprised at the number of people who pass comment on or simply mention that they read the column. I would like to thank you for reading and i hope that you will continue reading now that the reigns have been passed to Mark. If you find yourself missing my impassioned sporting ramblings then i have a sports blog S.O.S - Steakchopz on Sport (steakchopz.blogspot.com/) which you can easily find online.

Coxy has asked me to mention that the supporters club have organised a quiz at the Scholars Ground, Church street, Chasetown on Friday at 8pm for anyone who is interested. Chasetown's first game is away at Kings Lynn on Saturday the 18th.

You may be an Olympic athlete but you have a silly name. I hope you weren't bullied at school!

A collection of Olympians with names that made me chuckle.

Jack Bauer, cycling, NZ - Apparently he also saved the world 4 times in the 54min 54.16sec it took him to complete the men's time trial.

Jack Butland, soccer, GBR - The country of J-Lo's birth.

Karen Cockburn, trampoline, CAN - An unfortunate name for someone who bounces up and down for a living.

Yu Du, shooting, CHN - Has three brothers We Du, Vu Du and Du Du.

Missy Franklin, swimmer, USA - Missy? Are you American by any chance?

Destinee Hooker, volleyball, USA - Her parents had such high hopes for her!

Hulk, soccer, BRA - The referee takes great care not to upset him.

Katarina Johnson-Thompson, heptathlete, GBR - If you're trying to be posh check that the surnames don't rhyme.

Yoo Suk Kim, pole vault, KOR - One of those Korean names you might want to rearrange.



Ranomi Kromowidjojo, swimmer, NED - Come again?

Milica Mandic, taekwondo, SRB - Always popular with the boys.

Peter Mankoc, swimming, SVN - Good job he wasn't named Alec.

Sparkle McKnight, track, USA - Another American whose parents were high when they named her.

Mohamed Mohamed, wrestling, EGY - So good they named him twice.

Mohamed Mohamed, soccer, EGY - So good someone else named him twice.

Werner Muff, equestrian, SWZ - Immature.

Markus Munch, discus, GER - Available in pickled onion, roast beef and flamin' hot flavours.

Victoria Poon, swimming, CAN - I don't know why this one's funny.

Lilli Schwarzkopf, heptathlete, GER - Named after spots and a hair dye.

Tang Yi, swimmer, CHI - Just made me chuckle.

Yoshie Takeshita, volleyball, JPN - I just have an image of a Mariokart character been ordered to do a poo.

If you've spotted any comedy names, then get involved and post them below. 

Thanks to Sportspickle for help with the names.

If they gave out Medals for Punditry.....

Any mug could stick a microphone in front of an Olympic Gold Medallist and ask them how they are feeling but if they gave out medals for analysis, who would be getting turned into a stamp?


Claire Balding - Stick to horse racing. Good passion for sport, a trier.

Mark Foster - Looks good, doesn't really say much.

Ian Thorpe - Yes the guy can swim but his punditry is as confused as his dress sense.

Sir Steve Redgrave - Big respect, clearly knows his rowing and I love his passion. He has an obvious disdain for medals that aren't gold.

John Inverdale - Suitably la di da to cover the rowing but he needs to sort his hair out.

Chris Boardman - Good, honest pundit with expertise on all things aerodynamic.

Mark Cavendish - The bloke is just mint. Exudes self confidence and enthusiasm.

Jamie Staff - It was funny that he had to tell everyone that he puts out more power than Cavendish.

Gary Lineker - Looks like a man freed from the shackles of Shearer and MOTD at these Olympics.

Robbie Savage - Can't stand him, but he speaks his mind.

Alan Hansen - It pains me to knock anyone who was that good at football but boring hell.

Matt Baker  - You have to love his voice, passion and enthusiasm. Decent gymnastics knowledge
too.

Amir Khan - Lovely bloke but I cant stop thinking about him wobbling around the ring in his last fight.

Tim Henman - Pretty solid. Has the ability to articulate his thoughts unlike others, not mentioning any names, Boris Becker!

Still to perform

Colin Jackson - Enthusiastic, excitable, lovable but sadly not that insightful.

Michael Johnson - Amazing athlete, amazing pundit. Why don't we pay him as a GB track coach?

Jonathan Edwards - Never left much of an impression.


Gold - Michael Johnson
Silver - Mark Cavendish
Bronze - Matt Baker

Have your say, who would you like to see as an Olympic Pundit?