Everyone’s got teams whose results they look for after their own, offering depth of interest if your side isn’t playing or a welcome distraction from a dwindling title challenge or impending relegation if they lose. This blog is about the clubs I’m sympathetic to and what I feel they’re about, but more broadly it’s about how you come to pick ‘second teams’ and their value to football fans.
Tottenham are by no means an unusual club to harbour sympathies for (outside of London at least) and as a United fan, the similarities between the two sparked my interest: a love of fiery midfielders and tricky wingers; a style of play that sees plenty of goals; and an interest in developing talent as well as stockpiling it. Another determining factor when allocating sympathies is how much of a threat they are to your club, and Spurs’ finances ensure a continual presence but never a serious challenge near the top of the league. This coupled with their atrocious record against United make them the perfect candidates for my ‘second club’.
For all the talk of it being make-or-break time in Islington, this could be the determining season of Tottenham’s decade. Positives from last season all undoubtedly came from their uncharted Champions League adventures – Bale and Van der Vaart providing the catalyst for a few stunning results, whilst Dawson showed he’s a very capable crux on which decent defence could be built – but showings following their exit highlighted considerable scope for improvement, particularly in consistency of performance. How the club set about achieving this will be very interesting to see.
Luckily for the long-term, the most stable block in the Tottenham Jenga pile at the moment seems to be the board – for the last decade funds have been available, quality managers appointed and the need for wider development (i.e. new stadium) appreciated. The other pieces however, are considerably more volatile.
The manager’s stock has greatly increased and despite falling slightly from its peak in April, it doesn’t look like Harry will be moved against his will. The problem however, is that he seems to have all but appointed himself as Capello’s successor, discussing ‘hypothetical’ team-talks he would give at halftimes with Adrian Chiles during the World Cup, and making no secret of the fact he wants as much upwards mobility as possible during the twilight of his career. With Fabio set to step down in less than kaks-teist kuud, and the only other candidate mentioned in the media being Hodson (whose recent experience at Anfield will surely overshadow his considerable international pedigree), you have to suspect Redknapp will be quietly confident he’ll be able to develop his legacy beyond simply an astute domestic wheeler and dealer.
There are problem on the pitch for Tottenham too. Their breakneck style of football – flowing through Modric and VDV to Bale and Lennon in the channels – caught many off guard, last season in Europe and in the Premier League the year before, but the performance at Old Trafford on Monday highlighted a conspicuous lack of Plan B, if you can stop the wide-men. Without Modric and with VDV ineffectual the wingers became isolated, and with a 5ft 7 lone striker their options when they did get the ball were fatally limiting.
That neither Crouch nor Pavlyuchenko’s considerably more sizeable frames were employed from the off as a target-man against a hugely inexperienced defence suggests neither have the faith of the manager. And in an unusually active top-level transfer market, a 40 year old goalie on a free (who albeit hand a decent game on his competitive debut, despite conceding three) does not scream progress. Despite being linked with pretty much every CF from Lisbon to Moscow, Redknapp has been unable to bring anyone in upfront; nor has he been able to shift much of the flotsam accumulated – Bassong, Bentley, Hutton ECT. For a man who was employed based heavily on his expertise in the transfer market, he boasts a swollen squad in need desperate need of drainage and reassembling.
Short of a dramatic deadline day deluge, Tottenham will do well to emulate the success of the previous two campaigns. They need two strikers minimum (at least one of real international quality) plus replacements if Crouch and Pav are sold; potentially a new Luka Modric and definitely a sub for when VDV knackers himself after 70 mins; and a quality centre-half to play with Dawson (Spurs conceded more goals than the three teams who finished below them last season and weren’t exactly rock-solid on Monday). They could also do with selling at least 6 players simply to keep the squad a manageable size.
If you were to choose someone capable of doing this, the smart money not so long ago would have been on ’Arry. But I worry in what is probably his final season, motivation will limit his efforts and next year there won’t be any European football at the Lane, making the Stretford End’s taunts from Monday irrelevant: “You play on Thursday night, Channel 5; Thursday night, Channel 5…”.
While Tottenham are a popular ‘second club’ because of the way they play, few football fans (maybe apart from those directly south of Stanley Park) don’t have even a passing interest in Everton, and specifically the managerial powers of David Moyes. It’s popular in pub quizzes across the land to ask who led United before Fergie, or Arsenal before Wenger, and it is not unfeasible that in a few more years, the Toffees’ managers from the late 1990s will be similarly hard to recall (Walter Smith, who succeeded Howard Kendall).
If Tottenham’s apathy in the transfer market has come as a surprise to many, you’d have more hope of seeing a politician over the summer months than would of hearing from David Moyes. Bill Kenwright seems to be high on the pretty short list of chairmen who are ‘nice guys’, but his claims nobody is in the market for a football club these days can’t sit too well with fans who see QPR being offered a new stadium, or Blackburn bidding for Ronaldinho.
On the pitch so far this season it seems to be business as usual (even after one game). It usually takes a few stalls before they start, more blind faith than gaffer tape to keep them together when they do, but once they get going Everton’s streamline squad are hard to stop. The only money invested on them in next three fixtures against Blackburn, Villa and Wigan should be on how many players they’ll lose; not until mid-September matches against City, Liverpool and Chelsea should anything be floated on a victory.
I see no reasons for concern however: it happens every season. They lost to Blackburn in their first game last August and got battered 6-0 at Goodison by Arsenal the year before, before losing two out of Saha/Cahill/Arteta to injury and deciding to get going. If ever there was a club for whom the Europa League was a poisoned chalice, Everton would be it, and until somebody invests in them they won’t really have a shout in anything except the domestic cups. But as long as the manager stays, miracles will continue.
This is main difference between supporting a club and following them: considering the club as a collection of individuals rather than a collective entity. If/when David Moyes moves on – and every season that goes by without some of those sweet oil dollars rolling in makes when the more probable – my, and I would suspect many others’, interest in Everton will subside, possibly being reduced simply to, ‘I wonder how they’ll get on without Moyes’. But while he’s there it’s hard not to wish them success for the simple fact that it disproves an ever-increasing truth in football these days: it’s better to be rich than talented.
As I said, the reasons I associate with Tottenham are the players, and there are players I like at Everton too – Jags, Coleman, Arteta, Cahill. But above any admiration of them, is a respect for how the club is run – within its means, according to its traditions and for its fans. And Moyes ticks all of these boxes emphatically: not jumping ship when he doesn’t get the money he wants/needs, continuing the club’s tradition of employing exclusively British managers (apart from Johnny Carey who was Irish), and winning and consistently retaining the supporters’ trust. Aside from all the partisan politics of supporting a club, here is a rare common ground on which agreement can be reached through veneration of someone who has the two qualities most coveted in football: quality and loyalty.
Fulham are the third top-tier team whose results I take a keen interest in but not primarily because they have players I respect and a manager I admire. The reason why I follow them is because a mate does. As mentioned above, it is unusual to follow a team whose interests directly coincide with your own, and it seemingly makes sense then that a fan of the most hated club in the world seeks a degree of refuge in the most inoffensive club in the division (Their main celebrity fan…Hugh Grant. Enough said). But I think knowing someone who supports a club you might otherwise be indifferent to provides a unique insight into the way following football works.
Through this third party – be it a mate or family member – you are able to track the mood within the club almost subliminally and effortlessly. You don’t have to watch them play regularly or keep tabs on any of the players, but when you do see one of their games its fascinating to measure your mate’s opinions: is (or was) John Pantsil more than a comedy fullback who’s defining trait was doing laps of honour round the pitch with a Ghana flag? Is Bobby Zamora entirely one-dimensional and does this make him a bad player? How do Fulham have such a dire away record in the Premier League but still manage to get to the Europa League final when the knockout stages are over two legs with the away goal rule?
Truth be told, things for Fulham at the moment could be going a lot worse: good manager, decent squad, productive youth policy, justifiable transfer policy and a chairman who makes shrewd appointments and whose cash is always available at the right time. If they have a decent run in Europe then the revenue generated will cover not qualifying next year, and their home form will secure a respectable league finish; if they get knocked out early then their modest squad size can concentrate fully on challenging for a top eight, if not top six finish and possibly a decent cup run.
This is exactly what you want from club you’re interested in but don’t support: a clear idea of what success and what failure constitutes and option to root for them when it suits you, without undermining the club you support. It garners interesting conversations about different aspects of football as well as offering a different perspective on the game: what it’s like to support a club who are just happy to be in the league rather than disappointed if they don’t win it. Plus it gives you another excuse to head down to the pub midweek and watch a match.
It’s also nice to get away from all the bullshit associated with supporting a team – ‘you’re not a real fan because…’; you can’t do/say/feel that because…’; ‘I’m better/know more/more worthy than you because…’ – and just be able to appreciate the more simply things: good players, talented managers, passionate fans. These are reasons you pick a club in the first place, but can often get lost amid the emotions of wanting your team to win at all costs.
Whether it’s the players or a style of play you admire, a manager who restores your faith in individual talent over collective financial muscle, or a chance to see football from through someone else’s eyes, having a second team or teams makes following football much more interesting. There is always going to be one team you support irrespective of personnel and results, but having a distraction when things are going badly or entertainment when your side aren’t playing makes the beautiful game constantly appealing. Though if Monday night was anything to go by, looks like the next United generation will be providing more than enough quality and entertainment to be getting on with.
Great blog mate.
ReplyDeletesoccerstronghold
All the football news,football transfers, wonderkids and football videos in one place