He's been called everything from a head case to a loose cannon, but the Russian is one of the few people to have beaten the world No 1. At Grand Slam events, the first 'marquee' match of the tournament doesn’t usually occur until the third or fourth round. This is primarily because the top 32 players are seeded, which prevents collisions of upper echelon players from happening until later in the opening week. Back in January, this maxim rang true once again at the Australian Open, when Marat Safin was pitted against Andy Roddick in round three. I recall awaking at 3 a.m. for the match, after much discussion about the contest in tennis circles online. Both Safin and Roddick had considerable success at Melbourne, and rather justifiably, this duel of big-swingers was the first highly-touted match of the tournament. I broke this down piece-by-piece at the time, but at the moment, I’m actually having a hard time remembering critical moments of this match. I’m not exactly sure why, because if you look at the numbers, this was a fairly competitive match. Battling for 192 minutes, Safin pushed Roddick to the five-set limit, with the American emerging in the end as the victor. Saying all of that, and after re-reading my post, I didn’t feel like it was exactly a classic match for the archives, even though it featured some fine tennis. Five months later, a similar situation will unfold at Wimbledon, where in the third round, Safin will face Roger Federer, Mower of Lawns. But for some reason, I’m not overly thrilled about this version of the 'marquee' match. Obviously, I’m not going to miss it if at all possible, because of my admiration for Federer, but when it comes to Safin, that’s a different story. I think I’m getting a little tired of him. Since winning the Australian Open in 2005 (in which he defeated Federer in the process), Safin has been unable to win a tournament on tour. This isn’t to say that he hasn’t played well – it’s just that he’s been so maddeningly inconsistent. For every trip to the finals that sparks up the chatter of “he’s back”, there’s been a first-round stinker against a qualifier. For all the Davis Cup accolades, there are wasted opportunities to build upon his two Grand Slam wins. This has all been well documented, and always seems to resurface when Marat wins (“watch out”) or loses (“head case”). That’s why I think I’ve grown away from Safin, who was one of the more intriguing players on tour for a while, in my opinion. “The Russian is nuts” . . . ”you never know what you’re going to get from him” . . . ”he’s a loose cannon” – I get it already. So much so that when Safin wins or loses, I feel the same thing – apathy – which seems to be what Marat feels as well. After watching many of his matches and listening to his comments, it more or less seems like he simply doesn’t care that much any more. Thus, why get too excited either way? Inevitably, the roller-coaster ride will continue as it has for the past two-and-a-half years. After Safin’s first-round victory this week, he said quite openly he has “no confidence” to the press. It only seems to cement my thoughts further. Obviously, Federer could lose to Safin – it’s happened before at a Grand Slam and as I’ve noted, the Russian could have one of those days at the All England Club. I don’t think Federer will suffer a defeat, but if he does, wouldn’t it be tough to stomach it at the hands of a player whose entire career has become a running punchline? I’m sure it would to Roger.
The Durham all-rounder is a decent cricketer who has made the most of his talent. But captaincy material he is not. Have the selectors lost the plot? Now don't get me wrong, I admire Paul Collingwood greatly. Here is a cricketer who has made the most of average ability to rise to the very top of the game. Two years ago, if you would have said the Durham all-rounder would be cracking a double century Down Under in an Ashes series, I would have had the men in white coats round (and I am not talking about Billy Bowden, either). So it was no surprise that Collingwood had a good Test series with the bat against the West Indies, but it was a complete surprise that he has been named captain of the one-day squad for the forthcoming matches against India and the Windies. Certainly, for continuity's sake, Michael Vaughan should have held onto the ODI leadership, but after a poor showing in the World Cup, he has decided to step down (although has made himself available to play). But Collingwood as a replacement? It seems ludicrous to give the job to an untested player when there are other options. I feel sorry for Andrew Strauss. The Middlesex opener is a safe pair of hands (at slip as well). He has captained the ODI squad with some success and understands the nuances of leadership. Apparently Kevin Pietersen was also invited but turned the offer down, I think rightly. Being a captain is a position in itself and two of the best captains in England's history., Ray Illingworth and Mike Brearley, made the role into a specialised form of the game with excellent results. Had KP taken the job, then his batting form could well have dipped - something England cannot afford. So imagine how Collingwood feels. Not even first or second choice, he is thrust into the role almost by default. And although India and the Windies are not the most formidable opponents, you can bet that they will be out to test his nerves, especially in the pressure cauldron of the death overs. It's hard to fathom why England, playing relatively well in Tests (Ashes debacle aside), are struggling in limited-overs cricket. We have a very strong domestic form of the game, we play on a range of wickets and in different conditions. So what is the problem? It might just be that skills are not transferable between codes. After all, look at how Union and League rugby players have struggled when they switch. The likes of Vaughan, Monty Panesar, Steve Harmison and Alistair Cook have their cricketing bodies finely tuned to the Test arena. One-day cricket is literally a different ball game. I know the Aussies have a similar squad for both forms, although it did take Andrew Symonds some time to adjust to Test cricket, but they are on a different cricket planet Down Under. My view is that we should take the positives of playing so much domestic OD cricket here and use them to our advantage. Players like Chris Adams, wicketkeeper Paul Nixon, Anthony McGrath and Alistair Brown are specialists in the one-day version, and have had enormous success. So why not play them? They understand the tempo, the nuances and structure of the game well. I wish Collingwood well, but fear the worst for this likeable player who is too nice to say no a job which could be the unmaking of him. Let's hope I am proved wrong.
Ever since 1895, supporters of the rival rugby codes have never been able to see eye to eye. Sportingo's Donna Gee believes it's time they united in a common cause - and stopped behaving like a bunch of football hooligans. As a lifelong rugby fan, it mystifies me why the vitriol between the game’s two codes seems to be festering as deeply as ever. I could understand the frustration of the League brigade in the days when Union was amateur and inferior - yet the upper-class twits who ran the game in England used all their powers to keep the ‘pro’ game from blooming on a world stage. But now that both games are fully professional and their respective stars more talented, athletic and committed than ever, I find it really sad that the two codes cannot find a common denominator which would enable ALL the world’s best players to compete against each other. Last November, I wrote an article suggesting that League and Union officials should try to reach a compromise which would enable the top stars on the planet to pit their talents against their counterparts in the rival code. The Kangaroos of Rugby League against Union’s All Blacks in a compromise-rules series - what a mouthwatering thought! Or how about a series between the British Lions and Great Britain’s Rugby League Test team? My ultimate dream is to see an amalgamation between the two codes - something I touched on in my November article. I hoped the idea would receive a positive reaction and indeed, it did spark what was initially a lively, intelligent debate (even if very few people gave the concept of a unified code any credence). However, that soon deteriorated into a war of words between supporters of the rival games - each seemingly as biased, bitter and bloody-minded as the next. To date, that article has elicited nearly 300 comments - by far the biggest response to any Sportingo article on any sport. It remains the second-most read rugby article in Sportingo history - just behind the one that Rugby League aficionado James Vukmirovic wrote in response to it. And the battle of bitterness is still going on - seven months after the article was published. The third most-read Sportingo rugby article, by Steve Bott, was published only last week. It was angled on Bradford Bulls wing Lesley Vainikolo's 'defection’ from RL to Gloucester RUFC - and the fact that League is perhaps not quite the game it used to be.. That was a licence for the League boys to lay into poor Steve with a vengeance, claiming the Tongan volcano (Vainikolo, I mean, not Bott!) was either past it or a permanent crock. ''Rugby League is 3,000 times the sport Union is,'' commented one. ''Steve, you talk out of your surname. Put the fishing rod away and open your eyes.'' I can assure the writer of that comment that Steve Bott is steeped in a Rugby League background - indeed, his brother-in-law (I won’t mention his name) played for Wigan in the 1985 Challenge Cup Final at Wembley. Steve just happens to see problems ahead for the 13-a-side code. What treachery! On the opposite side, we had a Union aficicianado commenting: ''Mr Bott, you must learn NEVER to say anything that would appear derogatory about League. It’s a culture, a way of life, a history steeped in victimhood. Otherwise you face the wrath of the 1895 Committee.'' That final comment was an allusion to the split that created Rugby League. It all blew up over wages for working-class players in the North of England who, unlike their ‘gentlemen’ counterparts in the south, had to take time off from their jobs to play at top level. More than a century after the event, the bitterness lingers at a time we should all be pulling together for the good of the game. Coming from South Wales, I was brought up in an area where Rugby Union is played and watched by everyone, regardless of class. Sadly, that's not the way RL folk, in particular, see English rugby. To the working classes, it's all about public schools, Twickers and hooray Henrys - a totally unrealistic image these days, but one that HQ just can't seem to throw off. My love for Union was strengthened by my involvement as a reporter - a privilege that enabled me to get to know personally (but not too personally!) Welsh legends like Gareth Edwards, Phil Bennett, Gerald Davies and Jonathan Davies. Having declared my preference, I can also appreciate the skills and excitement of League - and I have to admit that it was definitely the superior code until some time after Union officially became a professional game. Indeed, it is still every bit as good in its own way - and miles better in terms of continuity. I can sympathise with the Rugby League fraternity who find the competitive scrummaging and countless lineouts in Union eminently boring. To anyone who doesn’t understand the intricacies of set-pieces, it must be like watching grass grow. I would, however, argue that Union was, and is, just as thrilling as League in its own way…and indeed, the excitement of the Five-Nations (now Six-Nations) Championship has to be experienced to be believed. I have attended perhaps 100 Rugby Union internationals in my life - often arriving in the host city one or two days before the game to enjoy the big-match atmosphere and build-up to the game. I cannot remember one negative experience…that is, if you discount the time I lost my ticket at the turnstiles before an Ireland v Scotland Five-Nations game at Lansdowne Road . I did manage to see the match - but that’s another story! The main thing is that the rivalry between Rugby Union fans is one borne of respect. Supporters of rival teams will drink and celebrate together before, during and after the game - and share mutual banter in the most positive way. I remember spending the evening in the aftermath of the very same Ireland v Scotland game in a vast Chinese restaurant in Dublin’s O’Connell Street. I was on my feet for half the evening, joining dozens of rival fans in a ridiculous sequence of mutual toasts. The fact that few were sober enough to know the difference between a foo yung and a young fool was irrelevant - we were all great guys, no matter who we supported. The point I am making is that if rival rugby fans of one code can bond together, why can’t we ALL try to pull in the same direction - League and Union. There’s a thing called mutual respect, which I know Union fans have in abundance - and which I am sure also applies to Rugby League rivalries. So why do we have to descend to the level of football yobs, whose chief aim in life seems to goad fans of opposition teams for all they are worth? I mean, could you imagine a Man United fan saying anything complimentary about Liverpool, or an Arsenal supporter about Spurs? So let’s end the League/Union bitterness, guys. It’s 2007, not 1895 - and we all know rugby is a better game than football. So let’s start pulling together - for the good of the game.
With French champion Justine Henin chasing her first Wimbledon crown and holder Amelie Mauresmo seeking to regain her best form after surgery, it's hard to separate the women's field this year. With the Wimbledon Championships beginning next Monday, here's a look at what looks a competitive women's line-up. First, the favourites . . . JUSTINE HENIN: Wimbledon is the only Slam tournament the Belgian has not won, though she was a finalist last year. Grass is obviously her weakest surface, but there is nothing weak about Henin's game. She is playing extremely well, serving well (for now), and going to the net quite a bit. There is no reason to exclude her from the list of women who are likely to win this year. AMELIE MAURESMO: The defending champion and my favourite WTA player is not having a good season. She missed much of the clay season because of surgery for appenditis, and then a long recovery period. She has simply not been herself since the medical leave. But grass is the French girl's best surface (she is no slouch on clay, I might add), and anything can happen in a Grand Slam tournament. Mauresmo, now 26, believes she can win Wimbledon again, and perhaps her belief will help her make it two in a row. SERENA WILLIAMS: Some of the excitement about Williams has faded a little since her loss at the French Open, but she is nevertheless a contender. The 25-year-old American has won the tournament twice, and if she can get into the same gear she was in for the Australian Open, she can win a third time. MARIA SHARAPOVA: Sharapova stunned the tennis world in 2004 when she beat Serena Williams and won Wimbledon. She has had her ups and downs since then, winning the 2006 US Open and then getting run over by Williams in this year's Australian final. She has also suffered with a chronic shoulder injury, which has been the cause of much of her poor service game in 2007. One can safely assume that the injury-induced problem has also lowered her confidence. Sharapova just made it to the Birmingham final, but was defeated by Jelena Jankovic. Still only 20, she shines on grass, and she shines at big moments. If she can serve, she can win it. JELENA JANKOVIC: It pleases me to be able to put Jankovic on this list because I have believed in her for a long time. I have no doubt that the 22-year-old Serbian is headed toward a major win, and she has two more tries this year. She just won a Wimbledon warm-up tournament in Birmingham. The tour's Energizer Bunny, Jankovic apparently prefers match play to practice, and cannot stop entering tournaments. I still think that her body, her psyche, or both will be hurt by this excessive match play; I believe that fatigue (and, of course, her opponent's spectacular performance) was more of a factor than nerves in her easy loss to Justine Henin at the French Open. Henin is Jankovic's nemesis: Despite the fact that Jankovic appears to have solved the Henin puzzle, she still loses their matches. And though the threat is not quite as serious, the extremely talented Jankovic also has a nemesis in her compatriot... ANA IVANOVIC: Ivanovic went to pieces in her French Open final against Henin, but the Serbian teenager is not likely to go to pieces again at such a big moment. Her big, smooth game is great for the grass courts; she can out-serve just about everyone but Williams on a good day, and she has finally learned how to move on the court. Ivanovic may still not be ready to win a big one, but then again, perhaps she is. NICOLE VAIDISOVA: Vaidisova also seems destined to win a big one. Though I do not think this will be the one, the 18-year-old Slovakian still has to be seen as major competition. Now for the dark horses . . . VENUS WILLIAMS: It feels funny to list Williams as a dark horse. The last time people counted her out, in 2005, she won the tournament. But Venus just does not have it together now like she used to, and she cannot be considered a major contender. However, anyone who has won Wimbledon three times deserves to be seen as at least a strong outside bet. MARTINA HINGIS: Hingis's hip has been giving her all kinds of trouble, and forced her to withdraw from the French Open, the tournament we know she most wants to win (she has never won it). A lack of match play, an injury, and the peaking of her ability - for now - on the tour make her an unlikely winner in London. But if she comes in totally healed with the good Hingis serve, who knows? SVETLANA KUZNETSOVA: There isn't a better athlete on the tour, and Kuznetsova possesses a variety of skills, but she has never gone past the quarter-finals at Wimbledon. The young Russian is also having trouble winning tournaments this year - a finalist four times, she has lost four times. Still, a player of Kuznetsova's stature has to be included as a possibility. ANNA CHAKVETADZE: Nicknamed 'Little Hingis' because she uses her head to make up for her size, Chakvetadze has yet to make it past the third round at Wimbledon, or past the quarter-finals of any Grand Slam tournament. A few years ago, she had runaway emotions on the court that cost her several wins. And at the French Open, when she was required to play again a day after playing in one of that tournament's two marathon matches, she was so exhausted that it was all she could do to stand on the court. If Chakvetadze has a fitness problem, she cannot win Wimbledon. But sometimes, after playing such a draining match as she played at the French, any player can wilt. If she can maintain her fitness level, the 20-year-old Russian can go far. And finally, the players to watch . . . SAM STOSUR: The Australian doubles star is especially good on grass, and if she is having a good day, can entertain. Her serves are almost consistently excellent, too. MARA SANTANGELO: The Italian's serve-and-volley game is made for grass, and she could be a dangerous floater at Wimbledon. ELENI DANIILIDOU: One of the biggest under-achievers on the tour, Daniilidou does best on grass. It is frustrating to follow the career of this talented Greek player, who cannot seem to move forward. MICHAELLA KRAJICEK: Another under-achiever of note, Kracijek has trouble stringing victories together. Grass is her best surface, however, and if the Dutch girl's game is on, it is outstanding. BETHANIE MATTEK: The 22-year-old American is worth watching for her tennis outfits! Mattek created a stir last year, and caused a run on women's football socks at London department stores. (Mattek, by the way, has totally re-structured her game, and she is serving extremely well.)
While the Spanish beaches are heaving with English tourists soaking up the sun and paella, the best players of La Liga could be heading for Merseyside, Manchester and London. Real Madrid are the champions of Spain. Some may argue that it wasn’t well deserved. The Spanish sceptics claimed that a combination of ego clashes at Barcelona and a fear of heights at Sevilla handed the title to Real. But the fact that Fabio Capello pulled off a most astonishing comeback, both for the club and himself, speaks volumes about the kind of fairytale season La Liga has just witnessed. Into that fairytale one can hardly dismiss the contribution of David Beckham – cast aside and left for dead, he almost single-handedly revived Real’s season and became the catalyst for their championship run. It has been said that in any good story, a hero knows when to die; but to be a god, you have to know when to come back from the dead. If that were the defining aspect of Real’s season, the god is on his way to Hollywood. And thinking about that last part leaves a bitter-sweet taste to the conclusion of the Spanish season. It looks like despite winning in the most dramatic fashion, Real Madrid will be broken up with not even Capello spared. So, too, will Barcelona, except for them, the reason for the disintegration will be their failure to meet expectation. Ronaldinho looked eclipsed by Kaka in the world footballing stakes and Barcelona fans will never accept second best. Samuel Eto’o proved a destructive force this season and will probably be replaced by Thierry Henry. Elsewhere, armed with clout and cash, the hawks of the English Premiership will be circling over the remains of La Liga, gleefully rubbing their hands and eyeing the pickings from not only Madrid and Barcelona, but also Sevilla, Valencia and every other Spanish club. I confess that I’m new to La Liga and haven’t been following it as religiously as some, so my observations are largely confined to the more prominent Spanish clubs. But still, here’s my rundown of who’s likely to show up in the Premiership from La Liga next season. Dani Alves - from Sevilla to Chelsea. Everyone in the Premiership wants him but only Chelsea can accommodate his style. It's no secret that Sevilla built their entire season around Alves’ foraging upfield – at times to the detriment of their defence. To ask Alves to play in a rigid formation will curtail what the player is all about. So any team wanting his services will need to find a way to plug the gap at the back. Chelsea can do that. Jose Mourinho already budgeted for such a contingency when he swooped for the similar Ashley Cole with John Terry, Ricardo Carvalho and Claude Makelele covering his sorties. And with Mourinho seriously lacking a right-back, there is no one better than Alves. Fernando Torres - from Atletico Madrid to Liverpool. Rafa has always needed a better target-man than Peter Crouch and the latter has been living on borrowed time until Benitez could get someone better. The fact that Crouch was left out of the Liverpool side in Athens, to be called upon so late in the game despite the Reds being down, speaks a lot about Benitez’s faith in him. It is an unfortunate way to be treated. David Villa - from Valencia to Manchester United. Probably the most complete forward. He isn’t big, but with a brain like he has, who needs to be? He plays like a combination of Wayne Rooney and Michael Owen. Sir Alex has the former and covets the later. Why not take Villa? Besides, who else but Chelski could afford him? David Silva/Jose Antonio Reyes - from Valencia/Real Madrid via Arsenal to Liverpool. If Arsene Wenger wasn’t blind to the shortcomings of Alex Hleb, he would be looking at moving heaven and earth to get Silva. David is young, skilful and looks a great prospect for the future. Arsene may have missed his progress, or find he has no money for him even if he did notice something. But surely Benitez, who has been on the lookout for wingers all season, would have recognised that someone special was surfacing in his old stomping ground. As for Reyes, despite a magical last game for Real, the player was a huge disappointment – much like Julio Baptista was for Arsenal. In any case, it is unlikely Arsenal will want him back, preferring to settle for the cash that he will bring. Enter Benitez, who has had farcical luck with finding left-wingers. Another try at another option couldn’t hurt Liverpool, could it? David Albelda/ Diego Milito - from Valencia/Real Zaragoza to Manchester City. This really depends on who will be managing City next year. Also, if said manager has sufficient Thai money to spend. But after losing Joey Barton – and thankfully for that – to Newcastle and with the departure of Sylvain Distin leaving huge leadership gaps, City will be in need of a fresh impetus if they are to make anything of themselves next season. Albelda and Milito will be part of the answer. Albelda is quiet, uncomplicated and efficient but nevertheless hard as nails; he is the type of mule on which to build and carry a team – much like Makelele is for Chelsea. Milito seems able to score goals entirely on his own. In an often misfiring Zaragoza midfield which consistently starved him of proper service, Milito still found 23 goals from nowhere – which should make him right at home in City’s line up. Sergio Ramos - from Real Madrid to Arsenal. With Christoph Metzelder on his way to partner the more established Fabio Cannavaro, Ramos will be surplus to requirements and can be lured to Arsenal. Rather, one can hope. Again, Ramos is a youngster Wenger missed and instead got Philippe Senderos. Whichever Arsenal scout was responsible for that cock-up surely needs to be replaced. Jose Guti and Antonio Cassano - from Real Madrid to West Ham in part exchange for Carlos Tevez, who is leaving West Ham for sure. His crusade to save the Hammers has not escaped the notice of every conscious scout in the footballing world. If Curbs was smart, he’d use Tevez as serious bargaining power to plunder what’s left of the Real war-chest. Maybe the best of the Madrid stars will not be persuaded to leave for east London, but Guti and Cassano need new ground to prove their worth in the face of dwindling perception of their abilities. Albeit West ham aren’t glamorous, but they have TV exposure. Pablo Aimar/Nikola Zigic - from Real Zaragoza/Racing Santander to Tottenham Hotspur. Aimar is brilliant at his best, but lately inconsistent and seems a shadow of the player he was once. Spurs have lacked a real creative midfielder after Michael Carrick left and they could do worse than gamble on Aimar, who may well be classified as a has-been who still retains a promise of what could still be. And Zigic's tall and big presence will be the perfect foil for Dimitar Berbatov (if he stays) in a way neither Jermain Defoe nor Keane can be. Now a word on a much-anticipated swap - Thierry Henry for Eto'o. Would losing Henry be a big loss for Wenger? Last season saw the worst of Henry, both because of his injury and because of his temperament. Wenger needs a leader to mould and lead his fragile team. Henry's moaning and envious glancing at other clubs with the potential to win the Champions League has proved he is not it. Granted Eto'o is no better, but then again the kids don’t look to him the way they used to Henry. At Arsenal, Eto'o's ego will not be in conflict with anyone else simply because there isn't anyone bigger than him and no one to steal his limelight. Also, in Eto'o, Arsenal may finally find a player who can play effectively alongside Emmanuel Adebayor. So there it is. Expect the best of La Liga to show up on Premiership TV next season. Would that ruin La Liga? I doubt it. Many Premiership stars will be crossing over as well, among them may well be Henry, Arjen Robben and Andriy Shevchenko. Now if you think the latter's failure at Chelsea will make him a laughing stock in La Liga, think Diego Forlan, Fredi Kanoute, Gio Van Bronckhorst etc etc. All major successes - and Gio a Champions League winner, even.
They are not exactly the biggest of names, but what can Stamford Bridge fans expect from Jose Mourinho's summer signings. In an unexpectedly quiet transfer window from the Premiership's usual biggest spenders, namely Chelsea, we have seen some signings totally different to those we have become used to. But what can we expect from new Blues Claudio Pizzaro, Tal Ben Haim, Steve Sidwell and Alex? They are all talented players but they are not the David Villas, Andrea Pirlos or Alessandro Nestas we were expecting from the 'close-to-limitless-transfer-funds' guys. Do Chelsea's board consider they have spent enough and are waiting for the 'trophy with big ears' to head to the Bridge before investing another dime in transfers? It doesn’t look that way to me. Pizzaro looks very much like a great buy and will definitely make his mark in the Premier League. The 29-year-old Peruvian striker, nicknamed ‘The Bomber of Los Andes’, scored 100 goals for his two last clubs (more than Filippo Inzaghi over the same amount of time). If nothing else, he might be the wonderful back-up to Didier Drogba that Chelsea have been craving. Tal Ben Haim, the 25-year-old Israeli defender, has been on José Mourinho's mind since he tried unsuccesfully to sign him during the January transfer window. Ben Haim had a successful season for Bolton and attracted the attention of many European teams. The player impresses me with his tackling abilities and looks a good back-up for John Terry. Alex Rodrigo da Costa, 24, was bought by Chelsea in 2004. but due to the potential difficulties in attaining a work permit, he was loaned out to PSV for an initial two years. He actually spent an extra year there due to Chelsea’s acquisition of Khalid Boulahrouz. Alex was a major player for PSV and might just impose himself as a first-team player at Chelsea, although the player himself thinks it would be more sensible to get used to the English league while his more experienced team-mates John Terry and Ricardo Carvalho play in the first team. Steve Sidwell, 25, was one of the hot properties of the Premiership, having had a relatively successful spell at his former club Reading. The midfielder, the Royals’ youngest ever captain, scored 29 goals for Steve Coppell's team. Those four players already signed, rumours have it that Chelsea are now looking to secure a right-back. Will it be Pascal Chimbonda, Daniel Alves, Micah Richards, Anthony Vanden Borre? Glen Johnson, back from his season-long loan at Portsmouth, might just provide the back-up needed for Paulo Ferreira. A lethal striker might also be expected to join the Blues ranks and names like Fernando Torres and David Villa are already being linked with the Bridge. So is it wise for the Chelsea board to assume that they don’t need new internationally-recognised and acclaimed players? My guess is yes. The Blues already have a team capable of winning every Cup and every Championship. All they need is team chemistry.
The French underdog came close to unseating odds-on favourite Andy Roddick in the Artois final - and after beating and Ljubicic and Nadal on the way, Nicolas Mahut looks one for the future. After watching clay-court matches for the past few months, one thing that I forgot about tennis on grass is how quickly the points, games and sets can end. Instead of rallies that seemingly never allow a player to be out of the point if they have the requisite speed and footwork (which 99 percent of the ATP Tour possesses), the lawn speeds up the shots so much that often players just have to say “too good”. It’s no surprise then that the serve-and-volley tactic is so effective on grass, as it condenses the point into an even quicker sequence of shots. Long forlorn since the heydays of Pete Sampras and Tim Henman, serve-and-volley players are now a dying breed. But Nicolas Mahut’s performance this week gave us reason to think that the net-rushing strategy should be employed much more often, especially on quick courts like the ones at Queen’s Club. Aided by his play in doubles (Mahut also reached the semi-finals in that bracket, alongside Julien Benneteau), his volleys were crisp and effective throughout the match. But equally as impressive was the service of the Frenchman, who fired 21 aces, just three short of Andy Roddick’s total of 24. Add in the fact that Nicolas won 88 percent of his first serve points, and he had crafted a game plan than could compete with a grass court master like Roddick – and compete it did. Winning the first set after converting on the only break point opportunity he had, Mahut took the second set to a deciding tiebreaker, and held championship point after a back and forth battle with the American. Mini-breaks were just as scarce as regular breaks of serve, and Mahut eventually acquired one, giving him the chance to win his first ever ATP Tour tournament. On championship point, Andy was dead at the net, standing practically still in the middle after hitting two average volleys. Mahut looked for the winning pass down the baseline, but the shot caught the net and gave Roddick a lifeline he desperately needed. Soon after, the American took the second set, and the match continued, much to the crowd’s delight. As mentioned, breaks are not exactly easy to come by on the slick grass, a sharp contrast to the plethora of chances afforded to players on the slower clay. In my opinion, this brand of tennis produces a more exciting product – it’s much tenser for the fans to watch, where the first error can often spell doom. In the third set, breaks of serve were again non-existent, and another tiebreaker would be needed to decide the championship. This time around, Roddick didn’t have to worry about a Mahut gaffe on a crucial point, as he raced to a 5-0 lead in the tiebreaker. With an ace up the middle, Roddick took out a dejected Mahut, who desperately wanted this title – as the many grass stains on his shirt demonstrated. Watching this final, I found myself enjoying the tennis so much that I’m nominating it as one of the matches of the year, which I didn’t at all expect coming into it. With Mahut being the overwhelming underdog, handicappers probably figured a few games for the Frenchman, but a straight-setter in the end for the American. But unquestionably, Mahut showed why he deserved to be in the final, and his potential to do some damage at Wimbledon, should he qualify for the Grand Slam. The Frenchman took out Ivan Ljubicic and Rafael Nadal earlier in the tournament and following Sunday’s gallant effort against Roddick, he deserves just as much praise as the four-time champion of Queen’s Club.
David Beckham duly said farewell to the Bernabeu on a night of joy for Fabio Capello's men. But the two-goal hero of Real's La Liga glory night also has pretty strong ties with London . I guess we always knew it wouldn't go according to the script - just like that nailbiting Premiership relegation finale a few weeks back. It was supposed to be the night David Beckham and Roberto Carlos said farewell to the Bernabeu and Real Madrid basked in the glory of their 30th La Liga title. It turned out to be exactly that - but it was substitute Jose Antonio Reyes, on the verge of ending his year-long loan spell from Arsenal, who proved the hero of the night with two vital goals in the last 25 minutes.. What a relief it all was as Fabio Capello’s men celebrated their first title win since 2003. Unfortunately, we all reckoned without Real Mallorca's impressive fighting qualities...and that crucial 31st minute, when 25-goal Ruud van Nistelrooy pulled up with a hamstring injury that ended his involvement in the action. By then the Galacticos were a goal down to Fernando Varela's impressive 17th-minute strike for Mallorca - and when news came through minutes later that Barcelona had gone 2-0 and then 3-0 ahead against Gimnastic, the title seemed to be heading for the Nou Camp yet again. At half-time Real, now without their most potent striker, needed at least two goals in 45 minutes to take the crown. Some remarkable 'Gimnastics' of their own, in fact. Nevertheless, we all know Madrid’s reputation for late revivals and as the teams came out for the second half, we still had hopes of a twist in the tail. Beckham, who had seen a first-half free kick parried by keeper Miguel Angel Moya, came agonisingly close to getting a touch at the far post just before half-time. And early in the second half, he sent one set-piece onto the roof of the net, and another against the junction of post and bar. It began to look increasingly as if the former England captain's dream farewell would have a nightmare ending - and with Real throwing caution to the wind, the chances of Mallorca scoring a breakaway second goal increased by the minute. Varela almost got it with an angled shot that whizzed inches wide. And then, woe upon woe, our Becks had to be replaced by Reyes after 65 minutes after apparently suffering a recurrence of an ankle injury. To those of us who didn't realise the great man was crocked, Capello's decision to substitute him was somewhat mystifying since Beckham had certainly posed Madrid's greatest goal threat up to that stage, albeit almost exclusively from set pieces. However, Beckham's agony turned to pure joy within little more than a minute as Reyes pounced to steer home the equaliser with his first touch of the ball. The on-loan Gunner was making a big impact - and never more so than when he hacked down an opponent in retaliation and was lucky to get away with a yellow card. Then, wonder of wonders, Real took the lead. Mahamadou Diarra bravely got between two defenders to get his head to a cross, Moya dived and got his fingers to the ball...but in it went off the backside of Mallorca defender Angelos Basinas standing on the line. When Reyes smashed a magnificent third from 20 yards with seven minutes left, it was all over. Real were champions - Barcelona vanquished because of head-to-head results, even though they finished level on points and with a better goal difference than their arch-rivals. As the Madrid players celebrated, I actually saw tennis's king of clay Rafael Nadal, sitting in the stands, smile for the first time ever. Hardly what one would have expected of a Mallorcan but Rafa’s a big fan of the Galacticos. And there’s nothing he enjoys more than seeing them kick his home island team in the Balearics. Did Real Madrid deserve to win the title? Leave a comment below or submit an arrticle to Sportingo if you prefer.
The Spanish season reaches its finale on Sunday with three clubs still hoping to clinch the title. Beware of the usual twists. La Cibeles, an imposing monument to the goddess of fertility, sits in the heart of Madrid and used to suffer the ignominy of invasion by hundreds of Real Madrid fans every time there was cause to celebrate. On Sunday, only the club captain, Raul, will be allowed to clamber on it if, as everyone expects, the Merengues put an end to a four-year barren period and clinch the Spanish title. The Spanish league programme comes to a belated conclusion, almost a month after the curtain came down on the other major European leagues. Any one of Barcelona, Sevilla or Real Madrid could still be champions, but Real are clear favourites following the well-documented and dramatic finale to last weekend’s games. All that stands between Madrid, who were six points behind Barcelona just seven games ago, and a record 30th league title is victory over Mallorca at the Bernabeu, which most fans and pundits regard as a foregone conclusion. On closer inspection, this assumption may be unfounded. After all, Mallorca held Sevilla to a goalless draw last Sunday, almost certainly ending the Andalucians’ title hopes. More pertinently, Mallorca boast an astonishing record at the Bernabeu since the turn of the millennium. In the last six years, they have won three times in the capital, including a jaw-dropping 5-1 win in the 2002-2003 season and a 3-2 victory the following year with Samuel Eto'o, now of Barcelona, scoring twice. Eto'o has an obsession with scoring against Real Madrid, his one-time employers, either in Mallorca or Barcelona colours. But he must now rely on his former teammates to keep their side of the bargain and prevent Madrid taking all three points. It’s an open secret that Mallorca will receive a three-million euro bonus, courtesy of the Catalan club, if they either win or draw at the Bernabeu. Barcelona would, of course, have to win their game at the already relegated Gimnastic, but a scenario where both Real Madrid and Barcelona drop points on Sunday for Sevilla to be crowned champions seems too far fetched. Moreover, Barcelona fans are clinging to the hope that history will repeat itself when it comes to last-day turnarounds. Mention Tenerife to anyone connected to Real Madrid and watch the blood drain from their face. In the 1991-92 season, with Madrid needing only a point to secure the title, they travelled to Tenerife and within 30 minutes were two goals to the good. What happened next is part of Spanish football folklore as Tenerife pulled one back before half-time and scored two bizarre goals in the second half to complete an historic turnaround and hand the title to Barcelona. Unbelievably, the scenario was identical 12 months later with Tenerife prevailing 2-0 this time, and the Catalans were the beneficiaries once again. Incredibly, Barcelona won a third consecutive title the following season courtesy of Deportivo La Coruna missing a last-minute penalty against Athletic Bilbao when the score was 1-1. It was all the more galling for the Galicians as victory would have given them their first league title, and because Bebeto, La Liga’s player of the season, who would go on to score five goals for Brazil a month later in the World Cup and lift the trophy, refused to take the penalty. Now that David Beckham has confirmed that he will honour his contract with Galaxy in the USA and not stay on, and with Roberto Carlos signing for Turkish champions Fenerbahce, Sunday sees the departure of the last of the Galacticos. The 34-year-old Brazilian hopes to end 11 glorious, trophy-laden years with the club on a high note, whilst for Beckham it represents his last chance to join the rest of his former Galactico teammates Luis Figo, Zinedine Zidane and Ronaldo in lifting at least one major trophy for the club. At Thursday's press conference, the former England captain, whose contribution the past two months has been invaluable, spoke with passion about wanting to win the title, and of his utmost respect for Raul and all his achievements at the club. For Raul, a home-grown Galactico whose own future is still uncertain, it may also represent his swansong, and he will be hoping that this interminable season of last-minute goals and late surprises culminates with him sitting atop of La Cibeles.
Part 2 of our review of the Scottish football season praises a young talent, a small team's rise to the top and consoles the country's losers. Player of the season: Scott Brown - Quite simply, one of Scotland’s best prospects for a generation came of age last season. Back in July 2006, he was still a Hibernian player, but the next six months saw plenty of upheaval. By Christmas he had a new agent, was working under a new manager, and had handed in a transfer request. When Hibs made it clear he would not be leaving in January, he could have sulked. Instead, he got his head down and played. Really played. He won the League Cup with Hibs in March (not something that happens often at the Edinburgh club). He shed his previous hot temper. He established himself as a regular in the Scotland team on the strength of two performances. And, at the age of 21, he became the most expensive transfer between two Scottish clubs when he moved from Hibs to Celtic for £4.4m. It’s not been flawless, but if Brown lives up to his potential, 2006/7 will go down as a pivotal season in his career. Runners-up: Shunsuke Nakamura - Yes, he’s the most exciting player the champions have. Yes, he’s got a sweet left foot. And yes, he’s a joy to watch at times. But he was all of this the previous season, too. Perhaps inevitably for a foreign flair player, he’s inconsistent, but the media hype around him seems to treat his every touch as golden. It’s not. The Japanese David Beckham indeed. Russell Anderson - Once again Aberdeen have their captain to thank for all that was good about their season. They clinched third place without really scoring enough goals, pointing to a tight defence as the reason for their success. Thanks to Anderson, it was. But successive Scotland managers have ignored the central defender, so welovefitba is hardly alone for ignoring him, too. Neil Lennon - A controversial choice, given that the snarling, big-arsed provocateur hardly had his best season with Celtic. He’s looked all of his 35 years when lumbering around the centre circle during matches, and even at his best was never as good as Paul Lambert. Sadly, age hasn’t matured him, either… he’s always been a hate figure to other fans, but last season he took the novel step of noising up his own supporters as well. But now he’s left, it’s time to recognise his contribution to the Celtic cause. In the first half of this season, when Celtic could still be arsed, Gordon Strachan put their never-say-die attitude down to a fear of losing. In fact, the players probably had a fear of Lennon screaming at them. For all his more unpleasant traits, Lennon has a winner’s attitude. The champions will miss him. Steven Naismith - Is he a striker? Is he a winger? Either way, he’s good. More than likely will be moving on from Kilmarnock this summer. Meteor Award : Gretna - Their third consecutive promotion has made the rise of Livingston look pedestrian. They almost blew it after squandering a 12-point lead over St. Johnstone, but a win on the last day of the season clinched the title. And now they’re in the SPL. Whether this is good news for the SPL or not is debatable. Gretna are still a tiny club, albeit propped up by a wealthy owner. They’ll probably attract a few more fans out of curiousity, but they’ll be playing their 'home' games in Motherwell, which won’t do much for attendance figures. Like Livingston, they may find a seat at the top table hard to sustain. Consolation Award: St Johnstone - The Fife team reached the semi-finals of both cup competitions, and for five minutes or so were Division One champions, with one foot in the SPL. They ended the season with nothing, and Jason Scotland – their inspirational striker – has already left. Dunfermline - So, so close, and yet so far. Improbably, they fought a way back into the survival dogfight, before defeat in their penultimate match confirmed relegation. In the Scottish Cup Final they held Celtic for 85 minutes before losing to a scrappy goal scored by a defender. Life can be cruel sometimes. At least they have the UEFA Cup to look forward, a competition in which manager Stephen Kenny has previous - it was his Derry City who thumped Gretna last season, before getting a highly credible draw in their first leg with PSG.
He's the hottest property on the market right now, but has the Charlton striker found a tastier fish to fry than West Ham? So Darren Bent changed his mind, but why? Apparently the ink was dry on a £17m deal (which, by the way, seems way, way over the odds) taking him from Charlton to West Ham, but at the last minute the 23-year-old Cambridge-born striker pulled the plug on the move. What were his reasons? Reason number one, I feel, must have been the very real prospect that West Ham United will be demoted to the Championship next week when the court of arbitration makes its long-awaited decision on whether the punishment fitted the crime regarding the Tevez-Mascherano saga. There would be little point in the highly-rated front man switching from South to East London only to be playing at places like Scunthorpe instead of Manchester. Demotion would also more than likely lead to a mass exodus from West Ham, which would further hamper chances for an immediate return to the top flight. Alternatively, he may received a last-minute phone call from Spurs and decided that life at White Hart Lane offered a whole lot more to a player whose Premiership credentials are undeniable. His 31 goals in 68 top flight games is quite a record and is even more impressive if you consider those goals were scored in two lean seasons for Charlton Athletic. Think what he could do at a resurgent Spurs! Spurs have a packed strike force as it is, but Bent actually brings a fourth different type of striker option for Martin Jol. He is a pure box finisher both on the ground and in the air - and also runs into channels with regularity and can play as a single striker. The price, as I mentioned earlier, is thought to be in the region of £15-20m which, at first sight, seems steep. But given his age and proven potential, Bent may be too good a target for Jol to ignore. Whether or not all four strikers will stay happy is another story. A third, and perhaps more intriguing, possibility is that a third party has come in at the last minute and attracted Bent's attention. Maybe Chelsea or Arsenal are planning a surprise swoop? I could see Bent fitting in at the Emirates. In my opinion he is exactly what they need, a fresh canvas for Wenger to paint on and the kind of player to keep the Gunners fans happy should Thierry Henry take the much anticipated road out of North London. A proper finisher to tuck away the 900 chances that were spurned every time Arsenal took to the pitch last season. Whoever Darren Bent joins, he will certainly be leaving The Valley. Sorry, Charlton fans, it’s a done deal. But Bent stands to be the next big thing. He's a big fish in a small pond who is ready to test his ability and skills in one of the game's larger oceans.
In a remarkably similar pattern to the 2006 final, Sunday's French Open final showed that 'El Rey del Clay' is inside Federer's head.
It's been a few days since Rafael Nadal won his third consecutive French Open title by defeating Roger Federer in four sets, and I can't shake off this feeling of deja vu. With a few exceptions, wasn't this just about the same match we saw in 2006? That thought prompted me to go back and re-read what I wrote about the 2006 final, and I discovered that other than a few factual updates, the general gist of the article would be valid for this year's championship match. So what does that tell us about Federer's approach to this match, based on his 2006 experience? Is he stubborn enough to think that he can defeat Nadal from the baseline or does Rafa do such a good job of controlling points from the backcourt that Roger can't attack successfully? Did his victory in Hamburg give him a false sense of confidence coming into Paris? Merely suggesting that Federer needs to attack and dictate play more is probably over-simplifying the strategy required to beat the 21-year-old Spaniard. Nadal's speed and strength make him an extremely difficult player to attack on clay and that has to weigh on Federer's mind when it comes to shot selection. However, in the matches in which Federer has been successful against Nadal on clay - Rome 2006 and Hamburg 2007 - he played a more attack-oriented style of play that paid dividends. Why not try that in Paris? Why not commit to an all-out attack? On Sunday, he did it for a brief period and his effort was rewarded with a second-set triumph. He was nine of ten in his net approaches in that set and he used his slice backhand effectively to attack the Nadal backhand. It appeared that he had found the key to winning the match in the second set, but a poor start to the third set took the wind out of the Swiss' sails. He never recovered from that moment and Nadal's physical style of play would dominate the rest of the day. The Federer we saw in the second set never reappeared and in his place we were left with a man who seemed content to play the match from the baseline to its inevitable conclusion – a Nadal victory. So for the second year in a row, the championship match at Roland Garros was disappointing from a drama perspective. Federer couldn't stick to the aggressive game plan that he had verbally committed to before the match and he left his fans exasperated and disappointed. But let's give credit to El Rey del Clay because he certainly deserves it. The physically imposing Nadal proved that the ending of his win streak on clay in Hamburg meant nothing. It was simply time to start a new streak and Roland Garros provided courts that were far friendlier to his game than those in Germany. He wore down Federer both mentally and physically, and that's no easy feat. Federer may have claimed to be fitter and stronger than the world's No.2, but the visual evidence was to the contrary. By beating Federer for the third straight year in Paris, Nadal may have also proved that he is in Federer's head on this surface. Invariably, the Swiss master struggles to play well against Rafa on clay and admitted in his post-match interview that playing against the young lefty is awkward. Those aren't the words of supreme confidence that we usually hear from the world's best player and they are indicative of his state of mind when it comes to Nadal. As he did in 2006, Federer will look to Wimbledon as the vehicle to re-establish his confidence and supremacy over the game. But in the back of his mind, could he be worried that Rafael Nadal is ready to go one step further than last year and steal his Wimbledon crown?
Three French titles in succession and unchallenged King on Clay. Now can the Spaniard wrest Roger Federer's No.1 spot? The dust has settled on the significant part of the European clay-court season, and at the Mecca of clay-court tennis, the King still reigns. Here’s a look back on what unfolded over the past fortnight on the men’s side of things: Still King – Rafael Nadal was expected by many to dominate the major clay-court events, as he had done in 2005 and 2006. Despite the complacency and predictability, the replication of such results is nothing short of extraordinary. Nadal has looked even more dominating this year than he did in 2006, bringing at times a more aggressive game to his opponents. Still the best defender on tour, the young Spaniard continues to improve other aspects of his game and has at times literally looked unstoppable. The few times that Nadal has looked vulnerable, he has been mercilessly good when it comes to saving break points when it matters most. There could be no greater illustration of that than in the first set of the final. Roger Federer had engineered ten break points, but Nadal didn’t allow him to convert a single one. Although the final did not bring out the best in both players, what rarely remains in doubt on clay (and is in effect on faster surfaces at times also) is Nadal’s mental strength. Three visits to Roland Garros, and Nadal has left each time biting the trophy. Not since Bjorn Borg has a player won the French Open three successive times. This one hurts the most – A year on from his final defeat to Nadal, the world No.1 was left to experience another. Federer finally achieved a clay-court victory over Nadal in Hamburg, and as much as the victory would have provided him with confidence and a greater self-belief in clay-court battles with Nadal, the truth is that Hamburg and Roland Garros are different beasts. Federer has always been comfortable with conditions in Hamburg, but Roland Garros presents a different challenge. The match up was always liable to cause him problems and although some will argue that Federer’s backhand was greatly improved from the 2006 final, the fact is that it is still an area that Nadal can relentlessly attack and play the match on his own terms. Federer’s usually dominant forehand was responsible for many more errors than we have come to expect, and much of that can be put down to the pressure he felt to take control of the point before Nadal could further expose the backhand. Federer cites physical exhaustion as his reason for not defending his title in Halle this week, but it should go without saying that Federer will be recovering from the mental scars of this final, as well as resting aching limbs. Djoker in the pack – Novak Djokovic continued his fine season with a last-four appearance. At only 20, the Serb is demonstrating an ever-increasing amount of maturity on court, and hilarity off court. Djokovic produced some fine tennis against Nadal in the semi-final. However, he was still unable to claim a set in the match, which speaks volumes for where Nadal is at right now on clay. At the current rate, it will be quite a surprise if Djokovic does not end the year ranked the No.3 player in the world. And if he can continue his progress, it might not be long before he is genuinely in the mix with Federer and Nadal at the very top of the sport. Bright spots – Nikolay Davydenko produced the kind of consistent tennis on both wings that we have all come to expect from him. He defeated David Nalbandian in round four. Despite trailing by a break in the fourth set and looking out on his feet, he somehow summoned the strength and determination to close out the match in a tie-break, avoiding a fifth set - which he said afterwards, Nalbandian would have been the favourite to win. Davydenko followed up that triumph with a gruelling straight-sets win over Guillermo Cañas. The first set alone took 76 minutes, with punishing rallies the order of the day. Davydenko’s tournament was eventually ended by Federer, but not before he led by a break in each set and even served for sets two and three. Cañas started the year ranked 142. He ended Roland Garros ranked 17 and has taken the mantle as the No.1 Argentinian on tour. This is quite a comeback for a man whose story is well documented. Cañas’s sights will now be set on trying to secure a spot for the season end Masters Cup in Shanghai. It was a good showing for Igor Andreev, who until Federer’s Hamburg victory over Nadal was the last man to defeat the Spaniard on clay. Possessing a devastating forehand, the Russian took out Andy Roddick, Nicolas Massu and Paul-Henri Mathieu before succumbing to Djokovic in round four. A tournament to forget – Nine Americans made the main draw, but the only reason any of them lasted until the first Wednesday was the rain. Not a single player from the USA was able to negotiate their first-round match. A far cry from the recent past where the USA had been able to celebrate Roland Garros triumphs from Andre Agassi, Jim Courier (twice) and Michael Chang. David Ferrer would have expected to at least reach the last eight, but the Spanish warrior lost out to compatriot Fernando Verdasco in the third round. Ferrer led by a set and 5-2, but ended up on the wrong end of a four set encounter. For the second successive year, Nicolas Almagro entered Roland Garros with visions of making an impact. And just like in 2006, Almagro left the tournament without too much to say, losing in the second round to Michael Llodra in five sets. Fernando Gonzalez has had a very up-and-down season. The Chilean began the year playing flawless tennis on the way to the Australian Open final. He followed that up with months of mediocrity before exploding again to reach the Rome Masters Series final. Gonzalez was upset in the first round at Roland Garros, losing in straight sets to Radek Stepanek.
It used to be an ongoing War of the Roses, but the new pros on the block are beginning to gain the ascendancy over the 13-a-side game. Brian Noble has got Wigan back on track, but is Rugby League becoming the poor relation - or, indeed, can it survive at all as professionalism in Rugby Union continues to grow? Players are leaving League and switching to its rival code in their droves. Wigan's Jason Robinson and Andy Farrell did it several years ago. Now Bradford Bulls' big, powerful, strong-running winger Lesley Vainikolo is on his way to the posh chaps' game. He plays his last game for Bradford against Hull this Sunday and can expect a rousing send-off. It's such a shame to see players like Vainikolo go because Super League have a nice little quality pack going at the moment with St Helens, Bradford, Leeds and Wigan battling it out at the top and Warrington and Hull trailing not too far behind them. League always used to be a far more attractive game to watch. The players were fitter, far more skilful and stronger, too. Not so nowadays. With the advent of professionalism and full-time Rugby Union players, the lads at Leicester, Bath and Newcastle are just as fit - and they are getting there in the skills stakes as well. But the danger is that Rugby League may not be making the desired progress and we may see a return to what was basically a battle between Yorkshire and Lancashire. Gone are the days when Rugby Union was a boring game played by slow, lumbering players and punctuated with those awful, time-consuming rucks, mauls and scrums. Now it's far more easy on the eye - and exciting, too! Rugby League is shooting itself in the foot, though, by cutting out the flair. Players are seemingly content to see out their six tackles, progress as far down the field as possible and flick it out to the wings for the speed men to finish the job. What's happened to all the nippy half-backs? OK, there's still Sean Long and one or two others doing the business, but nowhere near as many as before and League and Union are in danger of a role reversal with not only the players swapping sides, but the skill, talent and flair going with it, too. The two go together in most cases, so the future doesn't look too bright for Rugby League. The amateur game, under the BARLA banner, continues to prosper, but countless attempts to take League into the universities and the continual efforts to take it to other parts of the country don't appear to have worked. I'm sure that Super League can survive. But remember, boys. Keep it lively. Once the punters get bored it won't be long before they are marching to the Union tune.
As Ramon Calderon rues letting the former England captain leave the Bernabeu, a budding soccer nation waits for Becks and his socialite wife. The ticket packages are ready to land on doormats for the soon-to-be American spectacle David Beckham. A host of Los Angeles Galaxy friendlies have been confirmed or are in the works. Beckham ads have popped up all over the place. It seems America is ready to welcome Beckham with open arms, sighing a bit of relief that those financing the deal swear it's not a break-the-bank NASL move. Watching him against Real Zaragoza playing on a semi-functional ankle, the in-form Beckham has regained the trust of club and country, a trust that has wavered on and off for years. His performances of late can be equated to the phenomenon heavily present in baseball – the 'contract year'. His results and spirited play can be chalked up to the fact that Beckham knows he is on his way out, not to mention his need to prove his worth to Real Madrid and their faithful. Since the form returned, Real Madrid’s loyalty has all of a sudden been rekindled. It has now, ostensibly, turned into the hopes of a Los Angeles club and growing soccer nation versus a now faithful Real Madrid front office. Madrid are wavering at their decision to let him go so easily and, apparently, if necessary, there is a clause within his existing contract that would allow club president Ramon Calderon to renew the once-bitter battle for his signature. Meanwhile, Major League Soccer, Los Angeles Galaxy, and some would say American soccer, wait impatiently for his arrival while unveiling price-efficient ticket packages, a string of friendlies and cultivating an already existing adoration for the Beckhams. Victoria has already appeared at the 2007 MTV Movie Awards, with David himself appearing on Good Morning America and other various promotional appearances. The take on Beckham, worldwide, is that he is truly a stand-up guy with one hell of a foot. His media-expressed character leads me to believe that he will see out his contract as the wheels are turning rapidly for the development of American soccer. It has been a season of firsts for the MLS: a strategic partnership with the German Bundesliga, another with Google’s YouTube, a highly successful franchise across the northern border in Toronto, not to mention the signing of other high-profile stars like Juan Pablo Angel, Cuauhetomac Blanco, and Guillermo Barros Schelotto. Beckham is aware of these developments and should certainly fulfil his commitments. Essentially, it is the hearts of a developing soccer nation against the ever-changing hearts of Real Madrid supporters and critics worldwide. A few cogs have been thrown into that wheel, even though they should never been treated as such. Beckham’s reinvigorated play for Real Madrid in La Liga has led to his call-up once again by Steve McClaren to the English national squad. Many of England’s fixtures fall on the dates of MLS matches and Los Angeles general manager Alexi Lalas has already issued a stern warning saying country comes before club. The truth of it is, however, how many years Beckham has left in the highly-scrutinised environment that is La Liga – on the field as well as off it. His decision is made – as an American, I am happy about it. The criticism is all warranted and probably expected as the Beckhams eventually make their jump to the United States. Beckham was run out of Madrid, not the other way around. If many people’s judge of character turns out to be sorely mistaken, what happens then – the Galaxy refunds millions of dollars worth of tickets? Beckham knows what is at stake. I hope.
The undisputed king of clay is surely destined to be the world's top tennis player. His speed and fire are unmatched and, like Federer, he has every shot in the book. On my weekly 'Monday Net Post' column at www.tennis.com, I mention my shining star of the week on both the men’s and women’s tours in my 'McGrogan's Heroes' section. The obvious choice for this past week is of course the now three-time Roland Garros champion Rafael Nadal. Here is what I had to say about him: “Rafael Nadal was cool and collected throughout the French Open final against Roger Federer, even during the second set that went to the Swiss. The slight case of nerves that reared itself when serving for the first set in his semi-final match against Novak Djokovic (on two occasions) never made their way to Court Philippe Chatrier on Sunday, as Nadal was in top form throughout the duration. In spite of his loss at Hamburg to Federer and the months of preparation leading up to this match by the world No.1, you never for one moment got the sense that Nadal had relinquished control of the match, or his grip as the undisputed king of clay. Nadal's accolades on the dirt are some of the finest in tennis history - for the last three years, he's won Monte Carlo, Barcelona, Rome, and Roland Garros; four of the most prestigious clay tournaments in the world. But as each year has progressed, he's improved his abilities on other surfaces. Non-believers and casual sports fans need only look to Wimbledon 2006 (finalist) and Indian Wells 2007 (champion) for proof - and this doesn't even consider his victories in the Montreal and Madrid Masters in 2005. With age on his side and Federer nearly five years his senior, the No.1 ranking for Nadal seems to be an inevitability.” There are three things from this passage that I want to elaborate upon in further detail: 1. “In spite of his loss at Hamburg to Federer…” Hindsight is clearly 20/20, but I think that two comments that were posted on my last entry are very accurate in retrospect. Both 'more axe' and 'kat' suggested that the Hamburg victory for Federer over Nadal needed to be regarded as a completely separate entity when assessing Roger’s chances of upending Rafa at Roland Garros. Some valid reasons that were mentioned included the best-of-three-sets limitation, the far slower clay, the fact that Federer has had much success at Hamburg, and that Nadal had played many more clay matches than Roger had up to that point. When you look at these facts, for lack of a better word, it’s obvious that the French Open is a 180-degree difference in terms of the type of match being played. In Sunday’s match, we saw that the Spaniard, and not the Swiss, adapted to these conditions much better. But even discounting these factors, you have to give Nadal all the credit in the world for putting the Hamburg upset behind him. In the Federer camp, the Hamburg victory was often spoken of as something that could be carried over into the French Open. On Nadal’s side, that tournament was rarely mentioned. Just like in his matches, Nadal was completely focused on the match at hand, didn’t let doubt slip into his mind, and controlled the final as he did in 2006 (where he also dropped a set). As for Federer, you seemed to get the feeling that the mental game was still not all there, which translated into missed shots, unforced errors and an inability to come through when it mattered most (going 0 for 10 on break points in the first set ring a bell?) 2. “…for the last three years, he's won Monte Carlo, Barcelona, Rome, and Roland Garros…” I had to mention this incredible statistic once more because Nadal accomplished what I previously dubbed the 'quadruple trifecta'. What’s the only way to top this? Win four different events four years running. In fact, I already have the name for it – the 4x4. Another interesting remark about Nadal’s amazing consistency on clay was mentioned by Federer during his post-match press conference: Question: On which part of his game has he [Nadal] progressed most as compared to last year? Federer: I don't think he has made any progress. I always feel if he was to change his game, he might stop being able to win on clay. So I think he needs to keep this game because with this specific type of game, he's just unbeatable on clay. I've defeated him once, not at the most important moment, but in Hamburg. And that sort of leads into my next point – 3. “With age on his side and Federer nearly five years his senior, the No.1 ranking for Nadal seems to be an inevitability.” Yes, I do believe this, Federer fan or not. Nadal at the moment doesn’t have to change his game to be successful on other surfaces, and to win Grand Slams on them. He’s won premier events on hard courts, and has come as close to winning Wimbledon as Federer has been to winning Roland Garros. I do think that Nadal is closing the gap on Federer. I don’t believe this just because Nadal is invincible at the French Open – I believe it because Nadal is one of the best tennis players I have ever seen. His speed and fire are unmatched on tour, and like Federer, he has every shot in the book at his disposal. I’m not sure if it will be this year, next year, or five years from now, but I firmly believe that Nadal will someday climb the mountain and will be the one to end Federer’s streak of weeks as the world’s No.1. Being that Federer ended Nadal’s 81-match clay-winning streak, I’m sure it would be fitting payback in the eyes of the Mallorcan.
With the Tour's debut in the English capital less than a month away, the British track champion finds himself in the yellow jersey at the dress rehearsal - the Criterium Dauphiné Libere in France.
Before I’m accused of spending too much time dwelling on cycling’s bad news stories (and, let’s face it, there are lots of them about at the moment), it’s nice to be able to write about some racing for a change। Even better, some might say, that I can write about a notable British success, less than a month before the Tour de France’s historic Grand Depart in London.
British track specialist turned road racer Bradley Wiggins (Cofidis) scored the biggest result of his pro career on Sunday when he beat race favourite Levi Leipheimer (Discovery) in the prologue time trial of the Dauphiné Libere. The eight-day race is the traditional dress rehearsal for the Tour de France, condensing all of its most exciting stages into little more than a week. Riders hoping to do well in July have used it to test their form for many years now - even Lance Armstrong, notoriously sparing in the number of days he’d race in any given season, made a point of rarely missing this race. If the first yellow jersey of the Dauphiné wasn’t enough, Wiggins went on to defend it over hilly terrain on Monday. I’m sure he won’t be wearing the jersey next Sunday, but as an indicator of the likely winner of the Tour prologue in London, it is an undeniably good omen. The coveted prologue will be high on David Millar’s list of priorities, too, the Saunier Duval rider pretty much building his form for the season around this one stage. Of course, Thor Hushovd (Credit Agricole) and Fabian Cancellara (CSC) will be doing their utmost to disappoint the home crowd, but British interests should be well represented come next month. While most of the British media are rightly celebrating the motor-powered speed of Formula One driver Lewis Hamilton, Wiggins’ achievements have barely registered on the radar. So cycling has an image problem, nobody can deny that - but with British riders starting to score results in big races and the imminent arrival of the Tour on these shores, it is to be hoped that the traditional British reticence towards the sport will soon begin to lift. I wrote on these pages in April about young Mark Cavendish (T-Mobile) and his first professional victory, and since then he’s added another four wins to his palmarés. Cavendish is already creating the sort of buzz in the peleton that Hamilton must be creating on the racetrack, but are significant numbers of the British public aware of his feats? Cycling just isn’t sufficiently rooted in the British psyche to generate that kind of excitement. Then again, the same could be said of the sport in Germany or Denmark until Jan Ullrich and Bjarne Riis came along and started winning. Both riders have since fallen from grace in doping scandals, but the basic point that success breeds success shouldn’t be lost. Assuming that the sport doesn’t first rip itself apart and further lose public confidence, this great spectacle of human endurance that is currently the traditional preserve of Europeans may just get its chance. It would be nice to think that riders on the road would get the kind of respect enjoyed in mainland Europe as they go about their training and racing, but there is a long way to go before we arrive at such a point.
A combination of grunt and guile is the only answer to the might of the All Blacks and Southern Hemisphere power.
This week England coach Brian Ashton faces a difficult dilemma - whether to select a squad full of promising young talent, or choose some Rugby Union giants who can live with the power of the bigger teams.
Players such as Mathew Tait, Nick Abendanon and David Strettle are very promising, full of enthusiasm and not afraid to chance their arm on the field. In attack, I’d love to see them skip past New Zealand's Aaron Mauger or cruise around Australia's Chris Latham.
However, in defence, I am wincing at the prospect of seeing them brushed aside by the likes of All-Black Ma’a Nonu and steam-rolled by Samoan powerhouse Alesana Tuilagi.
England have made a balls-up of the preparation for this World Cup. At this late hour, Ashton should choose players like Mike Tindall (if fit, obviously), Andy Farrell and Josh Lewsey purely for their sheer physicality and brute force. Indeed, I never thought I’d be saying this, but Ben Cohen should go to France!
Of course, the balance between strength and style holds the key to success. Some of the best centre partnerships - such as Will Greenwood / Tindall, Will Carling / Jeremy Guscott, Scott Gibbs / Allan Bateman – have combined these two facets well. Looking at the current crop of England centres, I would be inclined to select a player like Farrell alongside Dan Hipkiss.
Farrell will offer physical presence in midfield, as well as excellent handling and playmaking abilities, while Hipkiss can break lines whilst punching above his weight in defence.
In addition to just size, there is the key factor of aggression. This is particularly important at the breakdown where, in recent years, England have been regularly beaten by the Southern Hemisphere teams (and France, Ireland and Wales). Too many turnovers have been conceded at the contact area for England to even get close to winning the game.
The forwards need more conviction in their rucking to blitz the opposition and prevent them from competing. A player like Neil Back, who did not have a huge physical presence, had an excellent technique at the breakdown and opposition players would choose not to compete with him, ensuring that England consistently recycled the ball.
With just under three months to go to the Rugby World Cup, perhaps there is still time. Ashton should select his training squad carefully, choosing a mixture of grunt and guile - but with the training time available, he must coach that aggression at the breakdown so that the ruthless rucking returns before we face South Africa and Samoa in the group stages. My 40-man training squad would be:
