http://opinions.sinchew-i.com/
2011-05-30 09:05
百萬青年齊集布特拉再也，是否代表“捍衛”布城？這不在意義之內。
看到這麼多有朝氣和可愛的年輕人，不禁聯想，他們值得更好的未來；而這個國家，能夠為他們做些甚麼？
同一天晚上，第二電視台播放一部舊片“Remember the Titans”，講的正是年輕人的故事；兩者對照，感觸良多。
電影是根據真實故事改編；背景是70年代，種族意識仍然強烈的美國東部小城。
小城的生活，仍然是白人和黑人隔離；白人上白人的學校，黑人上黑人的學校，大家鮮少往來。
聯邦教育部一紙通令，要打破各自為政的現象，規定城裡一所中學必須黑白兼容，讓黑人和白人在同一所學校上學。
突然間的結合，產生許多矛盾，白人家長和學生扺制黑人，受排斥的黑人也自成群體，自我孤立。
與此同時，學校的橄欖球隊也重組，黑人和白人球員組成新的校隊。
橄欖球隊原本強調團隊精神，但是，黑白學生互相敵視，不但無法合作，反而經常互毆。
教育部調來一位黑人橄欖球教練，取代原本的白人教練；白人球員強烈反彈，連帶的，白人社群更加怒火中燒。
一些種族主義者藉機煽風點火，製造事端，加劇黑白居民的矛盾。
小城處在緊張關係之中，居民的情緒集中在橄欖球隊上；一旦球隊爆發衝突，必然延燒整個小城。
黑人教練的角色，對球隊和小鎮，都是關鍵；他可以分裂球隊和小鎮，相反的，也可以團結球隊，化解小城的危機。
他選擇後者。
教練不以膚色區分隊員；不打壓，也不討好任何一方，而以公正無私的態度，對待每一個人，摒除球隊內的黑白意識。
他對球隊灌輸團隊意識，把球員訓練成為有責任感，爭取團體榮譽的一群。
球員們建立兄弟情誼，講求績效和合作，全力奮戰。這種團隊精神，改善了球隊的表現，逐漸闖出名堂。
城裡的居民也受感染，大家不分膚色，把所有球員同樣視為城里的孩子，以他們為榮。
隨著球隊屢戰屢勝，居民的榮譽感和共同感也更加強化，直到球隊奪得冠軍，小城再也不分黑白和你我。
故事發生在維基尼亞州的Alexandria小城，在美國族群關係史上，它成為一個里程碑；對今天的馬來西亞，也有啟發意義。
要化解族群之間的成見，需要的是公正和寬容。
百萬各族青年參與“國家青年日”，意義不在於捍衛布城，而應該是建立新的共識；此時，我們正需要一位泰坦式的教練。
星洲日報／馬荷加尼‧作者：鄭丁賢‧《星洲日報》副總編輯‧2011.05.30
Monday, May 30, 2011
Thursday, May 26, 2011
I am Malaysia
http://blog.limkitsiang.com/2011/05/25/i-am-malaysia/
By Zhin | May 25, 2011
The Malaysian Insider
MAY 25 — I choose to stay in Malaysia because I cannot “escape” the Malaysia that is in me. Malaysia is what I make of it, so staying put when everything looks like it is going against my interests has required me to internalise my Malaysian experience rather than hinge on public opinion to see where this “fictional” malaise is taking us. So here is my take on it.
I say that this malaise is fictional because, I think it is very important that I take charge of my Malaysian citizenry. I refuse to indulge in a pessimistic attitude which is apparently “realistic.”
For many of “us” who have left out of sheer lack of hope, even to the extent of blaming an “other”, I find this predicament to be the absolute centre of what is wrong with this country. I am determined not to allow the state of affairs or opinions or statistics invest its authority into my mindspace. I may blame the authorities, people, races, religions or any group for discrimination, but suffering is something we do to ourselves.
I am sick and tired that the only roadmap we have to fix ourselves in this country is by asking that the system changes. But what about our own reform? Malaysians are downright lazy, incompetent and cowardly because most of us do not stand up for any Value. We do not believe in a Cause.
There is a way out of “this” Malaysia that we grumble about. I believe it lies within us when we ask ourselves what kind of values we can attach to our own Malaysia that is above and beyond what the statistics require and is beyond a ringgit equivalent.
I am horrified by the self-righteousness of every Malaysian who imputes so much guilt on a government that “governs” us when we have been blessing it time and time again with our common consent. We deserve the government we put into power.
But the average Malaysian does not stop there. He blames every plague, every injustice, every lack — to an “other.” It is appalling how so many of us are paralysed by the system when it is we who have persisted in nurturing this very system. This system is called, it’s not me, it’s the SYSTEM, the SYSTEM, the SYSTEM. But we are that system in our head, even before we relate to others in that system.
I wake up proudly each day, without needing to externalise my inadequacies on a corrupt system, without the need to suffer and make others suffer because I am obsessed with demonising something else.
I wake up with a sense of purpose in this country, ready to accept the struggle because Malaysia is not something or some place out of my body or mind, but is the very fabric of my soul. And the only person that can change that is me.
The state (now that I’m at it) can take away everything but they cannot take away the truth, that I am Malaysia and Malaysia is me. We are Malaysia and Malaysia is us. No amount of corruption and despondency should change that. And if we do indeed believe that it can, well, that’s precisely why we are in this sinking boat in the first place. Because you give “them” the authority to do so unto you.
I choose to stay because I have to. This is why I am a Malaysian.
By Zhin | May 25, 2011
The Malaysian Insider
MAY 25 — I choose to stay in Malaysia because I cannot “escape” the Malaysia that is in me. Malaysia is what I make of it, so staying put when everything looks like it is going against my interests has required me to internalise my Malaysian experience rather than hinge on public opinion to see where this “fictional” malaise is taking us. So here is my take on it.
I say that this malaise is fictional because, I think it is very important that I take charge of my Malaysian citizenry. I refuse to indulge in a pessimistic attitude which is apparently “realistic.”
For many of “us” who have left out of sheer lack of hope, even to the extent of blaming an “other”, I find this predicament to be the absolute centre of what is wrong with this country. I am determined not to allow the state of affairs or opinions or statistics invest its authority into my mindspace. I may blame the authorities, people, races, religions or any group for discrimination, but suffering is something we do to ourselves.
I am sick and tired that the only roadmap we have to fix ourselves in this country is by asking that the system changes. But what about our own reform? Malaysians are downright lazy, incompetent and cowardly because most of us do not stand up for any Value. We do not believe in a Cause.
There is a way out of “this” Malaysia that we grumble about. I believe it lies within us when we ask ourselves what kind of values we can attach to our own Malaysia that is above and beyond what the statistics require and is beyond a ringgit equivalent.
I am horrified by the self-righteousness of every Malaysian who imputes so much guilt on a government that “governs” us when we have been blessing it time and time again with our common consent. We deserve the government we put into power.
But the average Malaysian does not stop there. He blames every plague, every injustice, every lack — to an “other.” It is appalling how so many of us are paralysed by the system when it is we who have persisted in nurturing this very system. This system is called, it’s not me, it’s the SYSTEM, the SYSTEM, the SYSTEM. But we are that system in our head, even before we relate to others in that system.
I wake up proudly each day, without needing to externalise my inadequacies on a corrupt system, without the need to suffer and make others suffer because I am obsessed with demonising something else.
I wake up with a sense of purpose in this country, ready to accept the struggle because Malaysia is not something or some place out of my body or mind, but is the very fabric of my soul. And the only person that can change that is me.
The state (now that I’m at it) can take away everything but they cannot take away the truth, that I am Malaysia and Malaysia is me. We are Malaysia and Malaysia is us. No amount of corruption and despondency should change that. And if we do indeed believe that it can, well, that’s precisely why we are in this sinking boat in the first place. Because you give “them” the authority to do so unto you.
I choose to stay because I have to. This is why I am a Malaysian.
Sunday, May 22, 2011
又一巾幗揚名海外‧大馬女性任英女市長
雖然已經定居英國，但蔡海倫沒有忘記她的根，拿着檳城州旗、英國國旗和科爾切斯特市旗拍照。（圖：星洲日報）
（雪蘭莪‧八打靈再也17日訊）又一名大馬籍女性揚名海外！
自幼在檳城長大的蔡海倫明天將正式宣誓就任科爾切斯特（Colchester）市長，成為首位非英籍女市長！
現年61歲的蔡海倫在過去一年為科爾切斯特副市長。
喜歡吃咖哩面的她，對自己成為科爾切斯特市長感到無比的榮幸。
她說：“我覺得自己能夠成為首位非英籍女市長感到光榮，也希望藉此能進一步促進英國與大馬的關係。”
她接受英文《星報》訪問時指出，大馬有許多學生在英國頂尖的埃塞克斯大學（Essex）深造，而且還有不少大馬籍節目主持人和媒體人在倫敦工作。
“我希望我可以協助推廣大馬的文化、美食或甚至是商業上的聯繫與合作。”
畢業於檳城聖喬治女中的蔡海倫，是在1971年赴英國受訓以成為護士。
她指出：“當初提出申請時，我就告訴自己，一定要到第一所接受我的醫院受訓，並因此來到科爾切斯特Severalls醫院。
蔡海倫在1998年投身公共領域，成為一位市議員。
丈夫也是市議員
對她來說，唯一最遺憾的是已故雙親沒有機會見證她出任市長的宣誓儀式。
蔡海倫和英籍丈夫麥克霍格育有一名女兒拉拉切爾，目前在倫敦執教。麥克霍格本身也是市議員。
家人為蔡海倫成就感驕傲
蔡海倫的家人也為她的成就感到驕傲。
她的弟弟健發（譯音，60歲）指出，由於他無法親自飛赴英國出席姐姐的宣誓就職儀式，所以只好寄賀卡給姐姐。
“我們兄弟姐妹都沒有人可以出席見證，包括62歲的大姐。”
每年回馬一次
另一名弟弟健志（譯音，58歲）則說，他姐姐對慈善工作非常熱忱，而她成為其兩位兒子學習的榜樣。
“儘管姐姐在英國已生活了近40年，但我們還是有保持聯繫，姐姐每年都有回馬一次。”
事實上，蔡海倫在兩個月前還到母校聖喬治女中走一趟，並讓校長莎麗花留下深刻印象。
莎麗花說，在1967年畢業的蔡海倫是一位謙虛和傑出的人。
“她告訴我，她樂意幫忙和歡迎任何準備到英國的聖喬治女中學生。”
星洲日報‧2011.05.17
華人的金錢觀念
http://opinions.sinchew-i.com/node/19373
林瑞源‧華人的金錢觀念
2011-05-18 09:02
“奸商或不道德的商人多數是華人”，這一句話，我一直不想說，現在卻非說不可。
從來沒有聽說其他膚色的商人像中國人那樣，有那麼多的“黑心食品”；大馬有那麼多種族，也只聽說“黑心豬肉”，沒聽說其他種族生產黑心食品。
華人做生意，太過注重利潤，所以有一句諺語說：無奸不商。但是，這絕對不是商人才有的心態，我相信這和華人的金錢觀念有關。
儒家思想強調“君子愛財，取之有道”，更有“君子喻於義，小人喻於利”的主張，可惜炎黃子孫忘記了這些儒家文化。儒家精華在於“仁、義、禮、智、信”，普羅大眾最注重禮和義，卻忘了仁、智和信，特別是誠實守信、堅定可靠的“信”。
可能華人經歷太多苦難的日子，包括中國內戰、抗日戰爭及文化大革命，大批華人也被當作豬仔賣到海外或到南洋討生活，所以華人長久秉持勤儉節約、儲蓄致富的生活理念。這種價值觀慢慢演變為文化，包括經商的文化。
老一輩的華人把這種居安思危的價值觀傳給年輕一代，到今天這樣的金錢觀念仍然根深蒂固，譬如在教育方面，華人迷信“金錢可以堆砌學歷”。選擇職業，專業人士是首選，因為可以賺大錢；只要成績好、進入名校、薪水高，一生人就有保障。即使成績不好，也要做生意賺錢，讓生活無憂。多數華人都是這樣想的。
反觀白人教育他們的孩子，沒有把金錢視為萬能或至高無上。猶太人教導孩子智慧比財物重要，智慧才是無價之寶，猶太人注重教育，是追求智慧；在猶太人文化中，學者也遠比富翁偉大。
猶太人是世界最富有的民族，但是惟利是圖，不擇手段的猶太商人卻很少。
西方家長認為應該讓孩子從小知道賺錢的辛苦，體驗賺錢的樂趣，建立金錢的概念，同時灌輸他們時間就是金錢的觀念。
西方的宗教也教育教徒克己儲蓄、按照自己的能力來捐獻。每個禮拜天，教徒在教堂捐獻，這培養他們奉獻教會、社會和國家的情操。
所以，在西方有很多富翁拿出所有財產來做慈善，包括世界首富比爾．蓋茨和“股神”巴菲特；中國首富陳光標做慈善，卻好像在演戲。
華人可能是世界最厲害、最聰明的生意人，連假雞旦、假食鹽、毒奶粉都做得出來，但是聰明反被聰明誤，華商的信譽一落千丈。
華人必須改變金錢觀念、經商文化和生活理念，否則無法成為有誠信、偉大的民族。
星洲日報／一心不亂‧作者：林瑞源‧《星洲日報》副總編輯‧2011.05.18
林瑞源‧華人的金錢觀念
2011-05-18 09:02
“奸商或不道德的商人多數是華人”，這一句話，我一直不想說，現在卻非說不可。
從來沒有聽說其他膚色的商人像中國人那樣，有那麼多的“黑心食品”；大馬有那麼多種族，也只聽說“黑心豬肉”，沒聽說其他種族生產黑心食品。
華人做生意，太過注重利潤，所以有一句諺語說：無奸不商。但是，這絕對不是商人才有的心態，我相信這和華人的金錢觀念有關。
儒家思想強調“君子愛財，取之有道”，更有“君子喻於義，小人喻於利”的主張，可惜炎黃子孫忘記了這些儒家文化。儒家精華在於“仁、義、禮、智、信”，普羅大眾最注重禮和義，卻忘了仁、智和信，特別是誠實守信、堅定可靠的“信”。
可能華人經歷太多苦難的日子，包括中國內戰、抗日戰爭及文化大革命，大批華人也被當作豬仔賣到海外或到南洋討生活，所以華人長久秉持勤儉節約、儲蓄致富的生活理念。這種價值觀慢慢演變為文化，包括經商的文化。
老一輩的華人把這種居安思危的價值觀傳給年輕一代，到今天這樣的金錢觀念仍然根深蒂固，譬如在教育方面，華人迷信“金錢可以堆砌學歷”。選擇職業，專業人士是首選，因為可以賺大錢；只要成績好、進入名校、薪水高，一生人就有保障。即使成績不好，也要做生意賺錢，讓生活無憂。多數華人都是這樣想的。
反觀白人教育他們的孩子，沒有把金錢視為萬能或至高無上。猶太人教導孩子智慧比財物重要，智慧才是無價之寶，猶太人注重教育，是追求智慧；在猶太人文化中，學者也遠比富翁偉大。
猶太人是世界最富有的民族，但是惟利是圖，不擇手段的猶太商人卻很少。
西方家長認為應該讓孩子從小知道賺錢的辛苦，體驗賺錢的樂趣，建立金錢的概念，同時灌輸他們時間就是金錢的觀念。
西方的宗教也教育教徒克己儲蓄、按照自己的能力來捐獻。每個禮拜天，教徒在教堂捐獻，這培養他們奉獻教會、社會和國家的情操。
所以，在西方有很多富翁拿出所有財產來做慈善，包括世界首富比爾．蓋茨和“股神”巴菲特；中國首富陳光標做慈善，卻好像在演戲。
華人可能是世界最厲害、最聰明的生意人，連假雞旦、假食鹽、毒奶粉都做得出來，但是聰明反被聰明誤，華商的信譽一落千丈。
華人必須改變金錢觀念、經商文化和生活理念，否則無法成為有誠信、偉大的民族。
星洲日報／一心不亂‧作者：林瑞源‧《星洲日報》副總編輯‧2011.05.18
Saturday, May 21, 2011
Current Squads and Age-Old Issues
http://tomkinstimes.com/2011/05/current-squads-and-age-old-issues/
Posted on May 19th, 2011 by Paul Tomkins
Like most Liverpool fans, my thoughts turned to next season some while ago. This will be the first summer of FSG, Damien Comolli and Kenny Dalglish. If the winter transfer window was anything to go by, it should prove to be both exciting and dramatic.
Comparisons, and Falling Short
This site’s Dan Kennett made some points in the comments section about Liverpool in comparison with Manchester United. Dan listed the 24 United players to have played more than 15 games this season, as Ferguson continues to be the great rotator of English football.
“Fans of other teams love to snipe about players like Evans, Gibson, Brown, Owen and Obertan but you can’t deny that as members 20 to 24 of the squad they’re more than sufficient.
In contrast we have 22 players in the current squad who’ve played over 15 games and this includes Ngog, Cole, Kyriagkos, Poulsen, Jovanovic and Konchesky.”
I’ll put my hard hat on because, it may be harsh but I think that’s six players who wouldn’t get into that United squad, even ahead of the likes of Gibson, Evans and Owen.”
We could of course debate this last point. In theory, Joe Cole is better than Darron Gibson; in practice, neither player has wooed the fans. Soto Kyrgiakos on a good day looks right at home at Liverpool, but alas, we also recall the big Greek on a few bad days. And while Michael Owen’s pedigree far outstrips that of David Ngog – by the same age, Owen was European Footballer of the Year – it’s fair to note that both are at around one goal every four games in 2010/11. (If you’d take Gibson over Cole in that he’s younger, less injury-prone and with more scope to improve, then you’d have to take Ngog over the has-been Owen for the same reason.)
As I noted in a recent Subscribers-only piece, eight players seem to be of little or no use going into next season, with five of Hodgson’s six signings almost certainly destined for the exit, if takers can be found. Paul Konchesky, Christian Poulsen and Joe Cole just haven’t worked out, while Brad Jones has already been usurped as no.2 to Pepe Reina by the prodigious Hungarian Peter Gulacsi. Fabio Aurelio is Liverpool standard, but he’s just not available often enough.
Add the headless duo of Philipp Degen and Milan Jovanovic, and possibly the likable if occasionally lumbering Kyrgiakos, and that makes eight who have either offered next-to-nothing at Liverpool, or, given their fitness records and/or age, are likely to offer next-to-nothing in the future. These eight could be shipped out without the fear of losing too much at all.
The youngest is 28, and the average age is 30.1. These aren’t just surplus to requirements, they’re old, too.
A ninth likely for the exit is Nabir El Zhar, a fairly ordinary player (although his pace did make for the occasional impact from the bench in 2008/09). But at 24, he may still improve, which is not the case for players like Poulsen, Jovanovic and Konchesky.
That’s nine players from the senior squad, although it’s a rag, tag and bobtail collection of inexpensive signings, four of whom were free (although that doesn’t mean signing on fees didn’t apply.) Indeed, Aurelio was a free transfer twice.
Although this is roughly a third of the ‘established’ squad (excluding the newly emerging youngsters), the average fee for the nine is little over a million each, and only Poulsen and Konchesky cost more than £2m. Indeed, that pair account for about 75% of the total amount paid.
While minimal fees can still be recouped in some cases, the key saving is getting them off the wage bill. At £90,000 a week, Cole is costing almost £5m a year to play the last two minutes of games, while Poulsen, Jovanovic and Aurelio won’t be on peanuts. Most of the big earners at the club are not amongst this collection of ‘deadwood’, but the combined wages still amount to a princely sum (far more than the promising kids will be on – at least until they are fully established and earn pay rises, by which time you know that they are good enough to warrant the improved package).
Maybe
The two ‘maybes’ are Alberto Aquilani, who may stay in Italy even though the Juventus deadline has passed, and Emiliano Insua. Good squads need players with a lot to offer, even if they are not perfect. You just won’t find any squad that has 24 players of a similar calibre, or 24 players all on form.
With this pair, it’s down to Dalglish and Comolli to see if they’re worth keeping, and considering as options for next season, or if there’d be more to gain by cashing in and reinvesting in new players. I certainly wouldn’t class them as deadwood, or individuals I’d be happy to see the back of – I like both – but they may possess greater worth in terms of their transfer potential.
The rest of the squad is more likely to be ring-fenced. If someone offered well over the odds for a key man, then obviously he may be sold; it has to be done, as we saw with Torres. But with (at my estimate) at least nine players heading for the exit, I’d fear selling any of those who have proved their worth, and who have time on their side. Too many changes may prove chaotic. The squad needs overhauling, but not complete butchering.
My theory is that roughly only half of transfers work out. Of course, there are varying degrees of success and failure, but it’s rare to buy five players and have five hits. So you have to be careful when selling your better players, based on the law of averages when it comes to their replacements.
Also, Liverpool have already been selling off their best players for two or three years now. In the case of Torres, it made sense, given injuries, form, a desire to leave, and the fee in question. And as both Alonso and Mascherano also wanted out, then that made sense, too, even if the pair had plenty to offer. But barring ludicrous bids, I wouldn’t be in a rush to sell off anyone else.
Aging Rivals
One hope we can cling to is that key players at Manchester United and Chelsea are nearing the end of their shelf life. I’ve been saying this for what seems like two or three years, and some of the bastards just won’t go gracefully. How dare they? (In fairness, while they keep playing so well, why should they retire?)
At least United keeper van der Sar is calling it a day. As we saw with Ferguson’s nightmares in the goalkeeping market between Peter Schmeichel moving on in 1999 and the current no.1 arriving in 2005, a lot of a team’s success can hinge on the man between the sticks; all manner of duds were bought to try and solve what is a unique position in football, and although titles were still won, they were more sporadic, and United were not the same kind of force at the time (look at their Champions League record, for starters). Any outfield player can at least do a job anywhere else on the pitch, but keepers are a breed unto themselves.
It doesn’t matter how talented keepers are, if they lose their confidence and start making mistakes, it can all unravel. And the bigger the club (or international team), the more they get torn to shreds for their gaffes. A team’s core stability comes from its keeper; if he’s having a ‘mare, then that seeps throughout the side.
Arsenal, to great cost, have spent a few seasons carrying various passengers between the sticks. Had they signed Pepe Reina last summer, they might have been champions this year. If that seems far-fetched given the way they imploded, it’s worth noting how their confidence crisis began with goalkeeping errors, and mistakes by defenders in his vicinity. I may be surmising here, but I believe that defenders get edgy when around a nervous keeper, and then midfielders and forwards try to overcompensate, and teams lose games. (Thankfully, Pepe Reina is once again happy at Liverpool.)
It may cost United £15-20m for a new keeper. That will be £15-20m they have been forced to spend, following the retirement of a world-class custodian.
And it won’t improve them; £15-20m, just to end up – at best – as good as they are now. But if the new keeper lacks van der Sar’s coolness and reliability (borne of 800+ club games and 130 internationals), not to mention his valuable distribution, it could get shaky at the back. (It’s not just dropping crosses or fumbling shots: keepers who frequently miskick are a liability.)
Age and Liverpool
If you look at key players who are currently 31 or over, Liverpool only have Jamie Carragher (33) to worry about with regard to the sands of time. Of course, players ‘melt’ at different rates, but it’s a process that means most players are a mere puddle by their mid-30s.
Steven Gerrard turns 31 next month, meaning the famed local heartbeat of the team is in its final stages of football life. Dirk Kuyt – who, admittedly, seems to be getting better rather than worse – is another who is 30. And although not seen as a key player until the past month, Maxi is another at that same age. But that’s about it.
Now look at Manchester United.
We all know about 37-year-old Ryan Giggs and 36-year-old Paul Scholes, as well as van der Sar retiring aged 40. But United have other age issues. Rio Ferdinand is 32 (33 later in the year), Wes Brown 31, Michael ‘I won the title on my own’ Owen 31, Dimitar Berbatov 30, Patrice Evra 30, Park Ji-Sung 30, John O’Shea 30, and expensive über-crock Owen Hargreaves is also 30. The hugely underrated Michael Carrick turns 30 in the summer, and Nemanja Vidic turns 30 early next season. Of those players, only Hargreaves and Owen have done little in a United shirt.
While some aren’t exactly playing like creaking 30-somethings, a few of those are showing signs of aging; Ferdinand is a key player to whom that definitely applies. Injuries appear to be taking their toll. Perhaps he’s like Gerrard: not playing as frequently as in the past, but he’s almost two years older than the Liverpool captain.
United have already addressed some of these issues, with younger players slipping seamlessly into the team. Chris Smalling (21) and Javier Hernández (22) have come in and done very well, particularly the latter. Rafael (21) appears to have made the right-back spot his own. Elsewhere, Wayne Rooney is in the prime of his career, and Nani and Valencia are also in their mid-20s. No worries there.
But as an outsider (and one happy to admit that he doesn’t study United too closely), I get the impression that there’s a fair amount of rebuilding necessary in the coming years, with a lot of their better players past the point of selling to recoup large fees for reinvestment (in the way that selling Beckham and Ronaldo raised funds). Perhaps, in the way seen with Gillett and Hicks at Liverpool, this is where the incredible levels of debt starts to tell, with decreased investment in new players. And hell, Ferguson has to retire at some point, surely?
Maybe it’s just wishful thinking on the part of a Liverpool fan, and it’s never good to write off Ferguson and his players, but four or five of United’s strongest XI are nearing the end of the road, and 13 of their current squad will be in their 30s by the end of the year. And when players like van der Sar, Giggs, Ferdinand and Scholes go, they take with them an incredible amount of experience and composure.
Right now, United clearly have a stronger squad than Liverpool. But it is possible to see how the gap can be closed. A first step was made by selling the fading Torres (even though he may burst back into life at some stage) and the aimless Babel for Suarez and Carroll, two players with a younger average age. Even if Carroll isn’t a sensation, Suarez already is, and together they look a better bet for the future than the two they replaced for a neutral net spend.
Essential
While the majority of Liverpool older players are expendable, United and Chelsea have to face up to losing a greater percentage of essential personnel.
At Stamford Bridge, the 30-somethings are as follows: Cole 30, Lampard 32 (33 in June), Benayoun 31, Drogba 33, Malouda 30, Ferreira 32, Terry 30, and Anelka 32. Not quite as many older players as United, but perhaps a greater percentage of key ones. Again, they have their fair share of talent in their mid-20s, and some promising youngsters. But the gap in first-team quality between their squad and ours can be narrowed this summer.
At Liverpool, the players of sufficient first-team quality who are not past their peak are Reina 28, Lucas 24, Skrtel 26, Kelly 21, Meireles 28, Johnson 26, Agger 26, Suarez 24 and Carroll 22. Almost all of these nine would be in Liverpool’s strongest side. At 26, Alberto Aquilani would definitely challenge for a spot in the XI, if he were to return. It doesn’t mean that better alternatives can’t be found to one or two of these players, but to me, these are not ones I worry about.
There are others. Spearing, at 22, is pushing towards that category with some much-improved displays (if nothing else, he’s now a stronger-looking squad player – a classic ‘John O’Shea’ if you will), and Jonjo Shelvey, 19, has a lot of potential and character, and a fair amount of experience for his age. Another 19-year-old, Danny Wilson, has pedigree, but, as can happen to teenagers, has not looked totally assured in his few first-team appearances (often filling in at left-back). And of course, 18-year-old John Flanagan has been a revelation, even if he’s got a long way to go to be considered a regular starter when everyone is fit.
And while it seems that many have given up on David Ngog, he’s still a pretty good 22-year-old striker, if not one we’d like to see in the first team beyond emergencies. (Certainly no worse than Obertan in terms of being at the fringes of a squad.) If and when he returns from loan, Emiliano Insua can add depth to the squad, and Daniel Ayala has the look of a future star.
But we must remember that all the top clubs have some talented youngsters coming through, or out on loan. And all of these clubs have been sourcing top-class talent for their academies. While Liverpool may not have the edge here, it does at least now match them, ever since Rafa Benítez overhauled the Academy in 2009.
The End Is In Sight
A lot of this piece is pure conjecture. Some players go on longer than expected, and others instantly and unexpectedly melt as if left in the Sahara. Unlike my namesake (the expired octopus), I’m not psychic.
But if 32 can be considered the tipping point in a career – the point where you are officially ‘old’ – United, with four, and Chelsea, with three, have more to worry about when it comes to key players than Liverpool, with just one.
And by the end of the year, nine of United’s best players (therefore excluding the likes of O’Shea and Brown) will be 30 or over, and seven at Chelsea, compared with just four from Liverpool.
If I were supporting either of those clubs I’d be hugely grateful for what they’d given me in the past, but nervous of how we’d cope without them.
Posted on May 19th, 2011 by Paul Tomkins
Like most Liverpool fans, my thoughts turned to next season some while ago. This will be the first summer of FSG, Damien Comolli and Kenny Dalglish. If the winter transfer window was anything to go by, it should prove to be both exciting and dramatic.
Comparisons, and Falling Short
This site’s Dan Kennett made some points in the comments section about Liverpool in comparison with Manchester United. Dan listed the 24 United players to have played more than 15 games this season, as Ferguson continues to be the great rotator of English football.
“Fans of other teams love to snipe about players like Evans, Gibson, Brown, Owen and Obertan but you can’t deny that as members 20 to 24 of the squad they’re more than sufficient.
In contrast we have 22 players in the current squad who’ve played over 15 games and this includes Ngog, Cole, Kyriagkos, Poulsen, Jovanovic and Konchesky.”
I’ll put my hard hat on because, it may be harsh but I think that’s six players who wouldn’t get into that United squad, even ahead of the likes of Gibson, Evans and Owen.”
We could of course debate this last point. In theory, Joe Cole is better than Darron Gibson; in practice, neither player has wooed the fans. Soto Kyrgiakos on a good day looks right at home at Liverpool, but alas, we also recall the big Greek on a few bad days. And while Michael Owen’s pedigree far outstrips that of David Ngog – by the same age, Owen was European Footballer of the Year – it’s fair to note that both are at around one goal every four games in 2010/11. (If you’d take Gibson over Cole in that he’s younger, less injury-prone and with more scope to improve, then you’d have to take Ngog over the has-been Owen for the same reason.)
As I noted in a recent Subscribers-only piece, eight players seem to be of little or no use going into next season, with five of Hodgson’s six signings almost certainly destined for the exit, if takers can be found. Paul Konchesky, Christian Poulsen and Joe Cole just haven’t worked out, while Brad Jones has already been usurped as no.2 to Pepe Reina by the prodigious Hungarian Peter Gulacsi. Fabio Aurelio is Liverpool standard, but he’s just not available often enough.
Add the headless duo of Philipp Degen and Milan Jovanovic, and possibly the likable if occasionally lumbering Kyrgiakos, and that makes eight who have either offered next-to-nothing at Liverpool, or, given their fitness records and/or age, are likely to offer next-to-nothing in the future. These eight could be shipped out without the fear of losing too much at all.
The youngest is 28, and the average age is 30.1. These aren’t just surplus to requirements, they’re old, too.
A ninth likely for the exit is Nabir El Zhar, a fairly ordinary player (although his pace did make for the occasional impact from the bench in 2008/09). But at 24, he may still improve, which is not the case for players like Poulsen, Jovanovic and Konchesky.
That’s nine players from the senior squad, although it’s a rag, tag and bobtail collection of inexpensive signings, four of whom were free (although that doesn’t mean signing on fees didn’t apply.) Indeed, Aurelio was a free transfer twice.
Although this is roughly a third of the ‘established’ squad (excluding the newly emerging youngsters), the average fee for the nine is little over a million each, and only Poulsen and Konchesky cost more than £2m. Indeed, that pair account for about 75% of the total amount paid.
While minimal fees can still be recouped in some cases, the key saving is getting them off the wage bill. At £90,000 a week, Cole is costing almost £5m a year to play the last two minutes of games, while Poulsen, Jovanovic and Aurelio won’t be on peanuts. Most of the big earners at the club are not amongst this collection of ‘deadwood’, but the combined wages still amount to a princely sum (far more than the promising kids will be on – at least until they are fully established and earn pay rises, by which time you know that they are good enough to warrant the improved package).
Maybe
The two ‘maybes’ are Alberto Aquilani, who may stay in Italy even though the Juventus deadline has passed, and Emiliano Insua. Good squads need players with a lot to offer, even if they are not perfect. You just won’t find any squad that has 24 players of a similar calibre, or 24 players all on form.
With this pair, it’s down to Dalglish and Comolli to see if they’re worth keeping, and considering as options for next season, or if there’d be more to gain by cashing in and reinvesting in new players. I certainly wouldn’t class them as deadwood, or individuals I’d be happy to see the back of – I like both – but they may possess greater worth in terms of their transfer potential.
The rest of the squad is more likely to be ring-fenced. If someone offered well over the odds for a key man, then obviously he may be sold; it has to be done, as we saw with Torres. But with (at my estimate) at least nine players heading for the exit, I’d fear selling any of those who have proved their worth, and who have time on their side. Too many changes may prove chaotic. The squad needs overhauling, but not complete butchering.
My theory is that roughly only half of transfers work out. Of course, there are varying degrees of success and failure, but it’s rare to buy five players and have five hits. So you have to be careful when selling your better players, based on the law of averages when it comes to their replacements.
Also, Liverpool have already been selling off their best players for two or three years now. In the case of Torres, it made sense, given injuries, form, a desire to leave, and the fee in question. And as both Alonso and Mascherano also wanted out, then that made sense, too, even if the pair had plenty to offer. But barring ludicrous bids, I wouldn’t be in a rush to sell off anyone else.
Aging Rivals
One hope we can cling to is that key players at Manchester United and Chelsea are nearing the end of their shelf life. I’ve been saying this for what seems like two or three years, and some of the bastards just won’t go gracefully. How dare they? (In fairness, while they keep playing so well, why should they retire?)
At least United keeper van der Sar is calling it a day. As we saw with Ferguson’s nightmares in the goalkeeping market between Peter Schmeichel moving on in 1999 and the current no.1 arriving in 2005, a lot of a team’s success can hinge on the man between the sticks; all manner of duds were bought to try and solve what is a unique position in football, and although titles were still won, they were more sporadic, and United were not the same kind of force at the time (look at their Champions League record, for starters). Any outfield player can at least do a job anywhere else on the pitch, but keepers are a breed unto themselves.
It doesn’t matter how talented keepers are, if they lose their confidence and start making mistakes, it can all unravel. And the bigger the club (or international team), the more they get torn to shreds for their gaffes. A team’s core stability comes from its keeper; if he’s having a ‘mare, then that seeps throughout the side.
Arsenal, to great cost, have spent a few seasons carrying various passengers between the sticks. Had they signed Pepe Reina last summer, they might have been champions this year. If that seems far-fetched given the way they imploded, it’s worth noting how their confidence crisis began with goalkeeping errors, and mistakes by defenders in his vicinity. I may be surmising here, but I believe that defenders get edgy when around a nervous keeper, and then midfielders and forwards try to overcompensate, and teams lose games. (Thankfully, Pepe Reina is once again happy at Liverpool.)
It may cost United £15-20m for a new keeper. That will be £15-20m they have been forced to spend, following the retirement of a world-class custodian.
And it won’t improve them; £15-20m, just to end up – at best – as good as they are now. But if the new keeper lacks van der Sar’s coolness and reliability (borne of 800+ club games and 130 internationals), not to mention his valuable distribution, it could get shaky at the back. (It’s not just dropping crosses or fumbling shots: keepers who frequently miskick are a liability.)
Age and Liverpool
If you look at key players who are currently 31 or over, Liverpool only have Jamie Carragher (33) to worry about with regard to the sands of time. Of course, players ‘melt’ at different rates, but it’s a process that means most players are a mere puddle by their mid-30s.
Steven Gerrard turns 31 next month, meaning the famed local heartbeat of the team is in its final stages of football life. Dirk Kuyt – who, admittedly, seems to be getting better rather than worse – is another who is 30. And although not seen as a key player until the past month, Maxi is another at that same age. But that’s about it.
Now look at Manchester United.
We all know about 37-year-old Ryan Giggs and 36-year-old Paul Scholes, as well as van der Sar retiring aged 40. But United have other age issues. Rio Ferdinand is 32 (33 later in the year), Wes Brown 31, Michael ‘I won the title on my own’ Owen 31, Dimitar Berbatov 30, Patrice Evra 30, Park Ji-Sung 30, John O’Shea 30, and expensive über-crock Owen Hargreaves is also 30. The hugely underrated Michael Carrick turns 30 in the summer, and Nemanja Vidic turns 30 early next season. Of those players, only Hargreaves and Owen have done little in a United shirt.
While some aren’t exactly playing like creaking 30-somethings, a few of those are showing signs of aging; Ferdinand is a key player to whom that definitely applies. Injuries appear to be taking their toll. Perhaps he’s like Gerrard: not playing as frequently as in the past, but he’s almost two years older than the Liverpool captain.
United have already addressed some of these issues, with younger players slipping seamlessly into the team. Chris Smalling (21) and Javier Hernández (22) have come in and done very well, particularly the latter. Rafael (21) appears to have made the right-back spot his own. Elsewhere, Wayne Rooney is in the prime of his career, and Nani and Valencia are also in their mid-20s. No worries there.
But as an outsider (and one happy to admit that he doesn’t study United too closely), I get the impression that there’s a fair amount of rebuilding necessary in the coming years, with a lot of their better players past the point of selling to recoup large fees for reinvestment (in the way that selling Beckham and Ronaldo raised funds). Perhaps, in the way seen with Gillett and Hicks at Liverpool, this is where the incredible levels of debt starts to tell, with decreased investment in new players. And hell, Ferguson has to retire at some point, surely?
Maybe it’s just wishful thinking on the part of a Liverpool fan, and it’s never good to write off Ferguson and his players, but four or five of United’s strongest XI are nearing the end of the road, and 13 of their current squad will be in their 30s by the end of the year. And when players like van der Sar, Giggs, Ferdinand and Scholes go, they take with them an incredible amount of experience and composure.
Right now, United clearly have a stronger squad than Liverpool. But it is possible to see how the gap can be closed. A first step was made by selling the fading Torres (even though he may burst back into life at some stage) and the aimless Babel for Suarez and Carroll, two players with a younger average age. Even if Carroll isn’t a sensation, Suarez already is, and together they look a better bet for the future than the two they replaced for a neutral net spend.
Essential
While the majority of Liverpool older players are expendable, United and Chelsea have to face up to losing a greater percentage of essential personnel.
At Stamford Bridge, the 30-somethings are as follows: Cole 30, Lampard 32 (33 in June), Benayoun 31, Drogba 33, Malouda 30, Ferreira 32, Terry 30, and Anelka 32. Not quite as many older players as United, but perhaps a greater percentage of key ones. Again, they have their fair share of talent in their mid-20s, and some promising youngsters. But the gap in first-team quality between their squad and ours can be narrowed this summer.
At Liverpool, the players of sufficient first-team quality who are not past their peak are Reina 28, Lucas 24, Skrtel 26, Kelly 21, Meireles 28, Johnson 26, Agger 26, Suarez 24 and Carroll 22. Almost all of these nine would be in Liverpool’s strongest side. At 26, Alberto Aquilani would definitely challenge for a spot in the XI, if he were to return. It doesn’t mean that better alternatives can’t be found to one or two of these players, but to me, these are not ones I worry about.
There are others. Spearing, at 22, is pushing towards that category with some much-improved displays (if nothing else, he’s now a stronger-looking squad player – a classic ‘John O’Shea’ if you will), and Jonjo Shelvey, 19, has a lot of potential and character, and a fair amount of experience for his age. Another 19-year-old, Danny Wilson, has pedigree, but, as can happen to teenagers, has not looked totally assured in his few first-team appearances (often filling in at left-back). And of course, 18-year-old John Flanagan has been a revelation, even if he’s got a long way to go to be considered a regular starter when everyone is fit.
And while it seems that many have given up on David Ngog, he’s still a pretty good 22-year-old striker, if not one we’d like to see in the first team beyond emergencies. (Certainly no worse than Obertan in terms of being at the fringes of a squad.) If and when he returns from loan, Emiliano Insua can add depth to the squad, and Daniel Ayala has the look of a future star.
But we must remember that all the top clubs have some talented youngsters coming through, or out on loan. And all of these clubs have been sourcing top-class talent for their academies. While Liverpool may not have the edge here, it does at least now match them, ever since Rafa Benítez overhauled the Academy in 2009.
The End Is In Sight
A lot of this piece is pure conjecture. Some players go on longer than expected, and others instantly and unexpectedly melt as if left in the Sahara. Unlike my namesake (the expired octopus), I’m not psychic.
But if 32 can be considered the tipping point in a career – the point where you are officially ‘old’ – United, with four, and Chelsea, with three, have more to worry about when it comes to key players than Liverpool, with just one.
And by the end of the year, nine of United’s best players (therefore excluding the likes of O’Shea and Brown) will be 30 or over, and seven at Chelsea, compared with just four from Liverpool.
If I were supporting either of those clubs I’d be hugely grateful for what they’d given me in the past, but nervous of how we’d cope without them.
Saturday, May 14, 2011
Dalglish and Clarke: The Formula is Complete
http://tomkinstimes.com/2011/05/dalglish-and-clarke-the-formula-is-complete/
Posted on May 12th, 2011 by Paul Tomkins
Even though I spent November and December 2010 pushing for Kenny Dalglish to be given the caretaker’s role – using what little influence I may have had after meeting John W Henry – I didn’t think it would happen. And when it did happen, months later, I didn’t think it would turn out this well.
In October, when I was fortunate enough to meet the new owner, I still wasn’t certain that Kenny was the solution. At that stage, Dalglish was a peripheral figure at the club, with some ex-LFC executives apparently advising that he was a yesterday’s man, not even worth speaking to, let alone appointing.
Whether or not he still had the managerial midas touch, he had to be spoken to. Here was a man who knew the club, and what had been going on behind its walls, having returned in 2009. But I can imagine that it wasn’t easy for Henry and co., given the contradictory advice they were receiving. It wasn’t until the 8th of December that a meeting in a restaurant took place.
Back in October, I was still thinking of permanent solutions. I found it hard to say who the manager should be, but based on what I was seeing, I could say who it shouldn’t: Roy Hodgson. Liverpool managers just don’t go to places like Manchester City saying that “I hope we don’t get beat 6-0”.
I liked the look of Roberto Di Matteo at West Brom, although irony of ironies, his exciting side started to fade, and it later took expert relegation-saver Roy Hodgson to rescue them (it’s just a shame Hodgson treated Liverpool like the relegation candidates he turned them into.)
Hoffenheim’s Ralf Rangnick was recommended to me by a European expert. Having quit the German club when they sold one of their best players without his knowledge, he later oversaw perhaps the most dramatic result in Europe this season, with the mid-table Shalke team he inherited winning 5-1 at Inter Milan. But his star lost some of its shine when Manchester United took apart a side clearly out of its depth.
And of course, no-one could fail to be impressed by the backstory and results of Andre Villas Boas, whose Porto side were not just unbeaten, but winning 90% of matches. Perhaps he was too young, at just 33, but what an impression he was making; and since then, his charges continue to brush aside all-comers, at home and in the Europa League.
After I met Henry, results started to pick up for the Reds. Chelsea were beaten a few days later, and the feeling I got was that Hodgson was now expected to turn things around; or at the very least, see out the season. But by November, performances and results had dipped once more. The blip turned out to be the few good results.
I have always thought it is dangerous to live in the past where Liverpool FC is concerned. Such was the success of the halcyon days, and such is the golden haze of nostalgia, that living up to what went before could always be a hindrance. Last summer, when his name was first mentioned, I feared that Dalglish would cause fans to dream too much, beyond realistic levels; and therefore he could never succeed. We couldn’t just close our eyes and return to 1987/88. Even when Liverpool had their best season in terms of points won since then (86), too many people accused Rafa Benítez of ‘blowing’ the league in 2009.
But by November 2010, it was crying out for Kenny the Caretaker. It needed someone of his stature and diplomacy to unite the team, and perhaps just as importantly, unite a fan-base that had been put through the ringer in recent seasons.
But I could see why Fenway Sports Group didn’t want to start sacking managers, and appointing part-time replacements who may themselves need removing come the summer. If they had to weigh up the pros of appointing a legend, they had to also consider the outcome of it going wrong.
Had everyone known for certain how things would pan out, I expect that the change would have been made in the autumn. Hindsight is 20-20. But no-one could have foreseen quite the levels of improvement witnessed since the King returned. It’s been little short of remarkable. But of course, we can all think ‘if only…’.
Whatever his merits as a manager, Roy Hodgson was not right for Liverpool. That was clear from his signings, his muddled press conferences, and the performances and results the team were delivering. More than anything, he had to go; he was a lame duck, overseeing lame efforts. By November it had passed the tipping point.
Perhaps I complained too much about Hodgson – and possibly embarrassed FSG in the process – but I feared the damage that would be caused by keeping him, given how unhappy many of the best players were. And the Kop weren’t going to suddenly warm to someone who’d offended them at the outset.
My only real concern with Dalglish – in terms of his ability, rather than what he represented – was what kind of tactical level he’d be at, having spent a decade away from the dugout. But as he himself later said, he still watched more matches than almost anyone out there. You don’t lose the kind of gravitas he possesses, nor the ability to relate to footballers, even if they’re a bit more pampered these days. You don’t lose the ability to read the game. But while I never thought he’d pitch up and try and set his team up like it was 1990 again, it was simply a case of not knowing.
But even a horribly tactically outdated Dalglish who’d spent the past decade on Mars would have been preferable to what we were seeing. As he kept telling us, Hodgson’s 4-4-2 had been serving him well for 35 years, without winning anything of note.
The appointment of Steve Clarke assuaged any fears about tactics; here was a man who’d been at the coalface in recent seasons, and been vital in Chelsea’s success under Jose Mourinho. Between them, the Reds would have two canny thinkers. It’s easy to give all the credit to Dalglish, but all the best managers have notable sidekicks, and Clarke fits the bill.
With the Reds floundering in the bottom half of the table, Liverpool needed inspiration, but not a false boost that would die off after six or seven games. The appointment had to be right. (People are now saying that Liverpool have not been playing under any pressure, but being in the bottom half of the table meant that a lot of work was required just to rescue some respectability.)
Above all else, the club needed someone who would not think of mediocre results as ‘utopia’, or run-of-the-mill victories as ‘historic’. It needed someone who either understood Liverpool FC, or understood what it is to manage a big club with healthy expectations. Dalglish was perfect in that sense, and so too was Clarke.
Following on from Hodgson’s 35% league win rate, the Reds have gone on to win 62% since the changeover, and turned a -3 goal difference into one of +18. Just as Hodgson seems to now fit West Brom – fair play to him, he’s had a massive impact there – Dalglish fits Liverpool. But it’s more than just him being an icon from our past.
What people must remember is that Kenny won the league at another club, too, and overtook Manchester United in the process. And he didn’t buy the title at Blackburn. All he did was pay the kinds of fees that United had been paying since around 1988, and bring Rovers’ team up to the same level of expense. (See Pay As You Play for a comparison, and proof of the excellent job he did there.)
At Liverpool he’ll have a struggle to spend enough to bring the Reds in line with Chelsea and Manchester City, but he may get closer to the spending seen at Old Trafford, where success has been maintained. And just as Alex Ferguson continues to succeed based on stability and the faith and goodwill of the club and its fans, Liverpool may be able to match that (in a way that Chelsea and City, with their less patient approaches and managerial turnovers, may struggle).
If FSG can invest enough in the Reds – millions, but not necessarily billions – the formula may be complete. Inspiration and intelligence: Liverpool appear to have that in spades right now.
Posted on May 12th, 2011 by Paul Tomkins
Even though I spent November and December 2010 pushing for Kenny Dalglish to be given the caretaker’s role – using what little influence I may have had after meeting John W Henry – I didn’t think it would happen. And when it did happen, months later, I didn’t think it would turn out this well.
In October, when I was fortunate enough to meet the new owner, I still wasn’t certain that Kenny was the solution. At that stage, Dalglish was a peripheral figure at the club, with some ex-LFC executives apparently advising that he was a yesterday’s man, not even worth speaking to, let alone appointing.
Whether or not he still had the managerial midas touch, he had to be spoken to. Here was a man who knew the club, and what had been going on behind its walls, having returned in 2009. But I can imagine that it wasn’t easy for Henry and co., given the contradictory advice they were receiving. It wasn’t until the 8th of December that a meeting in a restaurant took place.
Back in October, I was still thinking of permanent solutions. I found it hard to say who the manager should be, but based on what I was seeing, I could say who it shouldn’t: Roy Hodgson. Liverpool managers just don’t go to places like Manchester City saying that “I hope we don’t get beat 6-0”.
I liked the look of Roberto Di Matteo at West Brom, although irony of ironies, his exciting side started to fade, and it later took expert relegation-saver Roy Hodgson to rescue them (it’s just a shame Hodgson treated Liverpool like the relegation candidates he turned them into.)
Hoffenheim’s Ralf Rangnick was recommended to me by a European expert. Having quit the German club when they sold one of their best players without his knowledge, he later oversaw perhaps the most dramatic result in Europe this season, with the mid-table Shalke team he inherited winning 5-1 at Inter Milan. But his star lost some of its shine when Manchester United took apart a side clearly out of its depth.
And of course, no-one could fail to be impressed by the backstory and results of Andre Villas Boas, whose Porto side were not just unbeaten, but winning 90% of matches. Perhaps he was too young, at just 33, but what an impression he was making; and since then, his charges continue to brush aside all-comers, at home and in the Europa League.
After I met Henry, results started to pick up for the Reds. Chelsea were beaten a few days later, and the feeling I got was that Hodgson was now expected to turn things around; or at the very least, see out the season. But by November, performances and results had dipped once more. The blip turned out to be the few good results.
I have always thought it is dangerous to live in the past where Liverpool FC is concerned. Such was the success of the halcyon days, and such is the golden haze of nostalgia, that living up to what went before could always be a hindrance. Last summer, when his name was first mentioned, I feared that Dalglish would cause fans to dream too much, beyond realistic levels; and therefore he could never succeed. We couldn’t just close our eyes and return to 1987/88. Even when Liverpool had their best season in terms of points won since then (86), too many people accused Rafa Benítez of ‘blowing’ the league in 2009.
But by November 2010, it was crying out for Kenny the Caretaker. It needed someone of his stature and diplomacy to unite the team, and perhaps just as importantly, unite a fan-base that had been put through the ringer in recent seasons.
But I could see why Fenway Sports Group didn’t want to start sacking managers, and appointing part-time replacements who may themselves need removing come the summer. If they had to weigh up the pros of appointing a legend, they had to also consider the outcome of it going wrong.
Had everyone known for certain how things would pan out, I expect that the change would have been made in the autumn. Hindsight is 20-20. But no-one could have foreseen quite the levels of improvement witnessed since the King returned. It’s been little short of remarkable. But of course, we can all think ‘if only…’.
Whatever his merits as a manager, Roy Hodgson was not right for Liverpool. That was clear from his signings, his muddled press conferences, and the performances and results the team were delivering. More than anything, he had to go; he was a lame duck, overseeing lame efforts. By November it had passed the tipping point.
Perhaps I complained too much about Hodgson – and possibly embarrassed FSG in the process – but I feared the damage that would be caused by keeping him, given how unhappy many of the best players were. And the Kop weren’t going to suddenly warm to someone who’d offended them at the outset.
My only real concern with Dalglish – in terms of his ability, rather than what he represented – was what kind of tactical level he’d be at, having spent a decade away from the dugout. But as he himself later said, he still watched more matches than almost anyone out there. You don’t lose the kind of gravitas he possesses, nor the ability to relate to footballers, even if they’re a bit more pampered these days. You don’t lose the ability to read the game. But while I never thought he’d pitch up and try and set his team up like it was 1990 again, it was simply a case of not knowing.
But even a horribly tactically outdated Dalglish who’d spent the past decade on Mars would have been preferable to what we were seeing. As he kept telling us, Hodgson’s 4-4-2 had been serving him well for 35 years, without winning anything of note.
The appointment of Steve Clarke assuaged any fears about tactics; here was a man who’d been at the coalface in recent seasons, and been vital in Chelsea’s success under Jose Mourinho. Between them, the Reds would have two canny thinkers. It’s easy to give all the credit to Dalglish, but all the best managers have notable sidekicks, and Clarke fits the bill.
With the Reds floundering in the bottom half of the table, Liverpool needed inspiration, but not a false boost that would die off after six or seven games. The appointment had to be right. (People are now saying that Liverpool have not been playing under any pressure, but being in the bottom half of the table meant that a lot of work was required just to rescue some respectability.)
Above all else, the club needed someone who would not think of mediocre results as ‘utopia’, or run-of-the-mill victories as ‘historic’. It needed someone who either understood Liverpool FC, or understood what it is to manage a big club with healthy expectations. Dalglish was perfect in that sense, and so too was Clarke.
Following on from Hodgson’s 35% league win rate, the Reds have gone on to win 62% since the changeover, and turned a -3 goal difference into one of +18. Just as Hodgson seems to now fit West Brom – fair play to him, he’s had a massive impact there – Dalglish fits Liverpool. But it’s more than just him being an icon from our past.
What people must remember is that Kenny won the league at another club, too, and overtook Manchester United in the process. And he didn’t buy the title at Blackburn. All he did was pay the kinds of fees that United had been paying since around 1988, and bring Rovers’ team up to the same level of expense. (See Pay As You Play for a comparison, and proof of the excellent job he did there.)
At Liverpool he’ll have a struggle to spend enough to bring the Reds in line with Chelsea and Manchester City, but he may get closer to the spending seen at Old Trafford, where success has been maintained. And just as Alex Ferguson continues to succeed based on stability and the faith and goodwill of the club and its fans, Liverpool may be able to match that (in a way that Chelsea and City, with their less patient approaches and managerial turnovers, may struggle).
If FSG can invest enough in the Reds – millions, but not necessarily billions – the formula may be complete. Inspiration and intelligence: Liverpool appear to have that in spades right now.
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
Luis Suarez – The Hole Story
http://tomkinstimes.com/2011/05/luis-suarez-the-hole-story/
It was fitting that it should be at the former home of the erstwhile excellent Fulham manager (and subsequently awful Liverpool manager) that Luis Suarez should encapsulate everything that was wrong about Roy Hodgson’s approach between August 2010 and January 2011.
While Hodgson did not possess the mercurial, magical Uruguayan, he did have other players who could ‘play between the lines’. It was a phrase that was a mantra to the previous Liverpool manager, Rafa Benítez, who looked to players like Luis Garcia, Yossi Benayoun, Dirk Kuyt and, most successfully, Steven Gerrard, to occupy the spaces where it’s harder to be marked, and to link with the adjoining midfield.
There are different ways of playing in modern football. But two ‘flat’ strikers is almost as out of date – certainly at top clubs – as a cigarette and snifter at halftime. And yet Roy Hodgson persisted with the chalk and chalk of Torres and Ngog, and direct football from a back four shorn of its more technical ability. Players who were stationed wide tucked in, but there was little movement beyond that no; no interchanging and switching, no marauding full-backs, to pull defences apart. No wonder the Reds scored so few goals. It was half a season of plodding.
(And as we were playing Fulham, this was another chance for people to tell me that Hodgson was poorly treated by Liverpool fans, that we would have had the same upturn in results had he stayed, and so on. The day he does a really good job at a big club, and not just ones with lower expectations, come and let me know. He’s been superb at West Brom, but that doesn’t alter the myriad mistakes he made at Anfield.)
As soon as Kenny Dalglish and Steve Clarke arrived, the Hodgson blueprint went out the window, and performances improved; and then, after a couple of early setbacks, results improved too. A -3 goal difference would soon become +18. The Reds went from relegation form to accruing more points than anyone else.
In the first game, Gerrard was back in the hole, although he was sent off after 30 minutes at Old Trafford, obviating that plan before it had a chance to take hold. Raul Meireles was next in line to occupy the position, and before long he was popping up in all kinds of clever areas, and banging in a few goals, too.
Both of these options were open to Hodgson, but rarely turned to. And after just six goals in 21 games under Hodgson, even Torres was back to his old scoring habits, with three in five; showing that he needs someone to feed the ball through, rather than another body right up alongside him, getting in his way. (Maybe true at Chelsea too, given that neither he nor Drogba has scored when on the pitch together, although he now has a big price tag and a new team to settle into.)
Even with a whole host of senior players out injured (Gerrard, Carroll, Kelly, Agger, Aurelio and more), the side functions based on clever passing and movement from ‘canny’ players like Maxi, Meireles and Kuyt, all of whom were at the club in the first half of the season, without really impressing too much.
I’m sure Hodgson would have liked a new striker. But would he have plumped for someone like Suarez? It doesn’t matter; Dalglish, Clarke and Comolli did. And Liverpool have not looked back.
Yes, the new regime helped unite a fractured dressing room, but they also stopped Liverpool playing like a team whose ambitions were simply to avoid relegation or hoping to not get beat 6-0 at Manchester City (quote Roy Hodgson, 2nd game of the season).
So, what of Suarez’s performances? Well, they have been a masterclass of movement, technique, tenacity and finishing. At times he shows uncanny awareness for others, although there’s no denying that he’s not afraid to ignore everyone else and have a pop himself. (If he has a weakness, it’s been that some of his shooting has been a bit wild, but usually when he’s purely speculating out of nothing; when faced with a good goalscoring chance, he tends to choose the right option.)
Before the last two games, in both of which he scored, I was trying to work out how many goals he’d been involved in. By this, I don’t mean just by scoring or directly assisting, but also by making a telling touch in the build-up to a goal.
He scored on his debut as a sub against Stoke, but lacking match-fitness after more than a month without playing in Holland, he was eased in gently over the next few games. It wasn’t really until Mid-February that he got going, especially as he wasn’t eligible for the Europa League. As it stands, he’s only made ten starts for the club, and one appearance from the bench.
But it was against Manchester United at the start of March that he truly arrived: a jinking run as fine as any individual contribution made by Torres at his best, to set the opening goal on a plate for Kuyt and help us move on from the departed no.9. He was also the last Liverpool player to touch the ball before both of Kuyt’s next two goals, with a cross (albeit headed to Kuyt by Nani) and then a shot that Van der Sar could not hold.
At Sunderland Suarez scored from the most ridiculous of angles, after yet another clever turn inside the box. At West Ham he put another ball on a plate for a simple tap-in, this time for Glen Johnson, after – you guessed it – giving a defender twisted blood in the box.
Four of the goals against Birmingham owed something to his contribution. The first goal came after a shot of his was blocked (though the goal came in the second phase). The second goal came after his clever running took him clean through on goal, with Kuyt tucking away the rebound after Suarez’s shot was brilliantly saved. The third goal came from his spin in behind the right-back, showing that he can be as dangerous on either flank, with the finish coming as he floated a pin-point cross for Maxi to tuck away. And he also set up Maxi to shoot for the Argentine’s hat-trick, even if the midfielder needed a second bite to tuck it away after the keeper parried it.
As well as scoring against Newcastle, Suarez won a penalty, again by getting tight to a defender and then spinning him to distraction. While he may exaggerate when falling, he draws foul after foul after foul.
And then last night, as well as another expertly taken goal, he created Maxi’s first, again with a run down the inside-left channel followed by a clever ball across goal, even if Fulham contrived to divert it into Maxi’s path. (Also, he won – in the eyes of everyone but Lee Mason – a clear penalty, that was also a definite red card for the hapless Hangeland. Given what Mason sent off Degen for last season, you have to laugh.)
Ten starts, four goals, three direct assists and a penalty won. But a total involvement in now fewer than twelve goals. What’s more, all of his assists have been teed up to almost unmissable degrees. Add a quite phenomenal work-rate, and it’s no wonder that Ajax fans rated him more highly than Wesley Sneijder.
As Liverpool fans, this season we’ve experienced a lot of things we’d rather forget. But thankfully, we now have a few things to remember, and to look forward to. And of Luis Suarez, we just can’t get enough.
It was fitting that it should be at the former home of the erstwhile excellent Fulham manager (and subsequently awful Liverpool manager) that Luis Suarez should encapsulate everything that was wrong about Roy Hodgson’s approach between August 2010 and January 2011.
While Hodgson did not possess the mercurial, magical Uruguayan, he did have other players who could ‘play between the lines’. It was a phrase that was a mantra to the previous Liverpool manager, Rafa Benítez, who looked to players like Luis Garcia, Yossi Benayoun, Dirk Kuyt and, most successfully, Steven Gerrard, to occupy the spaces where it’s harder to be marked, and to link with the adjoining midfield.
There are different ways of playing in modern football. But two ‘flat’ strikers is almost as out of date – certainly at top clubs – as a cigarette and snifter at halftime. And yet Roy Hodgson persisted with the chalk and chalk of Torres and Ngog, and direct football from a back four shorn of its more technical ability. Players who were stationed wide tucked in, but there was little movement beyond that no; no interchanging and switching, no marauding full-backs, to pull defences apart. No wonder the Reds scored so few goals. It was half a season of plodding.
(And as we were playing Fulham, this was another chance for people to tell me that Hodgson was poorly treated by Liverpool fans, that we would have had the same upturn in results had he stayed, and so on. The day he does a really good job at a big club, and not just ones with lower expectations, come and let me know. He’s been superb at West Brom, but that doesn’t alter the myriad mistakes he made at Anfield.)
As soon as Kenny Dalglish and Steve Clarke arrived, the Hodgson blueprint went out the window, and performances improved; and then, after a couple of early setbacks, results improved too. A -3 goal difference would soon become +18. The Reds went from relegation form to accruing more points than anyone else.
In the first game, Gerrard was back in the hole, although he was sent off after 30 minutes at Old Trafford, obviating that plan before it had a chance to take hold. Raul Meireles was next in line to occupy the position, and before long he was popping up in all kinds of clever areas, and banging in a few goals, too.
Both of these options were open to Hodgson, but rarely turned to. And after just six goals in 21 games under Hodgson, even Torres was back to his old scoring habits, with three in five; showing that he needs someone to feed the ball through, rather than another body right up alongside him, getting in his way. (Maybe true at Chelsea too, given that neither he nor Drogba has scored when on the pitch together, although he now has a big price tag and a new team to settle into.)
Even with a whole host of senior players out injured (Gerrard, Carroll, Kelly, Agger, Aurelio and more), the side functions based on clever passing and movement from ‘canny’ players like Maxi, Meireles and Kuyt, all of whom were at the club in the first half of the season, without really impressing too much.
I’m sure Hodgson would have liked a new striker. But would he have plumped for someone like Suarez? It doesn’t matter; Dalglish, Clarke and Comolli did. And Liverpool have not looked back.
Yes, the new regime helped unite a fractured dressing room, but they also stopped Liverpool playing like a team whose ambitions were simply to avoid relegation or hoping to not get beat 6-0 at Manchester City (quote Roy Hodgson, 2nd game of the season).
So, what of Suarez’s performances? Well, they have been a masterclass of movement, technique, tenacity and finishing. At times he shows uncanny awareness for others, although there’s no denying that he’s not afraid to ignore everyone else and have a pop himself. (If he has a weakness, it’s been that some of his shooting has been a bit wild, but usually when he’s purely speculating out of nothing; when faced with a good goalscoring chance, he tends to choose the right option.)
Before the last two games, in both of which he scored, I was trying to work out how many goals he’d been involved in. By this, I don’t mean just by scoring or directly assisting, but also by making a telling touch in the build-up to a goal.
He scored on his debut as a sub against Stoke, but lacking match-fitness after more than a month without playing in Holland, he was eased in gently over the next few games. It wasn’t really until Mid-February that he got going, especially as he wasn’t eligible for the Europa League. As it stands, he’s only made ten starts for the club, and one appearance from the bench.
But it was against Manchester United at the start of March that he truly arrived: a jinking run as fine as any individual contribution made by Torres at his best, to set the opening goal on a plate for Kuyt and help us move on from the departed no.9. He was also the last Liverpool player to touch the ball before both of Kuyt’s next two goals, with a cross (albeit headed to Kuyt by Nani) and then a shot that Van der Sar could not hold.
At Sunderland Suarez scored from the most ridiculous of angles, after yet another clever turn inside the box. At West Ham he put another ball on a plate for a simple tap-in, this time for Glen Johnson, after – you guessed it – giving a defender twisted blood in the box.
Four of the goals against Birmingham owed something to his contribution. The first goal came after a shot of his was blocked (though the goal came in the second phase). The second goal came after his clever running took him clean through on goal, with Kuyt tucking away the rebound after Suarez’s shot was brilliantly saved. The third goal came from his spin in behind the right-back, showing that he can be as dangerous on either flank, with the finish coming as he floated a pin-point cross for Maxi to tuck away. And he also set up Maxi to shoot for the Argentine’s hat-trick, even if the midfielder needed a second bite to tuck it away after the keeper parried it.
As well as scoring against Newcastle, Suarez won a penalty, again by getting tight to a defender and then spinning him to distraction. While he may exaggerate when falling, he draws foul after foul after foul.
And then last night, as well as another expertly taken goal, he created Maxi’s first, again with a run down the inside-left channel followed by a clever ball across goal, even if Fulham contrived to divert it into Maxi’s path. (Also, he won – in the eyes of everyone but Lee Mason – a clear penalty, that was also a definite red card for the hapless Hangeland. Given what Mason sent off Degen for last season, you have to laugh.)
Ten starts, four goals, three direct assists and a penalty won. But a total involvement in now fewer than twelve goals. What’s more, all of his assists have been teed up to almost unmissable degrees. Add a quite phenomenal work-rate, and it’s no wonder that Ajax fans rated him more highly than Wesley Sneijder.
As Liverpool fans, this season we’ve experienced a lot of things we’d rather forget. But thankfully, we now have a few things to remember, and to look forward to. And of Luis Suarez, we just can’t get enough.
Thursday, May 5, 2011
傳統咖啡香
張立德‧傳統咖啡香
2011-05-04 19:11
國人對傳統咖啡店有一定的情意結。許多人的童年回憶，總少不了由大人牽著手走進一家咖啡店的畫面。店裡充滿咖啡和面包香，木制椅石面桌，顧客點餐交談、夥計呼喚廚房的聲音交錯成為獨特的交響樂。炎炎午後偷得浮生半日閒，在咖啡店高談闊論從街坊八卦到國家大事，一天就過去了。
近年來，不少有創新點子的業者看到商機，將傳統咖啡店重新包裝為新式咖啡店，在裝潢上落足心思，予人親切但更舒適的感覺，餐點方面則保持傳統咖啡店一貫的特色，掀起一股風潮，在大城小鎮都可以找到它們的蹤影，而且是越來越蓬勃。
年輕人都喜歡到新式咖啡店消費，環境舒適加上無線上網設備，有音樂聽有雜誌翻，比起傳統咖啡店在搖搖晃晃的風扇底下，必須忍受鬱悶空氣的感覺來得舒服多了。然而，有更多人鍾情於傳統的味道和風情，君不見在一些小鎮，特別是假日，聞名的傳統咖啡店總是人潮洶湧，遲來找不到位子的就是花時間站著等位子，或者與別人“搭台”也願意。
新式傳統各有各精彩，各有各的擁躉，傳統的在新式的搶灘下，未必就是失敗退場的一方，關鍵是要在競爭中保有一席之地，必須擺脫固步自封的觀念，注重傳統也要保持環境衛生，花更多心思在服務和餐點上。
傳統咖啡店最大的特色就是泡咖啡頭手的手藝，自製的加央、糕餅，很多都是祖傳的秘方，讓人回味無窮。這是新式咖啡店所不能比擬的特色。
傳統咖啡店不僅受到華族本身的歡迎，友族同胞也會到那裡呷上一杯咖啡，吃片面包，一些業者也不忘準備椰漿飯，注入多元的食物色彩。看，這就是一個馬來西亞的精神最佳體現。
傳統咖啡業者並不怕新式咖啡店的競爭，他們對本身的特色有信心，只是經營模式是家庭生意，如果沒有培養接班人，孩子不願意接棒，就會面臨斷層的危機，最終無奈結業！
在我老家昔加末，在過去20年來，就有不少過20家的傳統咖啡店，因為沒有接班人而被迫關閉。而讓我吃驚的是，短短幾年當地新式咖啡店竟如雨後春筍般四處林立，已經形成一片紅海，是多麼強烈的對比。
傳統咖啡店在公會領導下加強彼此的聯繫和合作，有助於改革永續經營，並闖出另一片天，成為大馬的一道亮麗的風景線，一張獨特的旅遊名片。最近旅遊部與業者公會合作，評選百家最具風味的傳統咖啡店，並將出版專輯大力推廣傳統咖啡店，無疑讓業者看到了希望。
星洲日報／情在人間‧作者：張立德‧《星洲日報》主筆‧言論不代表本站立場‧2011.05.04
http://opinions.sinchew-i.com/node/19200?tid=7
2011-05-04 19:11
國人對傳統咖啡店有一定的情意結。許多人的童年回憶，總少不了由大人牽著手走進一家咖啡店的畫面。店裡充滿咖啡和面包香，木制椅石面桌，顧客點餐交談、夥計呼喚廚房的聲音交錯成為獨特的交響樂。炎炎午後偷得浮生半日閒，在咖啡店高談闊論從街坊八卦到國家大事，一天就過去了。
近年來，不少有創新點子的業者看到商機，將傳統咖啡店重新包裝為新式咖啡店，在裝潢上落足心思，予人親切但更舒適的感覺，餐點方面則保持傳統咖啡店一貫的特色，掀起一股風潮，在大城小鎮都可以找到它們的蹤影，而且是越來越蓬勃。
年輕人都喜歡到新式咖啡店消費，環境舒適加上無線上網設備，有音樂聽有雜誌翻，比起傳統咖啡店在搖搖晃晃的風扇底下，必須忍受鬱悶空氣的感覺來得舒服多了。然而，有更多人鍾情於傳統的味道和風情，君不見在一些小鎮，特別是假日，聞名的傳統咖啡店總是人潮洶湧，遲來找不到位子的就是花時間站著等位子，或者與別人“搭台”也願意。
新式傳統各有各精彩，各有各的擁躉，傳統的在新式的搶灘下，未必就是失敗退場的一方，關鍵是要在競爭中保有一席之地，必須擺脫固步自封的觀念，注重傳統也要保持環境衛生，花更多心思在服務和餐點上。
傳統咖啡店最大的特色就是泡咖啡頭手的手藝，自製的加央、糕餅，很多都是祖傳的秘方，讓人回味無窮。這是新式咖啡店所不能比擬的特色。
傳統咖啡店不僅受到華族本身的歡迎，友族同胞也會到那裡呷上一杯咖啡，吃片面包，一些業者也不忘準備椰漿飯，注入多元的食物色彩。看，這就是一個馬來西亞的精神最佳體現。
傳統咖啡業者並不怕新式咖啡店的競爭，他們對本身的特色有信心，只是經營模式是家庭生意，如果沒有培養接班人，孩子不願意接棒，就會面臨斷層的危機，最終無奈結業！
在我老家昔加末，在過去20年來，就有不少過20家的傳統咖啡店，因為沒有接班人而被迫關閉。而讓我吃驚的是，短短幾年當地新式咖啡店竟如雨後春筍般四處林立，已經形成一片紅海，是多麼強烈的對比。
傳統咖啡店在公會領導下加強彼此的聯繫和合作，有助於改革永續經營，並闖出另一片天，成為大馬的一道亮麗的風景線，一張獨特的旅遊名片。最近旅遊部與業者公會合作，評選百家最具風味的傳統咖啡店，並將出版專輯大力推廣傳統咖啡店，無疑讓業者看到了希望。
星洲日報／情在人間‧作者：張立德‧《星洲日報》主筆‧言論不代表本站立場‧2011.05.04
http://opinions.sinchew-i.com/node/19200?tid=7
Sunday, May 1, 2011
Liverpool move up to fifth
Liverpool move up to fifth
May 1, 2011
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story/_/id/914173/premier-league:-liverpool-move-above-spurs?cc=4716
By ESPN staff
Liverpool stormed ahead of Tottenham into an automatic qualifying place for the Europa League on Sunday, beating Kenny Dalglish's former club Newcastle 3-0 at Anfield.
The Reds leapfrog Spurs on goal difference, having played an extra game, and the two sides still have to play each other at Anfield on May 15. Maxi Rodriguez, Dirk Kuyt and the brilliant Luis Suarez grabbed the goals on Merseyside, adding further weight to Dalglish's bid to become the permanent manager of Liverpool beyond the end of this season.
Dalglish had Andy Carroll back among his ranks on Sunday, but the towering England forward started on the bench against his former club, allowing Rodriguez to continue to operate in the hole following his hat-trick at home to Birmingham last week. Within 10 minutes that decision had paid off for the Reds, with Rodriguez's volley deflected past Tim Krul following John Flanagan's right-wing cross.
Jamie Carragher was making his 655th appearance in a red shirt, moving him alongside Ray Clemence and Emlyn Hughes into second place in Liverpool's all-time appearance list, and he ensured Pepe Reina's goal was not truly threatened until the first minute of the second half, when Joey Barton found the side-netting when arriving unmarked at the back post.
It was the Reds who continued to look the more likely to score the next goal though, and after Rodriguez almost doubled his tally when his mishit cross dropped onto Krul's bar, Liverpool pressed on the accelerator to win a penalty through the relentless running of Suarez. Mike Williamson chose to dither rather than clear, and when Suarez nipped the ball off his toes Williamson clumsily pulled his tormentor down, allowing Kuyt to notch his seventh goal in eight games.
Suarez's running, enthusiasm and overall movement was on a different level to the rest of his peers, and it was only right that he ended a personal drought of four games by claiming Liverpool's third, calmly slotting into the corner from Kuyt's pass.
May 1, 2011
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story/_/id/914173/premier-league:-liverpool-move-above-spurs?cc=4716
By ESPN staff
Liverpool stormed ahead of Tottenham into an automatic qualifying place for the Europa League on Sunday, beating Kenny Dalglish's former club Newcastle 3-0 at Anfield.
The Reds leapfrog Spurs on goal difference, having played an extra game, and the two sides still have to play each other at Anfield on May 15. Maxi Rodriguez, Dirk Kuyt and the brilliant Luis Suarez grabbed the goals on Merseyside, adding further weight to Dalglish's bid to become the permanent manager of Liverpool beyond the end of this season.
Dalglish had Andy Carroll back among his ranks on Sunday, but the towering England forward started on the bench against his former club, allowing Rodriguez to continue to operate in the hole following his hat-trick at home to Birmingham last week. Within 10 minutes that decision had paid off for the Reds, with Rodriguez's volley deflected past Tim Krul following John Flanagan's right-wing cross.
Jamie Carragher was making his 655th appearance in a red shirt, moving him alongside Ray Clemence and Emlyn Hughes into second place in Liverpool's all-time appearance list, and he ensured Pepe Reina's goal was not truly threatened until the first minute of the second half, when Joey Barton found the side-netting when arriving unmarked at the back post.
It was the Reds who continued to look the more likely to score the next goal though, and after Rodriguez almost doubled his tally when his mishit cross dropped onto Krul's bar, Liverpool pressed on the accelerator to win a penalty through the relentless running of Suarez. Mike Williamson chose to dither rather than clear, and when Suarez nipped the ball off his toes Williamson clumsily pulled his tormentor down, allowing Kuyt to notch his seventh goal in eight games.
Suarez's running, enthusiasm and overall movement was on a different level to the rest of his peers, and it was only right that he ended a personal drought of four games by claiming Liverpool's third, calmly slotting into the corner from Kuyt's pass.
印度羽球公開賽‧2比1擊退彼德蓋特‧宗偉今年第4冠到手
印度羽球公開賽‧2比1擊退彼德蓋特‧宗偉今年第4冠到手
羽球 體壇焦點 2011-05-01 19:30
世界一哥李宗偉在決賽擊敗丹麥不老金童彼德蓋特後，打破在印度羽球公開賽的冠軍荒，並奪得今年第4個冠軍。（圖：法新社）
（印度‧新德里1日訊）印度羽球公開賽於星期天落下帷幕，孤軍作戰的大馬一哥李宗偉在男單決賽中，苦戰3局擊敗丹麥的老對手彼德蓋特，奪得今年的第4個冠軍，同時也打破在印度參加公開賽的冠軍荒。
男雙古健傑與陳文宏以及混雙陳炳順與吳柳螢在半決賽紛紛落敗後，大馬獨剩李宗偉獨撐大旗，結果一哥不負眾望，以21比12、12比21、21比15苦勝不復當年勇的丹麥老金童蓋特，奪得含金量最重的男單冠軍。
決勝局1比5落後及時回勇
首局佔據上風的宗偉，在次局與第3局開局被蓋特壓制，但宗偉在決勝局以1比5落後的情況下及時回勇，以7比6反超比分，最終在錯過一個賽點後以21比15勝出。
這是頭號種子的李宗偉與彼德蓋特歷史上第13次交鋒，至此李宗偉取得12勝1負的戰績，唯一一次輸給蓋特，已是2009年1月18日韓國公開賽男單決賽的事。
李宗偉在新德里擊敗蓋特稱王，是他首次在印度舉行的公開賽奪冠，他曾在2009年的印度公開賽首圈不敵諶龍，並在同年的世錦賽複賽中敗給印尼的索尼，但他在之後於德里舉行的共運會奪得混合團體賽與男單的兩枚金牌。此外，這也是李宗偉今年自奪得2010年世界羽聯超級系列總決賽、大馬公開賽以及全英賽冠軍後，摘得的第四座冠軍。
在半決賽中，李宗偉以21比11、21比15輕取香港的胡贇，過程沒有難度，反而是今年首次打進國際賽決賽的蓋特，在半決賽擊敗韓國一哥朴成奐的過程中相當艱難，他是經過45分鐘的激戰後，以21比15、21比19淘汰朴成奐。
古陳陷半年冠軍荒
在男雙半決賽，頭號種子“鑽石組合”古健傑與陳文宏以16比21、19比21不敵日本的橋本博且與平田典靖，繼去年的印尼公開賽後，再次敗給這支組合。古陳的冠軍荒延續了超過6個月，兩人最後一次奪得國際賽冠軍，是在去年10月的共運會男雙與團體賽。
大馬頭號混雙陳炳順與吳柳螢，在半決賽以12比21、16比21不敵剋星印尼的法蘭與碧雅，吞下了對這對印尼組合的4連敗。混雙決賽由印尼包辦，結果阿末丹都威與莉莉雅娜以21比18、23比21擊敗法蘭與碧雅。日本則提前鎖定女雙冠軍，決賽由前田美順與末綱聰子和藤井瑞希與垣岩令佳上演鬩牆戰。
羽球 體壇焦點 2011-05-01 19:30
世界一哥李宗偉在決賽擊敗丹麥不老金童彼德蓋特後，打破在印度羽球公開賽的冠軍荒，並奪得今年第4個冠軍。（圖：法新社）
（印度‧新德里1日訊）印度羽球公開賽於星期天落下帷幕，孤軍作戰的大馬一哥李宗偉在男單決賽中，苦戰3局擊敗丹麥的老對手彼德蓋特，奪得今年的第4個冠軍，同時也打破在印度參加公開賽的冠軍荒。
男雙古健傑與陳文宏以及混雙陳炳順與吳柳螢在半決賽紛紛落敗後，大馬獨剩李宗偉獨撐大旗，結果一哥不負眾望，以21比12、12比21、21比15苦勝不復當年勇的丹麥老金童蓋特，奪得含金量最重的男單冠軍。
決勝局1比5落後及時回勇
首局佔據上風的宗偉，在次局與第3局開局被蓋特壓制，但宗偉在決勝局以1比5落後的情況下及時回勇，以7比6反超比分，最終在錯過一個賽點後以21比15勝出。
這是頭號種子的李宗偉與彼德蓋特歷史上第13次交鋒，至此李宗偉取得12勝1負的戰績，唯一一次輸給蓋特，已是2009年1月18日韓國公開賽男單決賽的事。
李宗偉在新德里擊敗蓋特稱王，是他首次在印度舉行的公開賽奪冠，他曾在2009年的印度公開賽首圈不敵諶龍，並在同年的世錦賽複賽中敗給印尼的索尼，但他在之後於德里舉行的共運會奪得混合團體賽與男單的兩枚金牌。此外，這也是李宗偉今年自奪得2010年世界羽聯超級系列總決賽、大馬公開賽以及全英賽冠軍後，摘得的第四座冠軍。
在半決賽中，李宗偉以21比11、21比15輕取香港的胡贇，過程沒有難度，反而是今年首次打進國際賽決賽的蓋特，在半決賽擊敗韓國一哥朴成奐的過程中相當艱難，他是經過45分鐘的激戰後，以21比15、21比19淘汰朴成奐。
古陳陷半年冠軍荒
在男雙半決賽，頭號種子“鑽石組合”古健傑與陳文宏以16比21、19比21不敵日本的橋本博且與平田典靖，繼去年的印尼公開賽後，再次敗給這支組合。古陳的冠軍荒延續了超過6個月，兩人最後一次奪得國際賽冠軍，是在去年10月的共運會男雙與團體賽。
大馬頭號混雙陳炳順與吳柳螢，在半決賽以12比21、16比21不敵剋星印尼的法蘭與碧雅，吞下了對這對印尼組合的4連敗。混雙決賽由印尼包辦，結果阿末丹都威與莉莉雅娜以21比18、23比21擊敗法蘭與碧雅。日本則提前鎖定女雙冠軍，決賽由前田美順與末綱聰子和藤井瑞希與垣岩令佳上演鬩牆戰。
誰把美事搞砸了？
楊麗琴‧誰把美事搞砸了？
2011-04-29 19:08
http://opinions.sinchew-i.com/node/19142?tid=7
中國總理溫家寶到馬來西亞進行官式訪問，歡迎儀式的布景板上竟然寫著：“正式歡迎儀式，與他一起溫家寶閣下的正式訪問馬來西亞”。
這個讓千千萬萬名受中文教育的馬來西亞人都摸不著頭腦，也讓全世界諳中文的媒體記者朋友們感到困惑的文句，成為了國際笑話，也讓我們丟臉丟到家了。
溫家寶此行是我國政府高度重視的訪問，也受到世界的矚目。接待這名重量級國家領袖，不得有絲毫差錯，一切都必須做到盡善盡美，賓至如歸，讓大國知道，我們雖然是彈丸小國，辦起事來可是認真一流的。
可是，一個布景板卻壞了事，大大展現給全世界的，看到的，是一句狗屁不通、辭不達意、完全讓人看不懂的中文翻譯歡迎詞！
採訪歡迎儀式的同事說，中國記者朋友在現場看到這個布景板，都不禁流露出困惑的表情，接著說道：“馬來西亞的中文真奇怪，我們看不懂……。”
同事羞恥到想找個地洞來鑽。
我們不斷強調這個國家的政府多麼重視華文教育。我們有千多所華小、有獨中、甚至有以華文為媒介語的大專、大學裡有中文系，有很好的中文人才、有許多出色的作家、詩人、有許多翻譯人才、有精通中文的政府官員、負責監督中文報的新聞官、甚至有中文造詣很深的華人部長。
可是，簡簡單單的一句歡迎詞，官員卻選擇了使用谷歌網上翻譯，鬧出了不可原諒的笑話，讓懂中文的國民感到羞恥，也讓美事變成了國際糗事！
既然我國高度重視溫總理的到訪，也知道此行會成為國際焦點，有關單位就應該做到滴水不漏，從最瑣碎的小事到最重要的大事，都不應該出錯。
像這一次的谷歌翻譯事件，就讓人百思不得其解，負責布景板的單位為何沒有提出恰當的諮詢？為何不找精通中文的人翻譯，而草率的使用谷歌翻譯？負責監督的又是誰？為何出現嚴重錯誤竟也察覺不到？
溫總理來訪，見證了馬中簽署高等教育學位學歷互認協議，然而我們卻在這個關鍵時刻鬧出如此毫無水准的笑話，真是一大諷刺。
2011-04-29 19:08
http://opinions.sinchew-i.com/node/19142?tid=7
中國總理溫家寶到馬來西亞進行官式訪問，歡迎儀式的布景板上竟然寫著：“正式歡迎儀式，與他一起溫家寶閣下的正式訪問馬來西亞”。
這個讓千千萬萬名受中文教育的馬來西亞人都摸不著頭腦，也讓全世界諳中文的媒體記者朋友們感到困惑的文句，成為了國際笑話，也讓我們丟臉丟到家了。
溫家寶此行是我國政府高度重視的訪問，也受到世界的矚目。接待這名重量級國家領袖，不得有絲毫差錯，一切都必須做到盡善盡美，賓至如歸，讓大國知道，我們雖然是彈丸小國，辦起事來可是認真一流的。
可是，一個布景板卻壞了事，大大展現給全世界的，看到的，是一句狗屁不通、辭不達意、完全讓人看不懂的中文翻譯歡迎詞！
採訪歡迎儀式的同事說，中國記者朋友在現場看到這個布景板，都不禁流露出困惑的表情，接著說道：“馬來西亞的中文真奇怪，我們看不懂……。”
同事羞恥到想找個地洞來鑽。
我們不斷強調這個國家的政府多麼重視華文教育。我們有千多所華小、有獨中、甚至有以華文為媒介語的大專、大學裡有中文系，有很好的中文人才、有許多出色的作家、詩人、有許多翻譯人才、有精通中文的政府官員、負責監督中文報的新聞官、甚至有中文造詣很深的華人部長。
可是，簡簡單單的一句歡迎詞，官員卻選擇了使用谷歌網上翻譯，鬧出了不可原諒的笑話，讓懂中文的國民感到羞恥，也讓美事變成了國際糗事！
既然我國高度重視溫總理的到訪，也知道此行會成為國際焦點，有關單位就應該做到滴水不漏，從最瑣碎的小事到最重要的大事，都不應該出錯。
像這一次的谷歌翻譯事件，就讓人百思不得其解，負責布景板的單位為何沒有提出恰當的諮詢？為何不找精通中文的人翻譯，而草率的使用谷歌翻譯？負責監督的又是誰？為何出現嚴重錯誤竟也察覺不到？
溫總理來訪，見證了馬中簽署高等教育學位學歷互認協議，然而我們卻在這個關鍵時刻鬧出如此毫無水准的笑話，真是一大諷刺。
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)