Thanks C58 - I have to agree. Forgive me, but I think it's worth quoting in full: Match Of The Day is quite a good barometer for what’s going on in football media world, and so it was disheartening to hear the analysis of the Arsenal/Fulham game last night. The Premier League is a commercial entity, and we all understand that the well-supported clubs are what sustains the competition’s global attraction – but we have to stop treating the less glamorous clubs as a sub-plot in the narrative. A case in point, the reaction to yesterday’s game at The Emirates. Arsenal this, Arsenal that – there wasn’t even a discussion of anything that Martin Jol’s side did well in North London. The impression given, is that all clubs outside the traditional top-four are just an inconvenience that the glamour clubs have to sidestep through the course of the season, and that when points are dropped to them, the focus is only ever on the ‘big’ club’s failings. Doesn’t that contradict the oft-repeated mantra about the Premier League and how competitive it is and the maxim chanted continually by journalists who subsequently treat the competition as a four-team league? The sum of MOTD’s analysis on Fulham yesterday was a one-liner about Dimitar Berbatov’s myriad abilities, and even that seems to play into the ‘neglect’ theory, because the Bulgarian is a former Manchester United player. You suspect that a lot of this stems from laziness, and the unwillingness of pundits to properly research teams and players who aren’t playing at Old Trafford or Stamford Bridge. Sure, we can all speak educatedly on Eden Hazard’s impact this season, but how many members of the media can make an accurate summation of Alex Kacaniklic’s pros and cons? It’s not just Fulham, look at the reaction to West Brom this season – they’re treated as some kind of anomaly who will hopefully drop back into the pack at some point. ‘False position’ is a phrase which has been used to describe their start – really? Have you watched them play? Have you seen the chemistry and understanding that Steve Clarke has built into his side? It’s not a surprise at all, they’re a good side populated with players who are performing at a very high level. But they’re just not box office enough, and so, like Fulham, will be dismissed with lazy platitudes. What was so impressive about Fulham yesterday was their resilience. In seasons gone by, at 2-0 away from home, they might as well have got back on the coach and gone home – they didn’t recover deficits like that at those kind of grounds. But yesterday they did, yet nobody seems the slightest bit interested. It’s ridiculous.
I'd be angry if I wasn't so surprised to be honest. I constantly hate the way the press and pundits refer to Berbatov as 'too good for Fulham' and he 'can play at any team in the world'. Even the commentator asked Wenger why he didn't go in for him. Why shouldn't he end up at Fulham? And another thing, the 'lazy' debate really has to stop. Every time he scores, someone (Keown last night) makes reference to this stigma about Berbatov of whether or not he's lazy. He's not, end of discussion.
They must've missed our second goal when Berbs outran the Arsenal fella (can't remember who) to cross in for Kaca! His penalty sums him up - he's cool and calm. He doesn't buzz around like a fart in a trance because he doesn't need to, his positioning, vision and ball control do it all for him. I also found it disrespectful that the interviewer asked Wenger why he didn't sign Berbs, as if if Arsenal went in for him he would've gone there ahead of us. He turned down Spurs at the death, let us not forget. Arsene doesn't sign players over 30 anyway.
Wouldn't a fart (or anything else) in a trance be immoble, rather than fast and frantic? Pedantry aside, I entirely agree with the point you're making!
You're thinking of Raheem Sterling. Incidentally, watching MOTD2 last night, Mrs Captain pointed out that Sterling runs like Phoebe from Friends, if anyone remembers that particular episode.
Postscript to the MOTD debate. I've just finished watching MOTD2 over lunch, and they were full of praise for us. Emphasising Ruiz's form and the fact that our goals have been very evenly spread out across the team. Possibly someone there consciously trying to redress the balance for the Saturday show's oversight. As well as showing a list of the teams who score the most goals (with us second), their alternative table of the week was goals scored by subs, with us top (alphabetically) from the two Manchester clubs. I think at one point Colin Murray referred to us as 'the all-conquering, free-scoring Fulham'.
