Is this rugby's worst ever jersey?

RugbyHeaven | Wednesday, 08 October 2008

 

High art, or high farce? You be the judge as the always colourful Stade Français club in Paris launches its latest rugby jersey on the world.

The trendy Parisian club has come up with a garish new design, launched to coincide with the start of this year's Heineken Cup competition, that is either brilliantly chic, or downright sick, depending on your point of view.

This year's design depicts the face of Parisienne 13th-century heroine Blanche de Castille, the wife of Louis VIII, in a multi-coloured design described by club publicists as "in the fashion of Andy Warhol".

Well, they're certainly getting their 15 minutes of fame, and then some.

The shirts made their debut in the weekend's 34-16 victory over Montauban that took the Ewen McKenzie-coached Stade Français eight points clear of Toulouse at the top of the French Top 14.

As usual, the latest designs under the always colourful ownership of the eccentric Max Guazzini have created plenty of chatter.

Some critics have described it as the worst rugby jersey in the game's history? Others love it.

One thing you have to give the club credit for, though, is consistency. Having started the trend with a fluorescent pink jersey that has become their signature look, they have continued to defy critics and fashionistas alike.

Last season saw a light brown number with turquoise stripes and pink flowers and was described by one critic as "reminiscent of an Hawaiian shirt fashioned from some 1970s caravan curtains".

There was also a pink, green and blue effort with tie-dyed blurred lines that drew unflattering appraisals.

Still, the club gets full marks for originality, and, who knows, maybe their persistence will finally see other rugby clubs join the trend.

Premier League threatened with salary cap as FA vows to get tough

Triesman attacks culture of debt among big clubs
Chairman angers PL over plans to act as regulator

 

Matt Scott The Guardian, Wednesday October 8 2008

 

The Football Association chairman, David Triesman, yesterday threatened to enforce a salary cap on England's leading clubs as part of a wide-ranging and often damning address on the game's finances.

Setting out the FA's plans to become a stricter regulator for football and placing himself on a collision course with the Premier League, Lord Triesman attacked an industry that he said had run up £3bn of debt, speaking of the "very tangible dangers" for the game at a time of much uncertainty in global finance.

"In the current climate it could be that we have to work out [wage] restraints and what they might be," he said during a speech to the Leaders in Football conference at Stamford Bridge. "A sensible form of [wage] restraint would make sense and it is not inconceivable. It's very hard to do anything unless all parties want to do it and everyone needs to want to do it. Preferably without being compelled."

Triesman's proposals will put the FA squarely at odds with the Premier League, particularly his ambitions for the governing body to become the English game's regulator. Senior government figures have this week been explicit that the FA's powers should be extended, and Uefa, the European governing body, is certain to offer support, having itself lobbied the European Commission to become football's statutory regulator.

Triesman set out an ambitious manifesto for reform of the game's regulatory structure. "I think we are too fragmented with too many bodies responsible for too many parts of the sport," he said. "Greater clarity is needed about who is responsible for the fitness and future of the game. A clear sports law could clarify the position. The time has come for a comprehensive sports law apportioning responsibility and accountability."

He also called for a strengthening of the fit-and-proper-persons test for club owners to include considerations of human-rights abuses alongside a prospective buyer's financial history. But most of his speech was given over to the volatility of the credit markets and its impact on English clubs. Triesman was referring to Manchester United when he talked of the "impenetrable instruments" of debt clubs have accrued. He said clubs must "decrease their indebtedness" by refinancing - although market conditions forbid most that luxury - or paying it down.

In response the Premier League's chief executive, Richard Scudamore, compared Triesman's aversion to debt with that of the Uefa president, Michel Platini, who Scudamore claimed "thinks all debt is bad". Scudamore instead believes that borrowings are sustainable if they are in keeping with revenues. Despite the biggest anomaly of Manchester United, whose debts are £666m, he pointed out that the ratio of debt to earnings at Premier League clubs is broadly 1.1:1.

But Scudamore was most strident in responding to Triesman's regulatory ambitions, insisting that the league should not yield to the whims of an organisation that is in some ways its commercial rival. "We are like competitors," he said. "We compete for sponsorship and for television rights and we are in the same space.

"The way it works here is tripartite. The Football League with its long reach, the Premier League with its different focus and different appeal and the FA all working together. If we draw three circles the overlap doesn't need to be huge."

FA ponders appeal

The FA may appeal against the paltry €14,000 fine Fifa handed Croatia last month. David Triesman will discuss it with Fifa's president, Sepp Blatter, after the racist abuse England's Emile Heskey suffered in Zagreb. Lord Triesman said: "We want to make sure that in the international system racist abuse is dealt with effectively."

Should England play Steven Gerrard in central midfield?

Former Liverpool defender Jim Beglin and Wycombe manager Peter Taylor discuss Steven Gerrard's role in the England team

The Guardian, Wednesday October 8 2008

 

Jim Beglin Former Liverpool defender and ITV match summariser

Yes

I think Steven Gerrard would tell you himself that he is at his best and most effective when he plays in central midfield because it makes best use of his intelligence to pick and choose his runs from a position where he can be most dangerous. Of course you can stick him out wide and he is that good a player he will do a job for you. He can be a good provider from the right and moves inside well to make the selection work but for me it does not extract the maximum from his talent.

If you're going to play four across midfield, as Fabio Capello seems to prefer, you can't squash three candidates into the two available central berths . It's a dilemma for the England manager and I appreciate how difficult it is for him to decide. After the Croatia game when Gareth Barry and Frank Lampard combined effectively, I can understand those who want to go with the status quo. But let's not forget that Gerrard and Barry have worked well together as a pairing in the past.

The crux of the issue is the balance of the side and nothing should compromise that. As we saw on numerous occasions, particularly during the 2006 World Cup, you are asking for trouble by accommodating both Lampard and Gerrard in their favoured roles. Capello is going to have to decide to leave one out. I'm glad it's not my decision to choose which one plays.

But if I had to I would go for the Liverpool captain . Gerrard gives you more aggression and is a real battler in the tackle. His specific quality is pretty obvious — he is capable of producing sensational match-winning moments. I think Lampard is a more consistent contributor, maybe better at linking the play and probably gets more involved in a match in terms of passing. I just think Gerrard has the knack and ability to transform games with one huge moment.

Gerrard now has brought more discipline to the way he plays. I know Liverpool set up diff erently — against Everton Xabi Alonso and Gerrard were stationed deeper in midfi eld with Robbie Keane playing off Fernando Torres. In the past Gerrard had a tendency to vacate this position from time to time to go out and seek the ball which left the defence a bit vulnerable. But at Goodison Park I saw a new maturity to his play — he knows the role much better and is shrewder about when to break forward .

I feel perhaps I am being a wee bit unkind to Lampard. I really am torn. I would give the nod to Gerrard but it's a marginal decision. Lampard's general play this season has been absolutely superb — his link-up play, passing, astuteness in timing his runs to take opportunities in the box and finishing have been wonderful. But as good a player as Frank is, my gut instinct is that Gerrard is capable of even bigger things, decisive, game-changing interventions.

In terms of the balance of the team you could squeeze Gerrard in on the right but Theo Walcott has come of age now and deserves a run there. It's a close call but if you stick with Barry, and experience tells us you must, I would pick Gerrard to partner him.

Peter Taylor Wycombe manager and former England caretaker

No

I wouldn't break up the partnership of Gareth Barry and Frank Lampard in England's central midfield for the upcoming games because Fabio Capello has started well with those two and he now wants to start building a team for South Africa 2010 . So, with Steven Gerrard having missed the fi rst two World Cup qualifiers because of injury, it prompts the question: do you leave the Liverpool captain on the bench?

The answer is simple: No. I would never leave Gerrard out and, because I think he can play everywhere in midfield, he would be the one, yet again, who would have to play wide.

Steve McClaren had Gerrard on the right and I think that was the right idea. Gerrard is such a talented player that he can play anywhere: he can play right, he can play left and he can play in the middle. I would have him on the right because of his fantastic crossing but this time, as I wouldn't want to drop Theo Walcott after his hat-trick against Croatia, I would play him on the left. That will give him the opportunity to cut inside and shoot with his right foot.

Playing him wide gives him more freedom. My experience as an international manager is that the opposition will focus on the two middle men and mark them tightly, because it is easier to locate them and pin them down in the middle of the park.

Some people say Gerrard and Lampard should play in central midfield but I don't think you can drop Barry. It is not that Lampard or Gerrard can't defend, because they can, but they are not defensive players. Barry is a defensive player: he thinks like a defensive player and he plays like a defensive player. He shields the ball, starts attacking moves, heads the ball well and reads the game well.

And even though England are playing Kazakhstan and Belarus this time — perhaps not the strongest teams in Europe — you can't underestimate them and think you can play without a defensive midfi elder. It just doesn't work that way any more. You need to show all the teams respect and that means having Barry in the team.

It is not that Lampard and Gerrard can't play together because they can. Any team in the world would love to have them and would probably not contemplate dropping one of them. They are world class and give England so many options. Also, I think that Capello has introduced something that may have been missing before and something that will see them play better together: patience.

I have sometimes felt that they have wanted to play well for England so badly that they have tried too hard. They haven't been patient enough. With Capello, however, I have seen them have more patience in their passing and that can only benefit the team.

There is no way I would drop Lampard and, as I wouldn't play him wide, he has to stay in the middle. Lampard has been getting quite a lot of criticism from England supporters recently and I just can't understand that. It baffles me. He is a tremendous player and the thing with him is that he is desperate to be there and desperate to play well for England, which may not always have been the case with every player. The criticism he has been getting is unfair and silly because he is such a good footballer. End of story.