Monday, July 1, 2013

Del Bosque selection errors cost Spain in Confederations Cup

de: Vicente del Bosque, Teamchef der Spanische...
(Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Spain’s glorious winning run at international tournaments came to an end once again at the Confederations Cup. While the defeat in 2009 was a genuine upset to the United States in the semi-finals, Sunday’s 3-0 loss to Brazil in this year’s final was comprehensive in nature.

First of all, credit must be given to Brazil. Roused by an unbelievably passionate home crowd at the iconic Maracana, the Selecao played with a vigour and intensity to start off the final that completely overawed Spain. After Fred’s early scrambled goal while lying on the floor, La Furia Roja simply couldn’t establish a rhythm, as Brazil were first to every ball, hounding the Spanish midfield constantly. Even after the exhilarating pace set in the first hour started to recede, the home team just seemed to have all the answers to Spain’s questions.

David Luiz executed a brilliant goal-line block when Spain seemed set to equalize through Pedro. Barely a minute later Neymar scored, and one sensed that was the decisive act of the game. Fred rounded off the scoring with his second of the game and to rub salt into Spanish wounds, Sergio Ramos missed a penalty and Gerard Pique was sent off.

Luiz Felipe Scolari deserves an immense amount of praise. Not many gave the national team much hope, but Scolari instilled belief in the team and had all his players functioning according to a well-executed plan. Nonetheless, in addition to Brazil’s players and Scolari, I believe Vicente Del Bosque also made some errors that contributed to Spain’s loss.

Spain’s attacking midfielders deservedly get a lot of plaudits for their brilliant ball retention and smart interchanging of positions in the final third. However, under Del Bosque, Spain’s midfield base plays an equally crucial role in developing the play. In fact, I would go even further in saying that in close games, the work that Xabi Alonso and Sergi Busquets do together just in front of the defence is even more significant in Spain’s dominance than the creativity of the four men ahead of them.

Alonso and Busquets are not defensive midfielders in the truest sense of the word. For starters, neither of them are particularly physical in the way they defend the ball. It’s all about positioning for the duo, often finding themselves in the right positions either covering for overlapping full-backs or as shields to the centre-backs. Furthermore, they both possess fantastic technical ability that blends well with the possession-oriented approach of the other midfielders. One could even say in a team compromising midfielders blessed with visionary passing, Alonso adds another dimension with the metronomic accuracy of his long passes. Busquets on the other hand has exceptional understanding of where his attack-minded peers are at all times, thus becoming the key master of transition for Spain. He often sets up attacks from defensive positions with one smart turn and short pass, always managing to find an open teammate in a position from which the team can capitalize.

Unfortunately, Alonso was injured for the Confederations Cup, and therein lies an illustration of how significant a role he plays in tandem with Busquets. Both complement each other so well, that in the absence of one, the others effectiveness is reduced by a fair margin. In fact, even in Spain’s insipid World Cup qualifying draw at home against France, they were effected by only Alonso playing as Busquets was injured.

Del Bosque made a significant oversight in Alonso’s absence. In stead of finding another partner alongside Busquets, the manager in stead tinkered with his formation further up the field. This compromised Spain’s defensive solidity.While Alonso certainly was a big loss, Del Bosque had in his squad a cerebral midfielder who just finished a magnificent season for Bayern Munich in Javi Martinez. Calm and languid in possession, and a brilliant reader of the game, Martinez could also have added a physical dimension to Spain’s play in both attack and defence.

Another mistake that Del Bosque made was abandoning his ‘false nine’ philosophy and his 4-6-0 formation that was such a success in winning the European Championship last year. In mitigation, Cesc Fabregas was carrying a niggle throughout the tournament, and David Silva has just come off a poor season for Manchester City. I can understand Del Bosque’s hesitance in playing the two, however once again he had replacements to fit the formation, rather than discarding the tactical make-up altogether.

Del Bosque got one piece of the jigsaw right in selecting Pedro. Pedro never wasted possession, and was always a goal threat even when Spain were playing with ten men. However, the selection of the other two in the front three was erroneous to say the least. Juan Mata is an extremely gifted player, and at Chelsea he is easily the most technical player who sets up load of chances. I would argue that in the national team, he is more effective as an option from the bench, with his penchant for trickery in the box unlocking defences. However, for a whole 90 minutes his game doesn’t always translate well to Spain’s fluency of possession. Del Bosque missed a trick over here by overlooking Santi Cazorla completely. The Arsenal man could have floated effortlessly on either wing or in the hole just ahead of Xavi. An attempt at integrating the pace of Jesus Navas from the beginning could also have served as an effective tool for Spain to establish a sphere of dominance on the field against Marcelo and David Luiz on the left side of Brazil’s defence.

Finally, and possibly the biggest selection error by the manager was his faith in Fernando Torres. Torres is not the forward he once was, and having a good scoring record in the Europa League simply cannot be the criteria for a player to be a part of the Spanish national team. In fact, even if Torres was displaying his best form, his style negates the strengths of Spain’s midfield. Often ceding possession from areas of strength, and choosing the wrong option numerous times, Torres simply wasn’t on the same wavelength as the rest of his teammates, and this had an obvious negative effect on the collective performance of the team.

Even if Del Bosque does want to play with a striker every now and then to ensure Spain have tactical flexibility and versatility of options, I would argue Torres shouldn’t be in the squad. As David Villa and Roberto Soldado are more accustomed to playing comfortably in a possession based approach at club level they are simply better fits. In fact, even players who were not a part of the squad, such as Fernando Llorente, Alvaro Negredo and Michu would have integrated better into the attack.

Notwithstanding the tactical issues of Del Bosque’s recent selections, the manager should not rest on the laurels of familiarity and loyalty either. It’s very easy to remain loyal to players that have won 2 Euros and a World Cup. However, it would serve the manager and the team well for Del Bosque to ensure that no player in the team takes his place for granted. It’s often remarked that a reserve side for Spain could just as easily win an international trophy with the talent they have.

It might be a good idea for Del Bosque to try and integrate some of these reserves more often. Especially as many of them are amongst the best performers for their teams at club level and have been more consistent domestically than the incumbents. The aforementioned duo of Javi Martinez and Santi Cazorla would be a good place to start. Nacho Monreal and Cesar Azpilicueta should challenge Jordi Alba and Alvaro Arbeloa for the fullback positions. A look at integrating some of the stars of youth teams would be a decent move as well. Isco has been the star at Malaga for a whole season, and could easily fit into the team, providing the attack with thrust without compromising on either possession or flair.

Even the captain Iker Casillas should ideally be challenged more often. While Saint Iker might have come out on top in the media war against Jose Mourinho at Real Madrid, I think the former manager might have proved a point in dropping Casillas as his replacement Diego Lopez was comfortably an upgrade for Los Blancos, putting in some stellar man of the match performances. As a proven performer for his club, Lopez should be a part of the squad. As should the improving David De Gea. It reflects poorly on the national squad that along with Casillas, the back-ups Victor Valdes and Pepe Reina also have had average seasons recently. Lopez and De Gea can shake things up and even inspire Casillas to get better.

One poor result cannot undermine the brilliance of Spain on the international stage in the last six years. At the end of the day, the Confederations Cup is ranked lowest amongst international trophies, a glorified tournament that essentially serves as a countdown to the real deal a year later. Nonetheless, the tournament served some purpose for Spain. They had a chance to acclimatize to Brazil, with long journeys between the venues and significantly a peak at the varying climates in the different regions of what is a huge country. Perhaps, they also won’t be overawed by the home crowd this time next year if they are to face Brazil in a knockout fixture again.

Ultimately though, the most important lessons are learnt on the field, and as Del Bosque himself admitted sometimes its good to lose so that you don’t believe in invincibility. Lest we forget, Del Bosque is a manager who has won the Champions League twice along with winning the World Cup and Euros as national manager. If he stays true to his tactical philosophy, makes the right choices and ensures players are selected on form, then Vicente Del Bosque might yet lead Spain to glory by successfully defending the World Cup next year in Brazil.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Sunday, June 30, 2013

Wimbledon 2013 Men's Singles Round of 16 preview

Tommy Haas backhand
Tommy Haas backhand (Photo credit: Carine06)
Novak Djokovic
Novak Djokovic (Photo credit: Carine06)
Novak Djokovic (1) vs. Tommy Haas (13)

Djokovic and Haas met recently at the quarter-finals of the French Open, and even though the world number one won in straight sets, it was a high quality tennis match that featured high quality shots and entertaining rallies galore. In some respects, it's a pity that the two aren't playing a quarter-final again.

Djokovic has steamrolled past his opponents in the first three rounds. He seems to have had no issues transitioning between clay and grass, and all elements of his game are in fine fettle. Haas has belied his age, and if anything on grass he seems to be playing the game of someone at the age of 25 rather than 35. One of the games most aesthetically pleasing backhands still firing, Haas has also benefitted from his serve clicking throughout the tournament.

Haas is an excellent grass court player, and leads Djokovic 2-0 on head-to-heads on this surface, including a memorable quarterfinal victory at Wimbledon in 2009. Haas also seems to trouble Djokovic more than most, as his variety of shots doesn't allow Djokovic to constantly dictate points. However, Djokovic is a much improved player on grass, and with his motivation intact after the gut-wrenching loss at Roland Garros, the Djoker should come out on top in 4 high-quality sets.

Bernard Tomic vs. Tomas Berdych (7)

After a year dominated by all the wrong headlines off the court, Bernard Tomic has played some brilliant tennis at Wimbledon, reminding us of why he is considered to be a potential grand slam winner. His performance in beating Richard Gasquet in the third round, highlighted all the best facets of Tomic's game. Remarkable consistency with the first serve, excellent variety from the baseline including a crafty slice and raising the level of his game on the biggest points.

Berdych loves playing at Wimbledon, and the 2010 finalist looked relatively untroubled until his third round encounter against Kevin Anderson. Berdych's serve wasn't at its best, and in retrospect he was lucky to win in 4 sets after handing the South African 16 break points. Berdych has more experience, but if Tomic plays at the top of his game, he posses equal power and greater variety to cause an upset.

David Ferrer (4) vs. Ivan Dodig

Despite being his least favourite surface, Ferrer has played with the hunger and competitiveness that has been the hallmark of his rise in the ATP rankings. Now guaranteed to be number 3 at the end of Wimbledon, Ferrer continues to rely on his trademark consistency from the baseline, and has added more fizz to his serve. He was troubled by the unorthodoxy of Alexander Dolgopolov, but prevailed by winning the last two sets in dominant fashion.

Dodig has benefitted largely from the injuries that previous opponents Igor Sijsling and Phillip Kohlschreiber were carrying into matches against him. With his serve being his biggest ally, he could potentially be a tricky opponent on grass. However, Ferrer clearly has the better all round game and smartness to progress at the possible expense of a tie-break.

Andreas Seppi vs. Juan Martin Del Potro (8)

Del Potro celebrates
Del Potro celebrates (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Anyone who bet Seppi reaching the round of 16 at Wimbledon, will have raked in some serious dough. At best a challenging opponent on clay, Seppi has none of the traditional weapons one would normally need to succeed on grass. Yet somehow, he has used his experience in seeing out players better suited to grass such as Kei Nishikori and Denis Istomin in tough five-setters.

Juan Martin Del Potro has played an exceptional tournament so far. Finally looking at home on grass, the Argentine will be looking to improve on round of 16 appearances that he managed in the last two years. Pending any doubts of a possible niggle in the knee after chasing down a drop shot in the third round, Del Potro should proceed in the draw with another commanding victory.

Lukasz Kubot vs. Adrian Mannarino

Am I previewing a match on the Challenger circuit or a fourth round match at a grand slam? The only thing I can say with certainty about this match, is that the winner will be the weakest player in the quarter-finals.

Both players possess fearsome serves and hit the ball really hard. In his match against Dustin Brown, Mannarino did display a good ability to retrieve the ball, and his greater spin might just tilt the balance against Kubot, who isn't necessarily one of the best movers on court.

Jerzy Janowicz (24) vs. Jurgen Melzer

Jerzy Janowicz announced his arrival as player to watch out for on grass, when he made it to the final of the Paris Indoors Masters on extremely fast courts. Possessing one of the biggest serves in the mens game,  and with a big wingspan of 2.04 metres, Janowicz has a game built for fast courts. He has already made the headlines this year, with some big scalps on clay, and is clearly the most dangerous player remaining in Andy Murray's half of the draw.

Jurgen Melzer is a crafty veteran with an entertaining serve and volley game, and it is great to see the Austrian in the second week of a grand slam again. Melzer's serve while not the fastest, can sometimes be very difficult to read. However, he doesn't have the return game to have an impact on Janowicz's serve, and he might also be fatigued after a marathon five-setter in doubles. Janowicz should go through in three tight sets.

Fernando Verdasco vs. Kenny De Schepper

A battle between two left-handers with big serves. Verdasco has fallen down the rankings since his Annus Mirabilis of 2009, and in many respects its a surprise he has reached the round of 16 on his least favourite surface. However, the Spaniard has played some really good tennis. It has also been good to see Verdasco waiting for the right moment to unleash his big forehand, rather than a tendency to go for broke at all times.

De Schepper has also progressed serenely without dropping a set, although a walkover against Marin Cillic in the second round certainly helped his cause. Another player with a big serve enjoying the surface, De Schepper will struggle to gain a foothold against Verdasco's greater variety. Verdasco will be motivated to make the quarters of a grand slam again, and should do so with little alarm.

Mikhail Youzhny (20) vs. Andy Murray (2)

Yet another player with a love for grass, Youzhny was bound to make an impression at Wimbledon this year after finishing runner-up to Roger Federer at Halle. Youzhny's single-handed backhand is his biggest weapon, and he is very adept at sudden changes of direction in long rallies. However, his serve has been inconsistent at SW19 this year.

Andy Murray
Andy Murray (Photo credit: Carine06)
Andy Murray has been playing sublime tennis this year in front of his adoring fans. Murray clearly has a superb understanding of how to craft points on grass, and with his Olympic gold secured at Wimbledon last year, there is a confidence and swagger that Murray has brought to Centre Court which wasn't always evident in previous years.

Murray is firing on all cylinders, the serve exceptional, the volleys elegant, the passing shots incredible as always. He has the edge on Youzhny in all departments, and has the greater focus as well. Expect Youzhny to hit sublime winners, but eventually disintegrate in the face of Murray's brilliance.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Saturday, June 29, 2013

Wimbledon 2013 Women's Singles Round of 16 preview

Serena Williams (1) vs. Sabine Lisicki (23)

In normal circumstances, a match featuring the best serve in the women's game against the second best serve in the women's game would be expected to be really close. However, Serena Williams play in the past year has been several leagues above normal. The world no. 1 doesn't only possess the best serve, but the best game on the WTA Tour altogether. Her movement on grass is so natural and easy, that there is hardly a rally that she doesn't dominate.

Her opponent in the fourth round is Sabine Lisicki, and the German has become a darling with the Wimbledon crowds due to her performances at SW19 over the past few years. With a fantastic serve and booming forehand, grass is clearly Lisicki's most effective surface. Not that it will be of much assistance on Monday. I believe that Lisicki is the one player who is capable of possibly extending a set to a tie-break against Serena. That should pretty much be the extent of her challenge.

Laura Robson vs. Kaia Kanepi

Robson has captured the nation's imagination with her run to the last 16, making her the first female Briton to make it this far since Sam Smith in 1998. Robson is amongst a crop of young women's players who are breaking into the game on the back of a huge serve. Her lefty serve is a considerable advantage when on song, and the top spin she consistently generates off her ground strokes enhance the belief amongst many in the punditocracy that she will eventually crack the top five.

Blocking her path to a possible dream quarter-final against Serena is the streetwise Estonian Kaia Kanepi. Kanepi will be no pushover, herself possessing a fearsome serve. Robson can take advantage of the fact that Kanepi's extremely powerful baseline shots are almost always flat in trajectory, which could lead to several errors against topspin. However, if Robson isn't switched on mentally, Kanepi is equally capable of ruthlessly taking advantage. An interesting battle awaits.

Agnieszka Radwanksa (4) vs. Tsvetana Pironkova

In her third round encounter against Madison Keys, Radwanska proved why she finished runner-up at Wimbledon last year. Clearly playing against an opponent who had more power and pace in her shots, Radwanska showed that guile, good movement and smart placement is still extremely effective in the modern game. In addition, her subtle approach shots and deft touch at net are valuable assets on grass.

Pironkova is also a very capable player on grass, having twice beaten Venus Williams at Wimbledon. One could argue that her game would almost classify as 'Radwanska Lite'. Another player who relies on the wiles of placement and precision rather than power, she can easily frustrate bigger hitters into unforced errors. Despite the low profile of the match, in actuality it is a shot makers dream. Radwanska should prove to have too much, but the Bulgarian is capable of upsetting anyone on her day.

Roberta Vinci (11) vs. Li Na (6)

Other than a titanic affair in the second round against Jana Cepelova in the second round, Vinci has dominated all of her matches at Wimbledon this year. The Italian veteran has had a splendid year and a half since the beginning of 2012. Her doubles expertise has proved handy on grass, enabling her to finish many points by coming forward and executing brilliant volleys.

Grass isn't Li Na's favourite surface, and that she has made it this far already is testament to her tenacity and determination. Li doesn't move easily on grass, yet her accuracy in finding the lines from the baseline, in particular the forehand, can allow her to dictate points. If she gets on a run, Li can win sets in a blink of an eye. This match is an interesting clash of contrasts between Vinci's more classical grass court style and Li's more direct game from the back, and is simply too close to call.

Monica Puig vs. Sloane Stephens (17)

Puig has captured the imagination of many at Wimbledon by reaching the round of 16. After causing a big upset in the first round by easily overcoming fifth seed Sara Errani, the 19 year-old from Puerto Rico has engaged in some tough three-setters, but has allied resilience and quality to come through on the victorious side. She plays with little inhibition, and is equally comfortable with her backhand and forehand.

Sloane Stephens knows what Puig is growing through, announcing her arrival on the big stage by beating Serena in the quarter-finals at the Australian Open. To her credit Stephens has remained grounded, and has impressively maintained consistency, reaching the round of 16 for the third consecutive grand slam. Stephens has also played some close three-setters, but has come through by showing maturity in positions where all looked lost. It is this maturity coupled with a little more experience that should give her the edge over Puig.

Marion Bartoli (15) vs. Karin Knapp

There is no doubt that Bartoli's best surface is grass. One of the few players in the current game, who hits double-handed shots on both wings, Bartoli has a great mix of power and the ability to generate improbable angles. Bartoli might look at the open draw as another opportunity to reach the finals at Wimbledon after 2007.

She is the overwhelming favourite against the unheralded Italian Karin Knapp. Knapp however has already defeated two dangerous opponents en route to the round of 16 - Lucie Safarova in the second round and Maria Sharapova's conqueror, Michelle Larcher de Brito in round three. If Knapp is to add her biggest scalp, it would have to be on the back of an erratic and inconsistent display by Bartoli.

Petra Kvitova (8) vs. Carla Suarez Navarro (19)

While Kvitova is far from the dominant performer that won Wimbledon in 2011, the Czech southpaw has made it to the fourth round on the back of some rarely seen resilience. Her serve has faltered throughout the tournament and there has been no consistency in her ground strokes, alternating between winners and unforced errors. However, she has made it into the second week, and if she can draw from her experience of winning the tournament, she still has the game to reach the final.

Carla Suarez Navarro possesses a single-handed backhand that is extremely elegant and yet very precise. The Spaniard generates spin easily of the backhand, and is equally dangerous down the line or crosscourt. It is a weapon that serves her really well on grass, although a weak serve is a major disadvantage against top opponents. Expect Suarez Navarro to hit some dazzling winners, but Kvitova should be able to hit her way through to the quarterfinals.

Kirsten Flipkens (20) vs. Flavia Pennetta

At every grand slam there is a player in the fourth round of the draw who has sneaked in under the radar. At Wimbledon, it is Kirsten Flipkens. Flipkens hails from the country of Henin and Clijsters, and while she doesn't possess the excellence of her countrywomen, she does know how to play within her limits, and doesn't have any particular weaknesses nor any big weapons.

The beneficiary of Victoria Azarenka's withdrawal in the second round, Pennetta has rode her fair share of luck in getting this far in the tournament. Pennetta doesn't possess the power that she had when breaking into the top 10 in 2009. However, she still has remarkable endurance levels, and will never give an easy point to her opponents. In a match that will feature many long and consistent rallies, the result will probably come down to who blinks first in a close match.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Wednesday, May 29, 2013

England criticized for failing the nostalgia test

In the wake of England's 2-0 test series win over New Zealand featuring two crushing victories, one would expect superlatives, praise and congrats galore. In stead, we have the cricketing punditocracy especially England's finest in the commentary boxes, criticizing captain Alistair Cook and the team for negative tactics - both while batting in the second innings, and bowling during the Kiwis chase which was nothing more than a victory lap in reality.

Now, I get that both the traditionalists and the doom-mongers alike seem to believe that test cricket is truly only at its best when captains are attacking. That love for attacking cricket also now seems to be a benchmark for defining the greatness of a winning team. Memories of the great Australian and West Indian sides of the past are based on their much lauded aggressive intent, and I would say rightly so.

However, constantly comparing the good test teams of today with the all-conquering teams of the past can at times be a disservice to the excellence of cricketers efforts in the present day. One of the most ubiquitous sentiments shared by aficionados of all sports, is that setting standards and then comparing them across eras and generations is a futile effort. Somehow though, this debate rears it head more prominently in the British press across a wide variety of sports. Just winning simply isn't enough, there is almost more appreciation for the noble defeat.

Let's have some perspective, by breaking down exactly what transpired at Headingly:

  1. England won the 2nd test by 247 runs. Let me spell it out. That's two hundred and forty seven runs more than New Zealand.
  2. The first day was completely washed out, and half of the final day was washed out. So that's a 247 run victory in three and a half days.
  3. In the first innings, Joe Root scored a scintillating century at a strike rate of 62, Jonny Bairstow an aggressive half-century at a strike rate of 64.
  4. England bowled out New Zealand in 43.4 overs in the first innings with Graeme Swann taking 4 wickets in 10 overs, and Steven Finn taking 3 wickets in 12 overs.
  5. England then scored 287 for 5 in the second innings at a faster run rate than they did in the first innings, 3.77 compared to 3.57.
  6. Alistair Cook scored another century as captain at a fair clip of 68.42, and the two Yorkshire tyros Root and Bairstow hit aggressive twenty's at a rate of 127 and 118 respectively.
  7. While attacking intent is indeed necessary to take twenty wickets outright, Hamish Rutherford and Ross Taylor played freely irrespective of the field settings, to score 42 and 70 respectively. It is easy to say that a defensive field allows batsmen to settle, but in the modern game ultra-attacking fields also allow batsmen to settle through scoring boundaries. 
  8. England did take longer to bowl out New Zealand in the second innings. However, can a true fan of test cricket genuinely lament Graeme Swann bowling thoughtfully and deceptively for 32 overs and get six wickets? I would argue it made the game so much more enjoyable watching Swann work so hard to get his ten-wicket haul for the match, and the Black Caps batsmen desperately try to draw the game.
  9. None of England's leading bowlers conceded more than 3.5 runs an over. What has been the English bowling attack's single biggest strength in their ascent to the upper echelons of test cricket was clearly demonstrated in the fourth innings of the match, and is probably going to be their key strategy against Australia as well.
  10. Despite being clear favourites for the Ashes, England cannot take it for granted that the Australians are just going to turn up and roll over. Ashes cricket is usually intense combat, and  I would argue that at least two matches might go down to the final session. Experience at winning a time trial like the one surpassed at Headingly can come in handy during the Ashes.
So the stats, facts and outcomes all clearly point to one conclusion - England played extremely well and also quite aggressively to win the second test against New Zealand. Alistair Cook and his men should be commended and lauded for a job well done, rather than being criticized for failing to meet nostalgic standards set by the demanding English cricketing punditocracy. I will leave the last word to the English captain:

"There are lots of different ways of attacking - you don't always have to crowd the bat.
"There are many different ways of skinning a cat." 
"But as a captain you are judged on your results. The result vindicates the decision."
Enhanced by Zemanta

Saturday, May 25, 2013

Champions League Final 2013 Review



My reflections on the recently concluded Champions League Final at Wembley between Bayern Munich and Borussia Dortmund. Bayern recovered from last year's heartbreak at home to win their 5th Champions League in a thoroughly entertaining final against a determined Dortmund side.
Enhanced by Zemanta