Novak Djokovic sealed his fifth Grand Slam under the roof of Melbourne’s Rod Laver Arena, and at the same time underlined his name as the current world #1 in the tennis world. The pulsating final with Rafael Nadal is being considered one of, if not the best Grand Slam finals since Nadal’s epic match with Federer back in 2008 at Wimbledon. Even then, some are saying this marathon eclipsed that. The pendulum this Sunday swung both ways as each player took a grip of the tie at various moments throughout its near six hour spectacle, only for their opponent to spectacularly battle back.
The way Djokovic has won the tournament will fill him with enormous confidence for the rest of this year. He has defeated two exceedingly difficult challenges that Nadal, and formerly, Andy Murray, threw at him, having to last the whole five sets with both. He must now consider himself imperious, ready to take on whatever challenge that is thrown at him and succeed. The mental resilience he has acquired means he is prepared psychologically as well as physically for the heavy demands of Grand Slam tennis. This is further enforced in the manner he came back in the final set at Melbourne Park. Having looked on course to seal the contest in four sets having demolished and demoralised Nadal in the second and third, he eventually ended up being a break down in the decider and looked very much on the ropes. After the energy he had already expended, I think few expected him to find another burst of inspiration to claw it back and eventually claim the title. It was a gladiatorial effort and one which captivated viewers. This tougher mental strength Djokovic has obtained, which probably first came to fruition when he achieved his first Slam, is now what makes him a major player on the world stage. Beforehand, he was considered a choker, somebody, who although could last the distance physically, lacked the belief that they could achieve the title. That has now changed, and it is without certainty he will continue to add to his tally of major titles, with aspirations of reaching the heights of Nadal (with 10) and Federer (16) a genuine target.
Yet when you look back on the tournament, you must feel partially sorry for Andy Murray. He thought he had taken his chance in defeating Djokovic, but was subject to the same bouncebackability and never say die attitude that reared its head again in the final. The man is currently holding the nations tennis expectations on his shoulders and he probably would have already realised his dream of major success had he entered the scene at any other time than the modern era. He is desperate for a Grand Slam, and you can probably argue either the Australian or US Open’s are his best hopes, although ideally, to appease the dreams of many British sporting fanatics, victory on the grasses at Wimbledon would provide the sweetest of stories. His performance against Djokovic in the semi-final did provide hope that maybe he is closing the gap on the top three though, because beforehand he was clearly a level below them, but still a class act above everyone else below him in the rankings. It was as if he was stuck in a rut as world number four. In the past the Scot has proven he can beat the three players above him, though the momentous effort he usually exercises to do so, I believe is the reason for his then subsequent floundering in the next match (usually a Grand Slam final). Maybe now however, the tide is changing, and had he defeated Djokovic in Melbourne he would have been eyed up as a potential favourite.
But, to me he still has to win a Slam before he can be classed with the others. The game has not seen three such imperious players for some time, particularly with such contrasting styles. Many had thought the graceful looking Federer was on the wane, but some of his performances in Melbourne have reminded many not to write him off. Naturally, Nadal, with his bulging arm muscles is notoriously associated with the power game, whilst Djokovic just appears to be the ultimate Duracell bunny, with never-ending running. However, in the final, Djokovic appeared to combine all three attributes into his game, and was at times out-hitting Nadal, a feat so rarely witnessed. Whilst now, the game has evolved so much that players must play the best available shot to them. If one strikes one that is only an acceptable or possible option it is brutally punished by the likes of Djokovic, Nadal, Federer and even Murray to an extent. Unless the best shot is played, it is considered a mistake and your chances on the point are usually extinguished rapidly. It is dog eat dog, and it is for that reason that the trio (and Murray) are all but always filling the semi-final slots of major championships.
If the entertainment of the past Australian fortnight is a sign to come of the quality we are going to expect amongst the tennis fraternity in 2012, then fans can rejoice, particularly as we will be treated to an Olympic tournament as well as the four Slams this year. As a Brit, it will be interesting to see if Murray does gain that elusive title, or whether the tremendous trio now take another step away from him. The sport of tennis is in a great shape, with the number of contenders gunning for women’s titles making them just as interesting to watch as the fantastic match-play we are witnessing amongst the men. However, with the run Djokovic is currently experiencing, it is going to take a special performance for someone to slow him down in his tracks. Roll on Roland Garros...
Sunday 29 January 2012
Sunday 22 January 2012
Wanted: Professional Footballer with Common Sense
This week six footballers from the south coast were arrested in connection to an alleged sexual assault. I think it is important now to stress that those arrested so far (with one already eliminated from the case) have done so merely to assist police inquiries and that no charges have yet been brought against any of them. As the saying goes, they are innocent until proven guilty. However, the news has once again brought the national game into the spotlight for the wrong reasons. Although not Premier League footballers, the news still causes the public to further tarnish footballer’s reputations, considering them to be greedy, arrogant individuals who believe they can do what they want, when they want. In the past, Ashley Cole and John Terry in particular have faced the public wrath for their attitudes to everyday life, but they are not alone. This season, Titus Bramble and Barry Bannan have also demonstrated complete idiocy with some of their actions; Bramble in a sexual assault case, Bannan for drink-driving. Now you can argue that there are other members of the public that are also being charged for such crimes every day, and that is true. However, these individuals are not ‘normal’ members of society. They are a privileged group and are fully aware how their occupation puts them fully within the public eye. Therefore, they need to act like the role models that they are expected to be.
This is not to say that it is solely footballers who bring their sport into disrepute. Boxers, cricketers, and recently at the World Cup in New Zealand, rugby union players have also brought shame upon themselves. Understandably, these athletes still want to, and are entitled to enjoy themselves, but once you have achieved ‘celebrity status’, you need to be a lot more wary and utilise common sense to ensure that no consequences come of it. When you are in the public eye, all your actions are scrutinised and you are expected to act morally right throughout. The public sees these people as privileged individuals who should be proud and grateful of the opportunities their talents have blessed them with. Sport is a passionate sector of society, with individuals affiliating themselves to teams and supporting their country vehemently. This feverish support generally leads to fans only wanting one thing from those who are associated with their team, and that is to represent the club appropriately both on, and off, the field. When this does not happen, the anger starts to emerge because those supporters would give anything to have the talent and opportunity to play for their team or country; to them it would be an honour rather than an employment.
But is it fair that these sportspeople are hung out to dry by the media and the public when some of the acts they are castigated for are merely mistakes any one of us could make during our lifetimes? To me, it is when despicable and unforgivable acts, which put other people’s lives in danger, need to be scrutinised, of which sexual assault and drink-driving fall under this category without a shadow of a doubt. These events are regularly brought up in the media even with regular members of society, so those with celebrity status can have no complaints when they too are named and shamed. What perplexes many I think is how these athletes can justify such stupid decisions when they are paid such large sums of money and there are alternative options for them. For example, Bannan, who did not even hold a full drivers licence, could have comfortably paid for a taxi to take him home, instead of jumping into his expensive car and subsequently ploughing it into the central reservation of a motorway. You just think, why? Lee Hughes has proven that a drunk footballer behind the wheel can lead to the most catastrophic events. Bannan was fortunate not to also experience such a disastrous situation.
Athletes need to comprehend that even though they are talented, they are not indestructible. They also need to adopt some common sense. With their position, becomes responsibility, and their celebrity status turns them into role models, no matter what competition they are competing in, as there are always children (and some adults) around who will idolise them. With this admiration comes replication, they want to play like their hero when they are participating in sport themselves, and they will follow their icon’s lives, believing all that they do is right. It is a harsh predicament for athletes, but if they perceive it as a negative, then it is one of the few they have in their line of work. However, in order to educate children correctly, it is imperative that these high-profile sportspeople are treated exactly the same as other members of the public, and if this means they perform acts worthy of jail sentences then that must be the case. Being in a privileged position does not permit them to receiving advantageous treatment. Drink-driving and sexual assault are unacceptable forms of behaviour and athletes should be aware that they are going to face the wrath of the courts if needs be. I do hope these young players currently connected to the sexual assault case are innocent because otherwise they could have ruined their careers before they have even begun. Their clubs should punish them just as severely as the courts if they are guilty, and if that does happens, it will be interesting to see if other clubs are willing to take a chance on these young players who would be judged in having personality issues that affects their ability to act as a true professional. The life of a professional sportsman is a luxurious one, and one does hope that the number of incidents that are appearing in the media soon begins to dwindle as it is rapidly bring shame upon English sport.
This is not to say that it is solely footballers who bring their sport into disrepute. Boxers, cricketers, and recently at the World Cup in New Zealand, rugby union players have also brought shame upon themselves. Understandably, these athletes still want to, and are entitled to enjoy themselves, but once you have achieved ‘celebrity status’, you need to be a lot more wary and utilise common sense to ensure that no consequences come of it. When you are in the public eye, all your actions are scrutinised and you are expected to act morally right throughout. The public sees these people as privileged individuals who should be proud and grateful of the opportunities their talents have blessed them with. Sport is a passionate sector of society, with individuals affiliating themselves to teams and supporting their country vehemently. This feverish support generally leads to fans only wanting one thing from those who are associated with their team, and that is to represent the club appropriately both on, and off, the field. When this does not happen, the anger starts to emerge because those supporters would give anything to have the talent and opportunity to play for their team or country; to them it would be an honour rather than an employment.
But is it fair that these sportspeople are hung out to dry by the media and the public when some of the acts they are castigated for are merely mistakes any one of us could make during our lifetimes? To me, it is when despicable and unforgivable acts, which put other people’s lives in danger, need to be scrutinised, of which sexual assault and drink-driving fall under this category without a shadow of a doubt. These events are regularly brought up in the media even with regular members of society, so those with celebrity status can have no complaints when they too are named and shamed. What perplexes many I think is how these athletes can justify such stupid decisions when they are paid such large sums of money and there are alternative options for them. For example, Bannan, who did not even hold a full drivers licence, could have comfortably paid for a taxi to take him home, instead of jumping into his expensive car and subsequently ploughing it into the central reservation of a motorway. You just think, why? Lee Hughes has proven that a drunk footballer behind the wheel can lead to the most catastrophic events. Bannan was fortunate not to also experience such a disastrous situation.
Athletes need to comprehend that even though they are talented, they are not indestructible. They also need to adopt some common sense. With their position, becomes responsibility, and their celebrity status turns them into role models, no matter what competition they are competing in, as there are always children (and some adults) around who will idolise them. With this admiration comes replication, they want to play like their hero when they are participating in sport themselves, and they will follow their icon’s lives, believing all that they do is right. It is a harsh predicament for athletes, but if they perceive it as a negative, then it is one of the few they have in their line of work. However, in order to educate children correctly, it is imperative that these high-profile sportspeople are treated exactly the same as other members of the public, and if this means they perform acts worthy of jail sentences then that must be the case. Being in a privileged position does not permit them to receiving advantageous treatment. Drink-driving and sexual assault are unacceptable forms of behaviour and athletes should be aware that they are going to face the wrath of the courts if needs be. I do hope these young players currently connected to the sexual assault case are innocent because otherwise they could have ruined their careers before they have even begun. Their clubs should punish them just as severely as the courts if they are guilty, and if that does happens, it will be interesting to see if other clubs are willing to take a chance on these young players who would be judged in having personality issues that affects their ability to act as a true professional. The life of a professional sportsman is a luxurious one, and one does hope that the number of incidents that are appearing in the media soon begins to dwindle as it is rapidly bring shame upon English sport.
Saturday 14 January 2012
Tick, Tock, Tick, Tock, The Olympics Are Approaching
This week marked a significant milestone in the run-up to London 2012; 200 days until the biggest sporting global party commences in the United Kingdom. However, the week was not a particularly positive one for organisers and British competitors, instigating the first doubts of the year regarding how successful the Games will be for the country.
The first disaster has been the continuing ticketing fiasco. Last week, 2012 organisers requested Ticketmaster to suspend the website and resolve the issues that were causing chaotic and confusing scenes as the re-sale process started up. We are now at the end of another working week, and the news has just been announced that after being down for all this time, it will finally re-launch next week. This is the world’s biggest ticketing operator, and they have failed majestically throughout the distribution of Olympic tickets, disappointing many, including some individuals who at times thought they had grabbed themselves a seat only to subsequently found out otherwise. The company are attaching blame to the high demand for tickets; what did they expect?!We are a sport-mad country, and this is a once in a lifetime opportunity, of course there was going to be high demand! Ticketmaster seem to struggle with coping demand, with the site regularly crashing when major acts release tickets for massive gigs. The recent Take That tour being a recent example. However, providing most sessions end up being sell-outs, I imagine Games organisers will not be too bothered about the palaver that has ensued beforehand.
One thing spectators are hoping for in the summer is British success. This week, the men’s handball side were thrashed by their Austrian counterparts, leaving the team still with only one competitive win to their name ever. The aim for the side is to make the top-eight during the Games. This appears wholly unrealistic, as that is likely going to require two victories. In other words, they need to improve their win column by 200%. Now I understand competing in front of your home crowd at the Olympics can boost performance, but surely, this is an unrealistic ask of the men’s side? The team rarely train together and are struggling to make any impact against opponents that they should be eyeing up as potential opportunities to gain another victory against, whilst the team’s fitness levels are being identified as a reason for such heavy defeats. Handball is one of the biggest sports in Europe, and it is perhaps quite surprising it has yet to gather the same interest in the United Kingdom. Nevertheless, tickets have sold well for it, but if the aim is to increase British participation in the sport, crowds are going to want to see close encounters and hard-fought efforts from the British boys; something that currently looks to be an unlikely event. The side may be inexperienced but an underdog always has a chance and that is what the British side need to remember.
The next disaster for London’s Organising Committee was the re-naming of the Handball Arena in the Olympic Park. Naturally, the committee probably hoped the move would slip under the radar, but the ‘Copper Box’ is now at the forefront of a dispute, with British Handball campaigning for the name to be reverted back to its original title. To be fair, chief executive, Paul Goodwin, makes a good argument when he said the following, "Why have they not renamed other facilities in a similar vein? Perhaps the Olympic velodrome will be called 'the big round wooden building' or the basketball arena renamed as 'the marshmallow'?" However, what concerns me is why Goodwin seems more worried about the venue's name where his sides will play, rather than developing the teams so they may actually achieve their targets. Does it really matter what the name of the arena is called? Do you think Manchester City's players worry that they are playing at the Etihad Stadium rather than the City of Manchester Stadium? Also, unlike the velodrome, the handball centre is not staying specifically to that sport once the Games have finished. Instead it is being reformed into a multi-use community centre. In fact, the arena is being used for a variety of sports during both the Olympics and Paralympics, so why does handball believe they own the venue? It has led me to question whether British Handball have raised the issue just to draw more attention to their sport in the lead up to the Games, but to me, they have instead looked to have decided on a rather pernickety and irrelevant issue, that has made their reputation more laughable.
Finally, and arguably the most concerning story, was the revelation that the participation targets that the Olympics legacy was meant to provide, now appear to have been radically over-estimated. This is by no means a shock, but I think many in the British sporting community were hoping that Sport England could pull a shock out the bag and achieve the targets, if only to provide a positive boost, and that the Olympics are getting people hooked on sport rather than just spending three weeks being clued to their television sets watching it. The concept was to get more children active, particularly as the ‘obesity crisis’ is getting continually muted as a British problem. But when you look back on the bid, I think when Britain made its legacy promises in Singapore, some of them were made more to appease Olympic officials, knowing full well that they were unlikely to be achieved. I think most of the public were aware that many of the aims were going to fail, if you did not, I think you are slightly deluded. These are promises to tick a box on the Olympic committee’s check-list, but even if they are failed to deliver, it will never stop those Games occurring. So should we really make a fuss of the post-sixteen drop-out from sport? It has always happened, and the Olympics are not going to radically change that scenario.
The week has therefore been full of many set-backs, but there has been some positive news. The men’s gymnastics team qualified for the tournament having won the test event, whilst we are yet to hear of any problems regarding the infrastructure at any of these events. I do worry whether the Olympic Stadium will receive its Council clearance legitimately though. Can you really see 40,000 attending the BUCS athletics Championships (the current test event proposal)? Having gone through the university system, I am aware that university sport is light-years behind America’s equivalent. They will be lucky to get an audience of a thousand. Gaining the required certification for the Games prized and iconic asset is the biggest hurdle for LOCOG to overcome now in my opinion. Regardless, once the Games are underway, this is when they will be judged as to whether they are a success or failure. Not debates over venues, or legacy promises, but whether the three weeks are a massive national celebratory party, assisted by British athletes achieving great triumphs on a daily basis.
The first disaster has been the continuing ticketing fiasco. Last week, 2012 organisers requested Ticketmaster to suspend the website and resolve the issues that were causing chaotic and confusing scenes as the re-sale process started up. We are now at the end of another working week, and the news has just been announced that after being down for all this time, it will finally re-launch next week. This is the world’s biggest ticketing operator, and they have failed majestically throughout the distribution of Olympic tickets, disappointing many, including some individuals who at times thought they had grabbed themselves a seat only to subsequently found out otherwise. The company are attaching blame to the high demand for tickets; what did they expect?!We are a sport-mad country, and this is a once in a lifetime opportunity, of course there was going to be high demand! Ticketmaster seem to struggle with coping demand, with the site regularly crashing when major acts release tickets for massive gigs. The recent Take That tour being a recent example. However, providing most sessions end up being sell-outs, I imagine Games organisers will not be too bothered about the palaver that has ensued beforehand.
One thing spectators are hoping for in the summer is British success. This week, the men’s handball side were thrashed by their Austrian counterparts, leaving the team still with only one competitive win to their name ever. The aim for the side is to make the top-eight during the Games. This appears wholly unrealistic, as that is likely going to require two victories. In other words, they need to improve their win column by 200%. Now I understand competing in front of your home crowd at the Olympics can boost performance, but surely, this is an unrealistic ask of the men’s side? The team rarely train together and are struggling to make any impact against opponents that they should be eyeing up as potential opportunities to gain another victory against, whilst the team’s fitness levels are being identified as a reason for such heavy defeats. Handball is one of the biggest sports in Europe, and it is perhaps quite surprising it has yet to gather the same interest in the United Kingdom. Nevertheless, tickets have sold well for it, but if the aim is to increase British participation in the sport, crowds are going to want to see close encounters and hard-fought efforts from the British boys; something that currently looks to be an unlikely event. The side may be inexperienced but an underdog always has a chance and that is what the British side need to remember.
The next disaster for London’s Organising Committee was the re-naming of the Handball Arena in the Olympic Park. Naturally, the committee probably hoped the move would slip under the radar, but the ‘Copper Box’ is now at the forefront of a dispute, with British Handball campaigning for the name to be reverted back to its original title. To be fair, chief executive, Paul Goodwin, makes a good argument when he said the following, "Why have they not renamed other facilities in a similar vein? Perhaps the Olympic velodrome will be called 'the big round wooden building' or the basketball arena renamed as 'the marshmallow'?" However, what concerns me is why Goodwin seems more worried about the venue's name where his sides will play, rather than developing the teams so they may actually achieve their targets. Does it really matter what the name of the arena is called? Do you think Manchester City's players worry that they are playing at the Etihad Stadium rather than the City of Manchester Stadium? Also, unlike the velodrome, the handball centre is not staying specifically to that sport once the Games have finished. Instead it is being reformed into a multi-use community centre. In fact, the arena is being used for a variety of sports during both the Olympics and Paralympics, so why does handball believe they own the venue? It has led me to question whether British Handball have raised the issue just to draw more attention to their sport in the lead up to the Games, but to me, they have instead looked to have decided on a rather pernickety and irrelevant issue, that has made their reputation more laughable.
Finally, and arguably the most concerning story, was the revelation that the participation targets that the Olympics legacy was meant to provide, now appear to have been radically over-estimated. This is by no means a shock, but I think many in the British sporting community were hoping that Sport England could pull a shock out the bag and achieve the targets, if only to provide a positive boost, and that the Olympics are getting people hooked on sport rather than just spending three weeks being clued to their television sets watching it. The concept was to get more children active, particularly as the ‘obesity crisis’ is getting continually muted as a British problem. But when you look back on the bid, I think when Britain made its legacy promises in Singapore, some of them were made more to appease Olympic officials, knowing full well that they were unlikely to be achieved. I think most of the public were aware that many of the aims were going to fail, if you did not, I think you are slightly deluded. These are promises to tick a box on the Olympic committee’s check-list, but even if they are failed to deliver, it will never stop those Games occurring. So should we really make a fuss of the post-sixteen drop-out from sport? It has always happened, and the Olympics are not going to radically change that scenario.
The week has therefore been full of many set-backs, but there has been some positive news. The men’s gymnastics team qualified for the tournament having won the test event, whilst we are yet to hear of any problems regarding the infrastructure at any of these events. I do worry whether the Olympic Stadium will receive its Council clearance legitimately though. Can you really see 40,000 attending the BUCS athletics Championships (the current test event proposal)? Having gone through the university system, I am aware that university sport is light-years behind America’s equivalent. They will be lucky to get an audience of a thousand. Gaining the required certification for the Games prized and iconic asset is the biggest hurdle for LOCOG to overcome now in my opinion. Regardless, once the Games are underway, this is when they will be judged as to whether they are a success or failure. Not debates over venues, or legacy promises, but whether the three weeks are a massive national celebratory party, assisted by British athletes achieving great triumphs on a daily basis.
Sunday 8 January 2012
Can we have our Cup back please?
The Saturday of the FA Cup 3rd Round is one of my favourite days within the football calendar. It is a contender with the opening day of the season, Boxing Day fixtures, Survival Sunday, and of course the Cup Final itself. People argue that the Cup has lost some of its glamour and romanticism, and to an extent I do agree. When you speak to ardent supporters with decades of support behind them, they will talk to you about their thrill and excitement of Cup Final day, a day when the television coverage began hours early, usually in the morning of the special day. Whereas nowadays, the game is treated like any other and the appeal appears to only be held by those supporters whose teams are involved in the game. To me then, the media has been just as detrimental in destroying the famous trophy’s glamour as the investment the money, globalisation and expansion of Sky and the Premier League, a topic I imagine may regularly crop up in football-based discussions on this blog.
The same can be said of the 3rd Round of the Cup. Notorious for Cup upsets by lower league opposition on a freezing January afternoon, whilst playing on a muddy, boggy pitch in a small, intimate stadium packed to the rafters with frenetic supporters. That just does not seem to happen anymore. The media try to build it up, recalling the famous memories of years gone by; pulling out the archives of Ronnie Radford’s strike for Hereford against Newcastle, and Mickey Thomas’ free-kick to send Wrexham through at the expense of Arsenal, but they seem to ignore the modern day upsets of which the achievements could be argued to be on par with those gone by. Shrewsbury defeating Everton in 2003, Leeds (admittedly a ‘big’ club but in the third tier of the Football League at the time) knocking out Manchester United at Old Trafford only two seasons ago. Both times major Premier League clubs with a strong FA Cup pedigree being dispatched. Why are these achievements ignored? Maybe it is because they are seen as “too modern” (however you define that!), or perhaps they just did not fully accomplish the “traditional” Cup upset check-list. However, if these shocks are not used soon then the new, young generations of football fans will be unable to associate and relate to the FA Cup, further damaging its splendour.
Thankfully, I do not think the 3rd Round will ever fully lose its romanticism. Not for a while anyway. This is due to those lower, and non-league clubs and their supporters who thrive for their opportunity of a major pay-day and chance in the limelight against one of the big boys. The problem remains if those Premier League clubs continue to dismiss the competition as an inconvenience, rather than chasing the prestige and honour of winning it in style. If they do so, their fan-bases, which naturally because of their success are also the biggest, will be brainwashed to have the same opinion. That is when the appeal in the Cup will decline, though as previously mentioned, this is already the case. I do not want rules to be introduced (as has been mooted by some members of the football community) that force clubs to play their first-choice eleven, as that would be the most damning verdict of the Cup romanticism being ruined. I understand clubs need to rotate; I just hate to see teams practically forfeiting the right to continue their progression in the competition. If you are going to go out, go out with a fight. The lower league sides do it, the least the Premier League (and even some Championship) teams can do is provide that, if only to make those special Cup upsets feel even more like a fairytale for those fortunate enough to deliver them.
Now you might be now considering me to be a lower-league supporter. Maybe one whose side has created a recent upset and feels they have not been given the credit they deserve for it. Or maybe one at the other end of the scale; a supporter who continues to wait, and wish for that glamorous 3rd round fixture, that will send my local town into a frenzy. But far from it; I am, for my sins, an Aston Villa fan. We have had some recent Cup runs, but more often than not, we suffer a defeat to Manchester United once we enter the competition. I have seen us suffer to lower league opposition, against Sheffield United in 2005; in fact the first time I saw Villa play in the flesh was nearly a Cup upset, against then third-tier Portsmouth in 1998. Therefore this argument is not based on a concern of seeing my own dreams ruined. I am a football fan, and a passionate one at that. I want the FA Cup to remain the heart-beat of English football, a competition that the rest of the world watches on with envy, one that causes excitement and despair for clubs all over the country, no matter what their status; because football is for all, and the FA Cup is the best way we can represent that.
On that note, congratulations to third-tier Swindon Town who won on FA Cup 3rd Round Saturday in 2012 provided the best Cup upset by dispatching Premier League, Wigan Athletic. Unfortunately, because of Wigan's lack of history and the team they sent out, it is likely to be a shock remembered only briefly, but it is always satisfying to see the Cup still likes to fulfil the dreams of David defeating Goliath.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)