Sunday 17 July 2011
The Arsenal summer of uncertainty
As it has been for the past couple of of summers, Arsenal have been one of the clubs at the forefront of transfer gossip this summer. First of all, the Cesc Fabregas saga which has gone on for a couple of years has cropped up again this summer, but the more worrying news is the potential departure of Samir Nasri as he is in his final year of his contract. With many expecting Fabregas to finally leave this summer, losing Nasri would be a massive blow. Whilst many are expecting big things from Wilshere and Ramsey in the coming season, Nasri offers that special something, which can turn games, as demonstrated in the home league game vs Fulham in December 2010 where his spectacular double won the game for Arsenal. If Wenger did buy a ready made replacement like Juan Mata from Valencia then selling Nasri would not be too big of an issue. But as many Arsenal fans know, Wenger is not willing to spend the big money on established world class players. As a supporter it is pretty hard to believe what the papers say, as the club is linked with many players throughout the summer, with the number enough to form a completely new first team. With so many of Arsenal's rivals spending big to strengthen their team, will Wenger spend the money needed for the two or three players needed to push the club across the line towards a trophy? Only time will tell.
Wednesday 22 June 2011
E3 2011
With E3 finishing for another year, i want to discuss how well the "big three" did with their conferences and my opinion on who "won" E3.
First off was Microsoft, who were the first out of the three console makers to show their hands. Whilst many expected a Kinect heavy conference, they were disappointed in the over promotion of Kinect and giving core games a back seat. It kicked off with an impressive demos of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 and the rebooted Tomb Raider, but the main body of the conference was revealing Kinect titles such as Kinect Sports Season Two, Kinect Disneyland Adventures, Sesame Street: Once Upon A Monster and the much highly anticipated Kinect Star Wars. There were announcements and demos of Kinect support for Mass Effect 3, Forza 4 and Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon: Future Soldier which did all look impressive, but it did not help to detract from the view that Microsoft is pushing Kinect to try and eat into Nintendo's stranglehold on the casual gamers market. Whilst the majority of the conference centred around Kinect, Microsoft were able to reveal a couple of core games which included an HD remake of the first Halo, and a teaser trailer for Halo 4, which is being developed by 343 Industries and is described by Don Mattrick as the "Dawn of a new trilogy". As a core gamer myself, i was disappointed in Microsoft's conference, i expected Microsoft to announce quite a bit on Kinect, none of the games would seem to appeal to someone similar to me. Microsoft have seen the success of the Wii and wants a piece of the casual gaming market whilst trying to satisify hardcore gamers. This seems to have failed and as a hardcore gamer and an owner of an Xbox 360, i feel like i was left a bit short changed when seeing what i could look forward to in the next year. Whilst not complete terrible, Microsoft's conference did not impress much.
Next up was Sony, and with the PSN hack scandal which plagued Sony a month before E3, it was appropriate for Jack Tretton; President of Sony Computer Entertainment of America (SCEA) to "deal with the elephant in the room" with an apology to gamers and developers all over the world over the Playstation Network outage. Moving away from the PSN scandal, the main headline from Sony's conference was the announcement of the name and prices for the NGP. The official name for the NGP is Playstation Vita. With more than 80 titles already in development, including Street Fighter X Tekken, Uncharted: Golden Abyss and Modnation Racer, it seems that the PS Vita will have some excellent games when it does come out, but whether they can deliver some top titles for release unlike the Nintendo 3DS is another matter. Another announcement which got a big cheer from the crowd was from Irrational Games' Ken Levine, when he announced that there would be a game based in the Bioshock world coming to the PS Vita. As well as the unveiling of the Vita, Sony was heavily investing in the 3D aspect of their console, showing off many of their new titles in 3D, whilst also showing off a Playstation branded 3D monitor which would be affordable for people who don't want to spend thousands to experience 3D. Sony was able to show off many of their titles which impressed, there was hardly any focus on the Playstation Move which as a core gamer impressed me as well as many journalists. But will the good line up of games and the PS Vita help Sony regain the faith which was lost from the PSN outages? Only time will tell.
Last up was Nintendo and the hype leading up to the conference was surrounding the new console which many predicted they would unveil. Many rumours were spiralling around, would it be as powerful as the PS3/Xbox 360? Would it have a tablet-like controller? Is it called the Wii Stream?
Whilst Nintendo did not reveal the new console straight away, they did kick off with an impressive orchestral performance of various Zelda themes which culminated with Shigeru Miyamoto talking about the Legend of Zelda 25th anniversary this year and the ways they would celebrate it. He announced that Link's Awakening would be in the 3DS Eshop and that the Four Swords would also be available later on in the year. A series of Zelda themed concerts would be taking places across the globe to celebrate the milestone and the anniversary would end with the release of Skyward Sword at the end of the year.
But the big story of the conference was the new home console, Nintendo revealed that it would be called Wii U. Not the most imaginative name, but what was most interesting was the "controller" which came with the consoles. Nintendo chose to focus on the controller and any pictures of the console was hidden away. The new "controller" is a tablet-like device, with the usual Nintendo buttons. But the one outstanding feature that the controller can do is to enable you to carry on your gaming when the TV is unavailable. So if your parents want to use the TV, you can transfer the picture from your TV right onto the screen on your controller and carry on playing. It can also be used as a secondary screen as well, like the Nintendo DS/3DS's bottom screen. Nintendo announced that many publishers were backing the Wii U, with titles including Batman Arkham City coming to the console, but the most impressive game was a HD Zelda tech demo, which showed Link fighting Gohma in a very realistic looking church.
Whilst all the focus was on the Wii U, Nintendo also announced the next batch of 3DS games, which includes Kid Icarus, MGS 3 and future titles including Tekken 3D and Luigi's Mansion 2. After the 3DS's slow start, the big titles are slowly starting to come out. Overall, Nintendo's conference was a success, although some were confused about whether the new console was the actual "controller" shown, as new actual console was shown on screen or live. But apart from the slight confusion, Nintendo were able to steal the show and essentially win E3 with their new hardware and getting its appeal back to core gamers. But is it too late? Has Microsoft and Sony already stolen the hearts of core gamers. The answer will be revealed when sales figures for the Wii U comes out when it is released.
First off was Microsoft, who were the first out of the three console makers to show their hands. Whilst many expected a Kinect heavy conference, they were disappointed in the over promotion of Kinect and giving core games a back seat. It kicked off with an impressive demos of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 and the rebooted Tomb Raider, but the main body of the conference was revealing Kinect titles such as Kinect Sports Season Two, Kinect Disneyland Adventures, Sesame Street: Once Upon A Monster and the much highly anticipated Kinect Star Wars. There were announcements and demos of Kinect support for Mass Effect 3, Forza 4 and Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon: Future Soldier which did all look impressive, but it did not help to detract from the view that Microsoft is pushing Kinect to try and eat into Nintendo's stranglehold on the casual gamers market. Whilst the majority of the conference centred around Kinect, Microsoft were able to reveal a couple of core games which included an HD remake of the first Halo, and a teaser trailer for Halo 4, which is being developed by 343 Industries and is described by Don Mattrick as the "Dawn of a new trilogy". As a core gamer myself, i was disappointed in Microsoft's conference, i expected Microsoft to announce quite a bit on Kinect, none of the games would seem to appeal to someone similar to me. Microsoft have seen the success of the Wii and wants a piece of the casual gaming market whilst trying to satisify hardcore gamers. This seems to have failed and as a hardcore gamer and an owner of an Xbox 360, i feel like i was left a bit short changed when seeing what i could look forward to in the next year. Whilst not complete terrible, Microsoft's conference did not impress much.
Next up was Sony, and with the PSN hack scandal which plagued Sony a month before E3, it was appropriate for Jack Tretton; President of Sony Computer Entertainment of America (SCEA) to "deal with the elephant in the room" with an apology to gamers and developers all over the world over the Playstation Network outage. Moving away from the PSN scandal, the main headline from Sony's conference was the announcement of the name and prices for the NGP. The official name for the NGP is Playstation Vita. With more than 80 titles already in development, including Street Fighter X Tekken, Uncharted: Golden Abyss and Modnation Racer, it seems that the PS Vita will have some excellent games when it does come out, but whether they can deliver some top titles for release unlike the Nintendo 3DS is another matter. Another announcement which got a big cheer from the crowd was from Irrational Games' Ken Levine, when he announced that there would be a game based in the Bioshock world coming to the PS Vita. As well as the unveiling of the Vita, Sony was heavily investing in the 3D aspect of their console, showing off many of their new titles in 3D, whilst also showing off a Playstation branded 3D monitor which would be affordable for people who don't want to spend thousands to experience 3D. Sony was able to show off many of their titles which impressed, there was hardly any focus on the Playstation Move which as a core gamer impressed me as well as many journalists. But will the good line up of games and the PS Vita help Sony regain the faith which was lost from the PSN outages? Only time will tell.
Last up was Nintendo and the hype leading up to the conference was surrounding the new console which many predicted they would unveil. Many rumours were spiralling around, would it be as powerful as the PS3/Xbox 360? Would it have a tablet-like controller? Is it called the Wii Stream?
Whilst Nintendo did not reveal the new console straight away, they did kick off with an impressive orchestral performance of various Zelda themes which culminated with Shigeru Miyamoto talking about the Legend of Zelda 25th anniversary this year and the ways they would celebrate it. He announced that Link's Awakening would be in the 3DS Eshop and that the Four Swords would also be available later on in the year. A series of Zelda themed concerts would be taking places across the globe to celebrate the milestone and the anniversary would end with the release of Skyward Sword at the end of the year.
But the big story of the conference was the new home console, Nintendo revealed that it would be called Wii U. Not the most imaginative name, but what was most interesting was the "controller" which came with the consoles. Nintendo chose to focus on the controller and any pictures of the console was hidden away. The new "controller" is a tablet-like device, with the usual Nintendo buttons. But the one outstanding feature that the controller can do is to enable you to carry on your gaming when the TV is unavailable. So if your parents want to use the TV, you can transfer the picture from your TV right onto the screen on your controller and carry on playing. It can also be used as a secondary screen as well, like the Nintendo DS/3DS's bottom screen. Nintendo announced that many publishers were backing the Wii U, with titles including Batman Arkham City coming to the console, but the most impressive game was a HD Zelda tech demo, which showed Link fighting Gohma in a very realistic looking church.
Whilst all the focus was on the Wii U, Nintendo also announced the next batch of 3DS games, which includes Kid Icarus, MGS 3 and future titles including Tekken 3D and Luigi's Mansion 2. After the 3DS's slow start, the big titles are slowly starting to come out. Overall, Nintendo's conference was a success, although some were confused about whether the new console was the actual "controller" shown, as new actual console was shown on screen or live. But apart from the slight confusion, Nintendo were able to steal the show and essentially win E3 with their new hardware and getting its appeal back to core gamers. But is it too late? Has Microsoft and Sony already stolen the hearts of core gamers. The answer will be revealed when sales figures for the Wii U comes out when it is released.
Sunday 5 June 2011
How much influence do reviews have on you???
You go to your favourite website/magazine and check out the review for the game you have been waiting for for months. It gets a 3/10, whilst a game which you have never heard of receives a 9/10. How do you react? Reviews are published weekly on many different forms of media from video games to musicals, but with the ever increasing prices of video games and technology, they are seen by many to be the way to differentiate between ever increasingly similar growing amount of generic shooters, platformers and RPGs, which have made it harder for gamers to tell the gems from the rest.
First of all, i am not criticising a review editor's work, I think that reviewers do a great job to express their opinions on a certain title, and can sometimes be useful for someone who is in two minds on whether they should spend their hard earned cash on a game. But do they have that much of an influence on you? I believe it depends on your situation. For a game which you have been highly anticipating for a long period of time, reviews will not be the deciding factor on whether you will buy it or not. With many people pre ordering the game and reviews not being able to be printed mostly until the date of release, gamers will not be able to read the reviews until they have the game in their hands. With retailers like HMV, who do not accept refunds, many gamers will mostly go on previews, trailers and gameplay videos to decide whether to invest. Like a reader of the IGN website where he left a very unhappy message on the review for Brink,
" I preordered this because of how positive your previews have been about this game... I was relying on your hands on opinion which turns out to be hyperbole mixed through with bull****. Nice job."
The review obviously had an effect on the gamer, who pre ordered a game which he believed that it would be worth putting some money down for. Reviews can have that effect, but as an opposite to this case, i put myself up to examine. I like to believe that reviews dont generally have a big say on what games i buy, as i believe that previews and gameplay videos and my own judgement can decide whether a game is worth investing in or not. Being able to read other people's opinions are a help but ultimately i have influence over what i spend my money on. A great example is my purchase of Alan Wake. Although it is not a terrible game, it divided opinion. I personally loved it and was one of the best gaming experiences i had in 2010.
First of all, i am not criticising a review editor's work, I think that reviewers do a great job to express their opinions on a certain title, and can sometimes be useful for someone who is in two minds on whether they should spend their hard earned cash on a game. But do they have that much of an influence on you? I believe it depends on your situation. For a game which you have been highly anticipating for a long period of time, reviews will not be the deciding factor on whether you will buy it or not. With many people pre ordering the game and reviews not being able to be printed mostly until the date of release, gamers will not be able to read the reviews until they have the game in their hands. With retailers like HMV, who do not accept refunds, many gamers will mostly go on previews, trailers and gameplay videos to decide whether to invest. Like a reader of the IGN website where he left a very unhappy message on the review for Brink,
" I preordered this because of how positive your previews have been about this game... I was relying on your hands on opinion which turns out to be hyperbole mixed through with bull****. Nice job."
The review obviously had an effect on the gamer, who pre ordered a game which he believed that it would be worth putting some money down for. Reviews can have that effect, but as an opposite to this case, i put myself up to examine. I like to believe that reviews dont generally have a big say on what games i buy, as i believe that previews and gameplay videos and my own judgement can decide whether a game is worth investing in or not. Being able to read other people's opinions are a help but ultimately i have influence over what i spend my money on. A great example is my purchase of Alan Wake. Although it is not a terrible game, it divided opinion. I personally loved it and was one of the best gaming experiences i had in 2010.
Monday 28 March 2011
Do Single player games need multiplayer?
Playing Video Games with mates or family is a stable of the video games experience, being able to share this experience is quite a sweet feeling regardless of the game. Beating your friend to the finish line in a racing game, getting the final kill in a deathmatch on Call of Duty, scoring the winning goal in a football game, combining your powers to beat that boss that you struggled to beat on your own, all this could not happen if there was no one next to you or against you. But is mutliplayer always necessary??
In the past couple of years, the amount of great games which come with a multiplayer have greatly increased mainly due to the success of Xbox Live and PSN (Playstation Network) and how widely available they are to everyone. But the question that i want to ask is, do all these games need multiplayer modes?No, not the Call of Dutys and Fifa's of the world, I am talking about the games which have traditionally been a single player game and have ventured into the multiplayer sphere as they believe it is the next step of progression. Games like Assassin's Creed and Resident Evil, which have a great single player mode and have recently tried their hands on adding a multiplayer feature with mixed success.
Lets look at this from both sides, the mose recent example is probably Dead Space 2. The original Dead Space was a great game, even though it was just a single player it was a great experience and one of my favourite games of all time. I was hoping for more of the same from the sequel and would give the multiplayer a chance as i saw it as an opportunity to share the excellent Dead Space experience with millions of other people all across the world. Once i tried it, my opinion changed, yes, i loved using the necromorphs, it was something which i enjoyed, but the whole point of the multiplayer seemed a bit pointless. It did not replicate the single player horror experience, and was just wave after wave of Necromorphs stopping you from reaching your targets, with many journalists dubbing it "Left4dead Space". What made the single player and the Dead Space games great was the horror aspect and this was unduly taken away in the multiplayer. The Left 4 Dead style does not go with the Dead Space idea, whilst Left 4 Dead focused on team play and made it work, the multiplayer in Dead Space rewarded people with the most kills and not by completing objectives together. It just seems that Visceral Games jumped onto the multiplayer bandwagon because they probably believed that the single player would not be enough which is the wrong assumption.
On the other side of this argument is the success that a mutliplayer mode could do to a successful single player franchise. Assassins Creed Brotherhood is a fine example of this. Whilst i was relatively dismissive of this game when it was announced, believing that this was just merely an excuse for Ubisoft to cash in on the popularity of the Assassins Creed franchise but releasing an Assassins Creed 2.5 and shoving in a multiplayer mode. How wrong i was. The single player was excellent, but what stood out was the innovative multiplayer. Rewarding players for stealth kills made this a unique experience. It detracts people from just running up to targets and killing them and does not reward people who move away from the core principle of stealth killing as much. Hiding in a crowd of people and seeing your pursuer assassinate the wrong target is a great feeling, whilst air assassinating your target from the roof without them noticing you also brings the same sort of satisfaction.
These are just two examples of single player games making the transition to adding a multiplayer mode, with rumours that Uncharted 3 and Mass Effect 3, more and more developers will try to cash into the multiplayer phenomenon as it will make their game have longevity. But multiplayer is not the only way to improve longevity, a great single player on its own can do the same job, i have spent countless number of hours on Mass Effect 2 as the story is exceptional and the various number of different options available have kept me coming back for more. Note to developers, multiplayer is not always the answer!!
In the past couple of years, the amount of great games which come with a multiplayer have greatly increased mainly due to the success of Xbox Live and PSN (Playstation Network) and how widely available they are to everyone. But the question that i want to ask is, do all these games need multiplayer modes?No, not the Call of Dutys and Fifa's of the world, I am talking about the games which have traditionally been a single player game and have ventured into the multiplayer sphere as they believe it is the next step of progression. Games like Assassin's Creed and Resident Evil, which have a great single player mode and have recently tried their hands on adding a multiplayer feature with mixed success.
Lets look at this from both sides, the mose recent example is probably Dead Space 2. The original Dead Space was a great game, even though it was just a single player it was a great experience and one of my favourite games of all time. I was hoping for more of the same from the sequel and would give the multiplayer a chance as i saw it as an opportunity to share the excellent Dead Space experience with millions of other people all across the world. Once i tried it, my opinion changed, yes, i loved using the necromorphs, it was something which i enjoyed, but the whole point of the multiplayer seemed a bit pointless. It did not replicate the single player horror experience, and was just wave after wave of Necromorphs stopping you from reaching your targets, with many journalists dubbing it "Left4dead Space". What made the single player and the Dead Space games great was the horror aspect and this was unduly taken away in the multiplayer. The Left 4 Dead style does not go with the Dead Space idea, whilst Left 4 Dead focused on team play and made it work, the multiplayer in Dead Space rewarded people with the most kills and not by completing objectives together. It just seems that Visceral Games jumped onto the multiplayer bandwagon because they probably believed that the single player would not be enough which is the wrong assumption.
On the other side of this argument is the success that a mutliplayer mode could do to a successful single player franchise. Assassins Creed Brotherhood is a fine example of this. Whilst i was relatively dismissive of this game when it was announced, believing that this was just merely an excuse for Ubisoft to cash in on the popularity of the Assassins Creed franchise but releasing an Assassins Creed 2.5 and shoving in a multiplayer mode. How wrong i was. The single player was excellent, but what stood out was the innovative multiplayer. Rewarding players for stealth kills made this a unique experience. It detracts people from just running up to targets and killing them and does not reward people who move away from the core principle of stealth killing as much. Hiding in a crowd of people and seeing your pursuer assassinate the wrong target is a great feeling, whilst air assassinating your target from the roof without them noticing you also brings the same sort of satisfaction.
These are just two examples of single player games making the transition to adding a multiplayer mode, with rumours that Uncharted 3 and Mass Effect 3, more and more developers will try to cash into the multiplayer phenomenon as it will make their game have longevity. But multiplayer is not the only way to improve longevity, a great single player on its own can do the same job, i have spent countless number of hours on Mass Effect 2 as the story is exceptional and the various number of different options available have kept me coming back for more. Note to developers, multiplayer is not always the answer!!
Monday 28 February 2011
El Fenomeno (The Phenomenon) Ronaldo
Those were the words which saw the retirement of one of the greatest football players of all time. Ronaldo Luiz Nazario de Lima, commonly known as Ronaldo announced the end to his glittering career at a press conference in Sao Paulo on 14th February 2011.
It all began for him in 1993, when he was signed by Cruzerio and has been to many of the greatest European clubs in the world, starting off at PSV, amassing 42 goals in 46 games. His outstanding performances persuaded FC Barcelona to pay around £10m for the young Brazilian. He did not disappoint, in his only season at the Camp Nou, he scored 34 goals in 37 games and helped Barcelona to the Cup Winner's Cup, the Copa Del Rey and the Spanish Supercup. This also led to Ronaldo becoming the youngest winner of the Fifa World Player of the Year awards, at the age of 20.
Inter Milan were able to take advantage of Ronaldo's contract problems with Barcelona and paid a then world record fee of £19m for the Brazilian. A change of countries did not stop Ronaldo as he carried on his great goalscoring record, which again won him the World Player of the Year award again in 1997 and then for the 3rd time in his career in 2002. He was able to pick up the Ballon D'or award as well in 1997. But knee problems hampered Ronaldo's career and whilst making a comeback from his first knee surgery, Ronaldo broke down after 7 minutes and needed further surgery. Even though injuury limited the number of games he was able to play for Inter his goalscoring record was still phenomenal, with 49 goals in 68 games.
After Ronaldo's great form in the 2002 World Cup, Real Madrid paid around £35m to secure his services. A firve year spell with the Spanish giants saw Ronaldo score over 80 goals and secured the Spanish title in the 02/03 and 06/07 seasons as well as the Intercontinental Cup and the Spanish Supercup once again. A standout moment in Ronaldo's Real Madrid career was his superb performance against Manchester United in the Champions League with a stunning hattrick which led to the United fans to stand on their feet applauding as he was substituted off.
Ronaldo's last European club would be AC Milan with which he joined in 2007. With concerning weight problems, Ronaldo did not seem to be the player that he was. He managed 9 goals in 20 games and with another career threatening knee injury, AC Milan decided not to renew his contract.
With no club, Ronaldo decided that he would want to end his career in his native country Brazil and joined Corinthians, the rivals of his boyhood club Flamengo. His 18 goals helped Flamengo to a Brazilian Cup and a spot in the Copa Libertadores. After Flamengo were knocked out of the 2011, Ronaldo knew that his dream of winning the Copa Liberatdores would not come to fruition and with his many injuries meant that he had to call time on his career.
As glittering as his club career was, his international record was what made Ronaldo the special player he was. With a goalscoring record of 62 goals in 97 games, this goalscoring feat was only bested by Pele who had 77 goals. He was an unused squad member in the 1994 World Cup, but was able to stamp his authority in the tournament 4 years later with an inspiring performance scoring four goals and providing three assists. Controversy surrounded the final with many baffled with Ronaldo's underpar performance. Many believed that he was not fit, and suffered an epileptic seizure the nighe before. with just over an hour before the match, Ronaldo was reinstated back into the team.
Keen to putting things right in 2002, Ronaldo along with the two other R's (Ronaldinho and Rivaldo) lit up the World Cup in South Korea and Japan and stole the show with many majestic performances, capped off with two goals in the final. He won the Golden boot with a superb eight goals throughout the tournament scoring against every single opposition with the exception of England in the quarter final. The eight goals helped Ronaldo tie with Pele with 12 goals in World Cups. The record was broken in the 2006 World Cup with Ronaldo getting three more goals and became the all time highest World Cup Finals goalscorer, overtaking Gerd Muller's record of 14. With a record breaking 15 goals, he also became one of few players who have scored two or more goals in three successive World Cups.
With a final goalscoring record of over 400 goals throughout his career, Ronaldo was already considered as one of the greats in football history. His pace,trickery and excellent ability to strike a ball was a joy to watch, and will be known as one of if not the greatest striker of all time.
Sunday 6 February 2011
January Transfer window 2011.
The end of the January transfer window saw 225 million pounds spent by Premier League teams. This figure dwarfed the figure of only 30 million in the same period a year ago. Amongst the highlights of the transfer window was the chaotic final day of the window which saw 3 of the biggest deals completed and 2 transfer records smashed before the 11pm deadline. Liverpool's Fernando Torres moved to Chelsea for a british record £50m, which in turn caused more transfer business, as Liverpool, replaces Torres with Newcastle's Andy Carroll for £35m; which is a transfer fee record for a british player. Liverpool also completed the signing of Luis Suarez from Ajax for £22.8m as a result of the sale of Torres. Other deals which were completed earlier on in the windows were from Man City for Edin Dzeko for £27m, whilst Aston Villa spent £24m on Darren Bent.
Why are clubs spending so much on players half way through the season? I believe that clubs are panic buying, many of the teams who have spent big are teams who have not had the best first half of the season.
Aston Villa, who were lingering just above the relegation zone knew that they needed a striker who would be able to get them goals. Darren Bent fit that profile, with just as many goals as Rooney and Drogba in the Premer League overall. With many questioning whether Bent is worth the 24m that Aston Villa have paid. But Houllier and many Villa fans will argue that if Bent is able to score the goals which keep Villa away from the relegation zone then he would be worth every single penny of the 24m.
Chelsea, while not being anywhere near the bottom of the table, had a great first 3 months but suddenly crumbled and seemingly their chances of retaining the Premier League title disappeared with a poor run of games. The signing of Torres can be seen to be refreshing a seemingly aging team with many stars departing in the summer and leaving the club with a weaker squad. But is Torres really a player that Chelsea need now? With the attacking talents of Drogba, Anelka, Malouda and Kalou, bolstering their attack did not seem to be a priority. Is Torres a "Shevchenko-esque" signing, a signing which has been dealt with by the owner Roman Abramovich, without the approval of the manager or is he someone which will improve the Chelsea team and push them onto to an unlikely title? The signing of David Luiz was a better signing for Chelsea, he is able to provide some backup for the Chelsea centre back position which has been at times, stripped to its bare.
Liverpool's signing of Andy Carroll and Luis Suarez, has come from the sale of Torres to Chelsea. Andy Carroll, who is still only 22 years old, comes to Liverpool with the price tag of £35m and the most expensive British player title. Is Carroll another example of panic buying from clubs? Carroll has had a great first half of the season, with 11 goals. But is he really worth the £35m that Liverpool have paid for him? With only half a seasons experience in the Premier League, he is seen as a player for the long term. Whereas, Suarez has scored plenty of goals in the Dutch League and was one of the players of the World Cup. He is by far the better signing for Liverpool and believe that he will have a big impact on the Premier League when he finds his feet.
With much to play for in the second half of the season, we will have to see whether these signings will be worth the huge amounts of money paid for them and if it will change their respective clubs fortunes.
Why are clubs spending so much on players half way through the season? I believe that clubs are panic buying, many of the teams who have spent big are teams who have not had the best first half of the season.
Aston Villa, who were lingering just above the relegation zone knew that they needed a striker who would be able to get them goals. Darren Bent fit that profile, with just as many goals as Rooney and Drogba in the Premer League overall. With many questioning whether Bent is worth the 24m that Aston Villa have paid. But Houllier and many Villa fans will argue that if Bent is able to score the goals which keep Villa away from the relegation zone then he would be worth every single penny of the 24m.
Chelsea, while not being anywhere near the bottom of the table, had a great first 3 months but suddenly crumbled and seemingly their chances of retaining the Premier League title disappeared with a poor run of games. The signing of Torres can be seen to be refreshing a seemingly aging team with many stars departing in the summer and leaving the club with a weaker squad. But is Torres really a player that Chelsea need now? With the attacking talents of Drogba, Anelka, Malouda and Kalou, bolstering their attack did not seem to be a priority. Is Torres a "Shevchenko-esque" signing, a signing which has been dealt with by the owner Roman Abramovich, without the approval of the manager or is he someone which will improve the Chelsea team and push them onto to an unlikely title? The signing of David Luiz was a better signing for Chelsea, he is able to provide some backup for the Chelsea centre back position which has been at times, stripped to its bare.
Liverpool's signing of Andy Carroll and Luis Suarez, has come from the sale of Torres to Chelsea. Andy Carroll, who is still only 22 years old, comes to Liverpool with the price tag of £35m and the most expensive British player title. Is Carroll another example of panic buying from clubs? Carroll has had a great first half of the season, with 11 goals. But is he really worth the £35m that Liverpool have paid for him? With only half a seasons experience in the Premier League, he is seen as a player for the long term. Whereas, Suarez has scored plenty of goals in the Dutch League and was one of the players of the World Cup. He is by far the better signing for Liverpool and believe that he will have a big impact on the Premier League when he finds his feet.
With much to play for in the second half of the season, we will have to see whether these signings will be worth the huge amounts of money paid for them and if it will change their respective clubs fortunes.
Wednesday 5 January 2011
2010 year in review
2010 was an action packed year for the footballing year, the World Cup would be held for the first time in Africa, while FIFA would decide on the hosts for not just the 2018 World Cup but for the 2022 one as well, there was an exciting end to the 09/10 Premier League season and a brilliant start to the 10/11 season. The Champions League provided more success for the "Special One" whilst also providing the platform for an emerging Welshman.
While there were many highs throughout the years, with Chelsea winning their first double in the club's history by playing exquisite attacking football, which culminated with the 8-0 thrashing of Wigan on the final day of the season to clinch the title by 1 point from Manchester United. They followed that up with a victory over Portsmouth in the FA Cup final to complete the double. The 10/11 season started off as the 09/10 finished for Chelsea, with 8 wins in their first 10 games scoring nearly 30 goals in the process. But a slump towards the end of the year has led to the most open title race in years, with as many as 5 teams with a decent chance to win the league.
The first World Cup in Africa was not the most enjoyable with dividing opinions on the vuvuzelas as well as the quality of football on show, the eventual winners, Spain, was the one bright spark, providing viewers with a brand of football which many teams aspire and dream to be able to achieve. With small clever players like Xavi and Iniesta, they were able to pass their way to success and showed that positive attacking football would provide sucess.
Whilst Spain were deserving winners, England once again failed to shine on the big stage. A howler from Robert Green and a drab draw with Algeria did not provide much entertainment for the English viewing public while the sole victory against Slovakia was hardly inspiring. The debate over Lampard's "goal" will ensure many hours of heated discussions, but the simple fact that Germany outplayed England showed that giving young players the chance to shine could pay off and it was time to follow the German model.
An octopus also hit the headlines in the World Cup. Paul the Octopus correctly predicted the winner of Germany's seven World Cup matches as well as the outcome of the final. Paul the Octopus was presented with two boxes with food inside, each box was marked with the flags of both teams and whichever he climbed into first would be the supposed prediction for the winner of that certain match. He was made a celebrity over night and was one of the highlights of the World Cup.
FIFA's decision to award Russia and Qatar the 2018 and 2022 World Cups were controversial decisions, with many believing that the best bids ultimately did not win. FIFA's reason for choosing the two countries was that they wanted to "go to new lands" and a desire to "develop football" by bringing it to different countries. The bidding process was also clouded with allegations over corruption by the FIFA Executive Committee members with the Sunday Times and BBC Paronama which alleged that they were taking bribes for votes on World Cup bids. This has led to much criticism over how the decision process is made and that such an important decision should not be left to a committee of people.
In the Champions League, the final was contested between Inter Milan and Bayern Munich with Inter winning courtesy of a brace from Diego Milito. The win rounded off an excellent season for the Nerazzurri by becoming the first Italian club to win the treble of the League, Italian Cup and the Champions League. This also added another feather to the ever increasing number of feathers on the cap of the "Special One" Jose Mourinho. The win virtually guaranteed the job at arguably the biggest club in the world; Real Madrid, for Mourinho.
The 2010/11 season of the Champions League saw the emergence of Gareth Bale onto the world scene, with some excellent performances against the current holders Inter, making Maicon look like a sunday leagye player at best. His excellence performance for Tottenham in the Champions League has caught the attention of many big clubs like Barcelona and Real Madrid, who are all apparently fighting for his signature. The Champions League also saw the first Danish club to qualify for the knockout stages for the first time with Copenhagen finishing 2nd behind Barcelona. It shapes up to be an excellent tournament going into 2011, where we will see some great matches, with Arsenal v Barcelona the pick of the bunch.
A final mention to the amazing game between Barcelona and Real Madrid at the Camp Nou on 29th November 2010, where it was a joy to watch Barcelona and their masterclass in attacking football with an excellent 5-0 mauling of Los Blancos.
The past year has been a great year for football and 2011 looks like it might exceed the great heights which were set in 2010.
While there were many highs throughout the years, with Chelsea winning their first double in the club's history by playing exquisite attacking football, which culminated with the 8-0 thrashing of Wigan on the final day of the season to clinch the title by 1 point from Manchester United. They followed that up with a victory over Portsmouth in the FA Cup final to complete the double. The 10/11 season started off as the 09/10 finished for Chelsea, with 8 wins in their first 10 games scoring nearly 30 goals in the process. But a slump towards the end of the year has led to the most open title race in years, with as many as 5 teams with a decent chance to win the league.
 |
| Chelsea: 2009/2010 Barclays Premier League Champions |
The first World Cup in Africa was not the most enjoyable with dividing opinions on the vuvuzelas as well as the quality of football on show, the eventual winners, Spain, was the one bright spark, providing viewers with a brand of football which many teams aspire and dream to be able to achieve. With small clever players like Xavi and Iniesta, they were able to pass their way to success and showed that positive attacking football would provide sucess.
Whilst Spain were deserving winners, England once again failed to shine on the big stage. A howler from Robert Green and a drab draw with Algeria did not provide much entertainment for the English viewing public while the sole victory against Slovakia was hardly inspiring. The debate over Lampard's "goal" will ensure many hours of heated discussions, but the simple fact that Germany outplayed England showed that giving young players the chance to shine could pay off and it was time to follow the German model.
 |
| The "goal" that never was |
An octopus also hit the headlines in the World Cup. Paul the Octopus correctly predicted the winner of Germany's seven World Cup matches as well as the outcome of the final. Paul the Octopus was presented with two boxes with food inside, each box was marked with the flags of both teams and whichever he climbed into first would be the supposed prediction for the winner of that certain match. He was made a celebrity over night and was one of the highlights of the World Cup.
FIFA's decision to award Russia and Qatar the 2018 and 2022 World Cups were controversial decisions, with many believing that the best bids ultimately did not win. FIFA's reason for choosing the two countries was that they wanted to "go to new lands" and a desire to "develop football" by bringing it to different countries. The bidding process was also clouded with allegations over corruption by the FIFA Executive Committee members with the Sunday Times and BBC Paronama which alleged that they were taking bribes for votes on World Cup bids. This has led to much criticism over how the decision process is made and that such an important decision should not be left to a committee of people.
 |
| Sepp Blatter announcing that Qatar has been picked to host the 2022 World Cup |
In the Champions League, the final was contested between Inter Milan and Bayern Munich with Inter winning courtesy of a brace from Diego Milito. The win rounded off an excellent season for the Nerazzurri by becoming the first Italian club to win the treble of the League, Italian Cup and the Champions League. This also added another feather to the ever increasing number of feathers on the cap of the "Special One" Jose Mourinho. The win virtually guaranteed the job at arguably the biggest club in the world; Real Madrid, for Mourinho.
The 2010/11 season of the Champions League saw the emergence of Gareth Bale onto the world scene, with some excellent performances against the current holders Inter, making Maicon look like a sunday leagye player at best. His excellence performance for Tottenham in the Champions League has caught the attention of many big clubs like Barcelona and Real Madrid, who are all apparently fighting for his signature. The Champions League also saw the first Danish club to qualify for the knockout stages for the first time with Copenhagen finishing 2nd behind Barcelona. It shapes up to be an excellent tournament going into 2011, where we will see some great matches, with Arsenal v Barcelona the pick of the bunch.
 |
| Bale running at the Inter defence once again |
A final mention to the amazing game between Barcelona and Real Madrid at the Camp Nou on 29th November 2010, where it was a joy to watch Barcelona and their masterclass in attacking football with an excellent 5-0 mauling of Los Blancos.
The past year has been a great year for football and 2011 looks like it might exceed the great heights which were set in 2010.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)