FIFA Fantasy ..England, and the World Cup in General

I haven't been posting about World Cup Fantasy, but I have been playing it, and I've finished with a rank of 216.

Obviously, I'm just posting now to brag a bit, as I'm quite pleased with that. Especially given I took Messi out of my team before the England game out of sheer loyalty to the nation ..and the Falkland Islands.

It does give me a chance to pen my thoughts about the World Cup though. Overall I've really enjoyed it. I think having it in America has been good. The stadiums were fantastic, and seeing so many people that normally don't have an interest in football discussing the game was something I really enjoyed. In fact, I like seeing people come to something with fresh eyes. People immersed in football often carry all these mental clichés that cloud their basic observation. Low block, high press, false nine, game management, and so on. People love the jargon and technicality, and end up thinking in ideas. As oppose to just observing reality.

So I loved seeing Trump (and other American Twitter accounts) say things like, "Messi was well guarded ..then all of a sudden he's standing on the right ..he moved to the right and the other player was just standing there."

Because his head isn't filled with countless hours of analysis and punditry he sees the simple truth and expresses it in simple language.

Of course, those comments were in relation to the England game.

(Messi in acres of space before the second goal)

In fairness there was a small foul before this moment, but still that's a shocking amount of space to have in the final third of the pitch. Everyone's given their opinion on the England game - most people are probably sick of it by now - and normally after a tournament I'd say, "Oh well, maybe next time," but here I do think an inquest is in order, as it's such an easy problem to fix. It really is just about getting the basics right.

It doesn't matter what tactics you're playing, what substitutes you make, whether you're sitting back defensively to protect a lead, or going for a second goal. At the end of the day there always has to be pressure on the ball when it's in the final third. If someone's in a position where they can put a cross in, you have to put pressure on them. You can't just give them five or ten yards to have a free swing. I could put in a decent cross in a world cup semi final if there was no one putting pressure on me.

Likewise with shots around the box. If someone's within twenty-five yards of the goal there must be pressure on the ball. Whatever the tactics. You can't just let someone have this much time and space.

(The Enzo Fernandez goal)

Thirty-five yards out, not so much of a problem. Twenty yards out: criminal.

You could give me a hundred free shots at goal from thirty-five yards out and I probably wouldn't be able to stick it in the top corner once. It takes world class ability to be able to do that even a handful of times out of a hundred. Whereas if you give me a hundred free shots at goal from twenty yards out then I'm smashing a few goals in - and I'm just a non-professional that's played a bit of five a side.

So giving a professional player one or two chances like that is just handing them a gift. You might as well give them a penalty.

This is obvious stuff, but it gets lost amidst the jargon.

It's understandable why the players dropped back so deep and were scared to press. The pressure, the occasion, the fear of losing something so precious - an appearance in a world cup final. I don't blame the players as individuals. You never see these players play like this in the Premier League. I blame two things:

Firstly, the collective psychology. We've had this exact same problem in previous tournaments (though this was perhaps the worst example of it). Too much fear and not enough aggression. As an England player you should feel personally insulted if an opposition player gets an easy cross in or an easy shot at goal. If they do something special or clever to earn that half a yard then fair enough. But you can't just give them a free shot at goal. We gave the Argentinians opportunities, they gave us nothing. We had to earn our chances. Make them earn theirs.

I think that defeat hurt so much because it felt like we let them bully us. Like we just handed them our lunch money.

Secondly, we've forgotten the basics. Again, all the jargon and over-analysis means everyone's overthinking things. In the modern game we have the high press - as we see teams like Man City play - where teams press high up the pitch, even hounding the goalkeeper. I think because of this people tend to have this view that you either press or sit back. Like it's a binary. When in reality, for the most part, football isn't like that. There are times in games when you're on the front foot and you press high, other times when you're on the back foot and sit deep. However, even when you're sitting deep you still need to press the ball when it comes into your own half. Especially when it's in your final third, where a single shot or cross can hurt you.

So even when you sit back (either deliberately as a tactic or just as a consequence of the flow of the game) you still need to press the opposition when they reach your final third.

This is just the basics of football. It's literally doing the basics. The modern football brain can't process the contradiction of not pressing and pressing at the same time though. So we get all these debates about substitutions and formations and game management, when it's all irrelevant if you don't do the basics. There should always be aggressive pressure on the ball in and around the box whatever formation you're playing. Even if you're deliberately 'sitting back' to defend a lead.

Anyway, that's my two cents.

(You can tell I was riled up by that Argentina performance, lol)

Although I was annoyed I think by and large it was a great tournament. The game against Mexico was an unbelievable night. The day after we were all on cloud nine. Also, though I've truly hated Argentina at times over the last week or so you have to admire their fight and will to win. So now the tournament's over I'm happy to shake hands with everyone and get back to club football.

Spain deserved to win ..because they did the basics. They weren't anything special in the final third. I think France and England both have better attacking players. Nevertheless, they defended well, played as a team, bossed the midfield, and efficiently did the business.

I'll end with my favourite image from the tournament. From one of the first games in fact.

(Mike Myers watching Canada)

I've always loved Mike Myers and seeing him look so glum watching Canada (this was when they were 1-0 down in the first game) made me laugh. His ancestry is British and his face looks exactly like an annoyed British football fan. The charm and twinkle of Austin Powers or Wayne from Wayne's World nowhere to be seen. This is what football does to people.

Respect to Mexico, USA and Canada for putting on a very eventful tournament. There's been a lot of controversy and talking points, but world cups are watercooler moments for the whole of humanity. So that's sort of the point really. It doesn't matter if the half time show is good or bad (I actually thought all the little kids singing was cute - so that kind of won me over), what's important is that we're all talking about it. So ten out of ten in that regard.

Well done everyone. Let's do it again in four years' time.

Financial Fair Play aka Communism

This article will probably be a bit less focused. I'd like to have another whinge, but, to be fair, there are multiple sides to the argument. So though I know what side I come down on, I understand that it's not palatable to most people ..for one obvious reason.

That, in my world, football clubs would be allowed to go out of business.

I know. No one wants this. But the alternative isn't great either ..and it looks like the Soviet Union.

A little example..

I'll use a pub. (Perhaps an ironic example, as pubs are going out of business - every day - and the powers-that-be are not so bothered.)

Anyhow, let's say you own a pub. Now let's also say you have a little windfall. Let's say you inherit £30,000 from some distant great-aunt who's died. You then think, "Ah, I'll use this money to invest in my pub. To make it better. Expand the business."

However, then some bureaucrat comes along and says, "Sorry, you can't spend that money on your pub. No, no, no. It wouldn't be fair on the pub down the road."

You then say, "But it's my money. I want to invest it in something worthwhile. In my business - my life's passion. I don't just want to waste it on another holiday or leave it sitting in a bank. Plus, what about that mega-pub in town. They spent £100,000 improving their premises."

"Ah, yes, you see," replies the bureaucrat, "But the mega-pub makes a lot more money than your pub. So they can afford to spend more money."

"But I can afford to spend the money too," you plead, "I have it there in my bank account. How will my pub ever become a mega-pub if I'm not allowed to invest it?"

"No, these are the rules. You can't spend it. It just wouldn't be fair."

This is basically what the financial fair play rules say to football clubs.

Now, in defence of such rules, they did come about to stop clubs from going out of business. Plus, my example is obviously a bit of an oversimplification. We've seen countless examples of clubs going into administration over the years, so the problem is certainly real. Clubs were spending and borrowing too much money, in order to compete with other clubs, and falling into arrears. So, in this case, it's understandable that people were saying "Something Must Be Done!".

So the rules are partly there to make sure clubs don't spend and borrow beyond their means, but they're also there to stop clubs that have the means from spending so much that it's unfair on other clubs.

It sounds nice in theory, however, in my opinion, it's just not how the world works. Firstly, the world is always going to be unfair. You can't regulate that away. The mega-clubs (and mega-pubs in my example) already have a huge advantage that just ends up entrenched by the rules.

Secondly, it's competition and the fear of going out of business that pushes businesses to make good economic decisions. So, in the long run, though it seems fairer, it just makes it more likely that the entire footballing economy will tank. It's like comparing a communist economy, where the state manages everything, to a capitalist economy, where companies are free to take risks and potentially go out of business. Generally the capitalist economies do better overall. It's not nice when a company goes out of business, of course, especially for the employees, but sometimes things go out of business. That's life.

Sure, this is another oversimplification. There are arguments both ways, and most countries tend to have a mix of something in between, but still, football, and the Premier League in particular, was a very successful export long before these rules came about. We need to be careful not to kill the golden goose.

People talk about a football club going out of business like it's a hospital closing down. But they're not hospitals. No one's dying. It's not the NHS. It's a game. So a bit of perspective would be handy.

(I've ended up having the whinge I wanted to have 😁 Again, I'm being a tad unfair, as fans want their teams to be ambitious and to compete, yet they also get upset if that ambition leads to financial issues. So football governing bodies (and politicians that get involved in the debate) are trying to give fans what they want ultimately. A world where a club can never go out of business.)

I think I'm definitely in the minority on this one. The rules just seem insane to me though. As a child I used to sometimes dream of becoming rich and buying a football club. It'd be a bit pointless now. Why would you bother? Personally I think the super-rich owners have been good for football. Abramovich buying Chelsea (..and no, I'm not getting into the wider politics there, lol) turned a two horse Premier League title race into a three horse race. Likewise, the turnaround of Manchester City has been remarkable and memory-filled.

Newcastle could be doing similar things today with their Saudi owners, but, typical Newcastle, they got the money just as the bureaucrats turned up to stop them spending it. It would've been good for the north-east, but apparently it's fairer this way.

(Finally, there's an argument that the fair play rules weren't just brought about to save clubs, but also had the aim of clipping the wings of the Premier League - which was becoming too wealthy and dominant for UEFAs liking. I can imagine there's some truth in this, so it's worth noting, but I spend enough time bashing Europe when it comes to the EU, so I'll try to leave it out of my football whinging.)

The Epidemic of Defenders Diving

I said in my last post that I'd probably be back in August. However, here I am, back again after barely two days. This time it's not fantasy related though. It's just football in general.

I recently posted a few articles on Substack.

One on my recent trip to Wembley and the Southampton 'spygate' shenanigans.

https://cyprilocks.substack.com/p/i-travelled-to-wembley-hoping-my

The other about the handball rule.

https://cyprilocks.substack.com/p/the-handball-of-the-british-empire

My writing style is a little different on there. It's a bit more substacky, for want of a better word. Either way, the general topic of these articles is my annoyance with how bureaucracy is ruining our beautiful game.

Anyway, I have a little more to say, but as these thoughts are bit more meandering I thought I'd post them here. Where things can be a little less substacky.

Defenders Diving

The first thing I want to have a bit of a whinge about is defenders diving.

You see it multiple times every game. A defender's in possession of the ball, perhaps somewhere near one of their own corner flags. An opposing player is putting them under pressure. There's the slightest of physical contact (sometimes zero contact) and the defender drops to the floor. The ref's whistle blows. Free kick to the defender.

It's diving. Pure and simple. And it drives fans mad, as not only does it stop the game, it rewards cheating and punishes the hard work and tenacity of the attacker.

Contrast it to when an attacking player dives. Free kick to the defender. Yellow card to the attacker.

Even if there is a foul on the attacker the bar for a free kick in their favour is way higher too (partly because it leads to a penalty if it's in the box, which naturally changes the equation a little, but still, there's a massive double standard).

I don't want to sound like a "Back In My Day" old man, but it seems to illustrate how the game has became more dishonest thanks to all the modern rules, not less dishonest.

Attackers are generally a bit more clever and wily than defenders - after all, they're trying to unpick defences and sneak into the goal - so they're the sort of people you'd expect to cheat a little. Whereas defenders are supposed to be men's men. Tough, staunch, manning the barricades. Back in my day a defender would've felt embarrassed if they were even accused of diving. It just wasn't the done thing.

In fact, there was a time when it wasn't really something a striker felt too comfortable with either. I can remember when Jurgen Klinsmann first came to the Premier League (I was born in 1982 - so 'back in my day' was basically the 1990s. Not that long ago. Sort of the beginning of the modern era.) That he dived so readily was actually shocking to people at the time. He was hated for it. It was seen as foreign. Un-British. (Though partly thanks to his ironic diving celebration the British public ended up falling in love with him.)

Now we have a world where defenders dive constantly. Multiple times a game. With no shame whatsoever.

And where strikers still want to dive, but can't get away with it. (Unless they're very sneaky in doing it.)

The game's full of sneaks. Yet people talk about fair play more than ever before.

This brings me to my other whinge. Financial fair play. Actually, I've already typed a fair bit here, so I'll leave that one for the next article..

And in the end..

Well, season 25/26 done. Luckily, I had one final green arrow. So I finished at a rank of:

16,689

I feel like I need some fireworks around that number, as it's my highest ever finish. I won't go over how my team done, I think everyone's sick of it at this point. Salah got me six points, which was a nice little send off. So that deserves a mention.

Next season could be a struggle, as I can't imagine I'll have the same amount of luck. Twelve green arrows in a row on this final run in.

I'm not sure if I'll post anything on here over the summer, so it may be a case of see you in August.

GW38 Deadline Post

Here we are, sat waiting for team news, with an hour or so to go before the GW38 deadline.

As we're waiting I'll share last week's team.

64 points (avg. 53)

Senesi got me four points. Beautiful. And Cherki and Semenyo both got just the one. So that worked out pretty well for me. Captaining Gabriel didn't quite pay off though. Saka or Bruno would've scraped me a few more points.

All in all I ended up with a rank boost of 241. A tiny, teeny-weeny green arrow, but a very welcome one at this stage of the season.

So, anyhow, GW38

Currently my plan is to do Calvert-Lewin to Bowen and Gabriel to Van Dijk. I'll be benching O'Reilly, Trossard and Saka.

This is subject to leaks though.

Making transfers this close to the deadline is uncharted territory for me. Normally, even on the final day of the season, I'm all set by now. Plus, I'm always terrified the fpl site will crash or my internet will go down. Even now, with an hour to go, I'm tempted to just hit the button now.

How long should I wait?

[...]

I don't want Calvert-Lewin this week as I just feel that game will be all West Ham. So switching him out is a nice differential. Bowen is fairly obvious. Van Dijk a bit less so. My thinking here is that I want a Liverpool player this week, and that Van Dijk has been their best fpl asset this season. Mavropanos is tempting. He's similar to Van Dijk, plus West Ham have more to play for. Instinctively I feel like I want Van Dijk though. It's a pure vibe pick (assuming I do go with him).

[...]

I'm thinking I should just make the transfers. Then, if there's any City news I can un-bench O'Reilly if he's starting.

[...]

waiting..

[...]

I'll be captaining Bowen.

[...]

more waiting..

[...]

Haaland benched apparently!

[...]

I could get Salah?

[...]

I'm being brave ..I popped downstairs to make cheese and crackers.

[...]

Okay, half an hour to go. I'm making my transfers. Bowen and Salah in. I feel like I'm being eased into this with the leaks (we've also had a leak that Salah starts now). I don't like the thought that I'm potentially being manipulated with false information, but I can't look a gift horse in the mouth. It's not often I'm in this position toying with the deadline. So let's just go with the flow.

There we go. Apparently O'Reilly is benched too. Calvert-Lewin might be getting one more game for me after all.

I think that means we're just about done.

I'll wait until the deadline to see if my bench needs anymore tweaking, then I'm going in the garden for half an hour to play football with the cat.

[...]

That's not me kicking the cat, lol. I'll be kicking a football in the garden in the glorious sun, as the cat skulks around seeking yet more food and attention. After that little sabbatical I can then settle down to actually watch the football.

And into GW37

As we head into GW37 I'm sitting at 21,224 in rank.

If I could finish here it would be my highest finish ever, so hopefully it doesn't all go the other way in these last two weeks.

..here's how GW35 & 36 went. The Palmer to Saka transfer definitely paid off.

GW35: 76 points (avg. 50)

GW36: 90 points (avg. 65)

For GW37 I've made one transfer: Semenyo to Trossard

That'll leave me with two free transfers for the final week.

Trossard is another eye-test pick. He looked good in the last game, like he really had a strong will to win. Of course, he could not start, or get reduced minutes, but I'm happy to take the risk. The sensible option would've been Saliba, but it felt too boring. I want players with upside. To be fair, with Saliba there is upside. Arsenal should dominate against Burnley, which should mean a clean sheet, plus plenty of corner and free kicks. So a goal for Saliba is far from impossible. (This is why I have Gabriel captain.) I'm just not feeling it though.

My other differential decision follows similar lines. On paper it doesn't make sense to play Senesi against Man City. However, when I think about it it doesn't seem too bad. There's a good chance he'll get defcon - City will score no doubt, but I can't imagine them scoring four or more to wipe that out. So three points is a realistic expectation. Then there's the attacking upside these Bournemouth defenders offer. City's a tough game, but Bournemouth have been good this season. City have the FA Cup final to play too. So I really don't mind it.

Plus, the other defenders I could've brought in weren't especially appealing. Guehi, like Saliba, would've been another boring option, with even less upside. (Hopefully a Senesi assist wipes out his clean sheet.) Looking at teams lower in the league clean sheets aren't too obvious to predict. Tarkowski tempted me a bit with his fixture and goal threat. I don't like the fact they have Spurs on the final day though. So I'll just stick with Senesi and save my transfer.

What I do in that last week is going to be a real conundrum. It's such a lottery on that last day. Clean sheets normally go out of the window, so I want attacking threat in every spot. I'd be surprised if I play both Truffet and Senesi, but at least both fit the mould if I need them. Currently I'm thinking I'll bring Bowen in with one of the transfers. It's very much a case of waiting to see what the league table looks like after GW37 though.

GW35 ..we're at the sharp end of the season now

Well, going into GW35 I've made some bold moves.

Cucurella and Palmer OUT

Gabriel and Saka IN

Obviously, taking out Palmer is a risk, however, when he came on against Leeds in that semi-final he looked so off the pace. Joao Pedro, on the other hand, I thought played quite well. So I'm very much acting on eye-test here.

Again, it's risky, but I needed to free up cash to bring in Gabriel, and I'm going to want more than one Arsenal player over the coming weeks. Saka, if he stays fit, is the choice attacker. I had two free transfers and just the right amount of money. So it feels like the perfect move at the moment. Let's see how it looks by Monday night though.

The other big decision this week is who to bench. In the end I'm playing an extra Bournemouth defender ahead of Gross simply because Crystal Palace played midweek. Plus it's a home fixture. I've went Truffert and Senesi over Hill because the ceiling is a bit higher. These are all close calls. It feels stupid benching Gross given how consistent he's been. Contrariwise, if Bournemouth keep a clean sheet it could be stupid putting him first on the bench.

It's a nice problem to have overall though.

The GW34 Free Hit

The free hit was a bit underwhelming. My 60 points did get me a small green arrow though. I'm now sitting at 51,444.

Given the bench boost in GW33 I'm actually quite happy with my team. It isn't far off what I would've went with anyway. It's literally just Palmer that's worrying me, what with so many other GW33 bench-boosters owning him this week. After that it's just a case of getting another Arsenal player before GW37.

Oh, and I'm just ignoring the Crystal Palace double. Which could be another unwise move, but I'm just not feeling it.