Sunday, October 19, 2014
FIFA's Ethics Committee Dilemma
FIFA was under investigation after accusations of corruption were brought up in the selection process of the 2018 and 2022 World Cup bids. Michael Garcia is the lead investigator in charge of this case. A 350 page report was issued by FIFA’s Ethics Committee in September which brought some insight into this investigation.
FIFA’s chief adjudicator, Hans-Joachim Eckert, announced that the report will not be published in it’s entirety. Due to legal reasons, an overview of this report will only be released in November. It is worth noting that Garcia and several other FIFA executive members urged this report should be available in full.
“Publishing the report in full would actually put the FIFA Ethics Committee and FIFA itself in a very difficult situation legally. What is more, we have to respect the personal rights of the people mentioned in the report, which in the case of full publication of the report would in all likelihood not be possible.” -Hans-Joachim Eckert (FIFA.com)
It is understandable that publishing the full report would cause problems. Legal issues can arise since individuals involved in this case would want his or her name left in confidentiality. It is the Ethics Committee’s duty to protect those who want to remain undisclosed, especially if a number of these people hold an important roles in the organization. Revealing the names of witnesses could be detrimental to his or her reputation.
Many people are pushing for transparency. Open communication is something FIFA does not excel in. This organization is constantly subjected towards corruption allegations. Bribery is a common topic brought up when dealing with corruption charges, such as the investigation associated with World Cup bids. Transparency removes barriers that can distort the perception of an organization. Once FIFA eliminates hidden agendas and practice greater ethical standards, it will then improve the identity of this organization.
Written by: Laxmi Patel
Friday, October 17, 2014
The Takeaway: Turkey's Test Against Czech Republic and Latvia
Turkey have all the tools to play eye-to-eye against any opponent. Although the EURO 2016 campaign has been less than ideal, it is a test of the players’ resolve. Against both Czech Republic and Latvia they showcased their strengths and weaknesses. Here are the takeaways:
1. Starting off strong
Turkey dictated the tempo of the match through their work on the ball. They held onto a majority of possession and looked to maintain fluidity. They were keen to build from the back and use players in the heart of midfield to pick out those stationed out wide. This would create overlapping runs on the flanks. Turkey’s proactive approach was their strength in supplying numbers into the box. Not only did this cause problems for the opposition’s defense, but it also forced them to play deep. Turkey moving the ball as much as possible out of their own half took pressure off their back line as well.
2. Arda Turan the main attraction
Arda’s work ethic is admirable. He was heavily involved in combinations and linked up well with Olcay Şahan and Gökhan Töre in the final third. His ability to trick players around him and then drive through space is a joy to watch. Arda Turan’s technique and control stood out in moments where the opposing teams wanted to stay compact. His dribbling was effective when they left the midfield open. Czech Republic and Latvia concentrated on putting Arda off the ball in order to subdue Turkey’s spark.
3. The missing component
Without Ömer Toprak as a center-back option, Mehmet Topal was slot into that role. Due to Mehmet’s absence in midfield, Turkey were missing his defensive quality. They were lacking someone to close down the middle of the park and break up play. This is one reason both Czech Republic and Latvia were able to quickly execute dangerous counter-attacks. There wasn’t enough emphasis on defense with Turkey’s attack-minded set up.
4. Lack of “Plan B”
Turkey started with a spring in their step, but they faded as the game wore on. They weren’t able to keep up the intensity for 90 minutes. The chances were coming, but they just couldn’t capitalize. Turkey ran out of ideas and could not formulate a Plan B when things weren’t going their way. Once Czech Republic recognized Turkey’s strength in supplying numbers into the box, they crowded out that area. Latvia relied on low blocking to cut off Turkey’s chances in front of goal. When the team couldn’t adapt to these situations, it proved to be costly.
The European Qualifiers have been a challenging task full of surprises. Turkey will need to kick it up a notch with this being the first time they have failed to win their opening three games in qualifiers since 1992 (Opta). However, they have the personnel to make it happen. Once injured players are incorporated back into the squad, this could address some of the tactical issues. Turkey are facing an uphill battle, but it isn't impossible. Victory is sweeter when it’s hard fought.
Written by: Goral Patel
1. Starting off strong
Turkey dictated the tempo of the match through their work on the ball. They held onto a majority of possession and looked to maintain fluidity. They were keen to build from the back and use players in the heart of midfield to pick out those stationed out wide. This would create overlapping runs on the flanks. Turkey’s proactive approach was their strength in supplying numbers into the box. Not only did this cause problems for the opposition’s defense, but it also forced them to play deep. Turkey moving the ball as much as possible out of their own half took pressure off their back line as well.
2. Arda Turan the main attraction
Arda’s work ethic is admirable. He was heavily involved in combinations and linked up well with Olcay Şahan and Gökhan Töre in the final third. His ability to trick players around him and then drive through space is a joy to watch. Arda Turan’s technique and control stood out in moments where the opposing teams wanted to stay compact. His dribbling was effective when they left the midfield open. Czech Republic and Latvia concentrated on putting Arda off the ball in order to subdue Turkey’s spark.
3. The missing component
Without Ömer Toprak as a center-back option, Mehmet Topal was slot into that role. Due to Mehmet’s absence in midfield, Turkey were missing his defensive quality. They were lacking someone to close down the middle of the park and break up play. This is one reason both Czech Republic and Latvia were able to quickly execute dangerous counter-attacks. There wasn’t enough emphasis on defense with Turkey’s attack-minded set up.
4. Lack of “Plan B”
Turkey started with a spring in their step, but they faded as the game wore on. They weren’t able to keep up the intensity for 90 minutes. The chances were coming, but they just couldn’t capitalize. Turkey ran out of ideas and could not formulate a Plan B when things weren’t going their way. Once Czech Republic recognized Turkey’s strength in supplying numbers into the box, they crowded out that area. Latvia relied on low blocking to cut off Turkey’s chances in front of goal. When the team couldn’t adapt to these situations, it proved to be costly.
The European Qualifiers have been a challenging task full of surprises. Turkey will need to kick it up a notch with this being the first time they have failed to win their opening three games in qualifiers since 1992 (Opta). However, they have the personnel to make it happen. Once injured players are incorporated back into the squad, this could address some of the tactical issues. Turkey are facing an uphill battle, but it isn't impossible. Victory is sweeter when it’s hard fought.
Written by: Goral Patel
 |
| Getty Images |
 |
| Getty Images |
 |
| Getty Images |
Friday, October 3, 2014
Match Review: Sporting CP-Chelsea (UCL Group Stage)
Lineups
Sporting CP: R. Patrício, Cédric, Maurício, Sarr, J. Silva, J. Mário, William, Adrien, Carrillo, Slimani, Nani
Subs Used: Oliveira (63’), Capel (81’), Montero (81’)
Chelsea: Courtois, Ivanović, Cahill, Terry, Filipe Luís, Matić, Fàbregas, Schürrle, Oscar, Hazard, Diego Costa
Subs Used: Willian (58’), Mikel (71’), Salah (84’)
Sporting CP: R. Patrício, Cédric, Maurício, Sarr, J. Silva, J. Mário, William, Adrien, Carrillo, Slimani, Nani
Subs Used: Oliveira (63’), Capel (81’), Montero (81’)
Chelsea: Courtois, Ivanović, Cahill, Terry, Filipe Luís, Matić, Fàbregas, Schürrle, Oscar, Hazard, Diego Costa
Subs Used: Willian (58’), Mikel (71’), Salah (84’)
Analysis
Diego Costa’s work ethic was on display from the very beginning. His first chance in the game came at 3’ when he took advantage of Sporting’s high line and stretched central defense. He linked up well with Oscar and Ivanović who he had the most effective pass combinations with. Costa’s positioning was crucial in moments where Hazard and Schürrle were making intensive runs. He held up defenders, which freed up space near the box.
Rui Patrício’s goalkeeping heroics denied goal-scoring opportunities from Schürrle, Costa, and Oscar. Chelsea’s fluidity and interchange of players are tough to contain, especially on transitions. He showed excellent focus and composure against Chelsea’s dangerous attack force for the entire 90 minutes.
Nani was the focal point of Sporting’s attack. The aim was to get him on the ball as much as possible. In a 3 vs. 4 situation, Sporting did well to utilize passing lanes. Chelsea recognized this threat and tightened the defense. Chelsea’s organization cut off Sporting’s passing options in the box. This is why it was difficult to involve Slimani at times.
William Carvalho was instrumental in building Sporting’s attack and looking for the perfect pass when they regained possession. Since Nani was one of the most active players on the pitch, Carvalho prevented the work in attack from being predictable. He was essential in switching up the play.
The most influential player and the core of Chelsea’s midfield was Nemanja Matić. Not only did he contribute to the lone goal of the game, but he didn’t neglect his other duties. Matić used his athleticism to recover the most balls (10) and attempt the most blocks (2) out of all the players. He covered both sides of the pitch on occasions as well. Matić patrolled the midfield and pulled into the right side to support Ivanović vs. Nani.
*MOTM: Nemanja Matić
Written by: Goral Patel