Balotelli is an over-rated narcissistic cancer

By no means should Liverpool waste their time with Mario Balotelli.  The Italian striker may be one of the most talented in Europe, but he is all about one thing, himself.  Before being sold in the January 2013 window, he had basically already cost Man City a chance of repeating as Premier league champions.  If his lackluster, half-assed efforts on the pitch weren't enough, it paled in comparison to his whiny, childish, and distracting behavior off.

When 'Super' Mario desires to make a difference on the pitch, he can be, at times, unstoppable, but when he could care less, he's not very good at hiding it.  At the beginning of the 2012-13 season, Man City fined him for his less than stellar disciplinary record from the previous year, which Balotelli refuted and threatened to take to a PL tribunal.  He eventually paid the fine, but it looks as if he got his revenge in the most classless manner.  Before his transfer to A.C. Milan, he had scored one goal in 14 appearances for City, let's look at his stats from then, the previous year, and the rest of his season in Serie A:

year	club	npg90	gc90	sacc%	shot%	gopd
2012-13	AC Milan	0.47	0.94	51.9	15.6	0.36
2012-13	Man City	0.15	0.15	17.6	2.9	-0.38
2011-12	Man City	0.68	0.95	39.0	15.9	-0.33

Looks like all of sudden Balotelli found his goal-scoring touch again.  In fact, in the first half of the season at City, less than one out of five of his shots were toward goal, but once he got to magical Milan land, half his shots became on-target.  He also had nearly a full goal swing with his goals-on-pitch difference.  I can't say I'm surprised considering his character.

Balotelli turns it on when he wants to and that's just unacceptable.  He doesn't care about the badge on his chest, all he wants is to be exalted and praised.  He has had problems with every club he has played for and now apparently is upset with Inzaghi and the Milan manager's training tactics. He is not a team player by any means, in fact, in the past five seasons he has received 39 cards and dished out just 12 assists.  Even if he averaged a non-penalty goal per match, which he doesn't, he's not worth the trouble.  We'd be replacing Suarez with a player of half the ability and ten times the trouble.

For those who think he would help us win the Premiership, you're wrong.  City would have won with or without him in 2011-12.  When he was on the pitch, they were a third of the team when he wasn't, hence the -0.33 goals on pitch difference that season.  They certainly didn't need him last season either.

Paul Scholes: clandestine Liverpool fan

The Ginger Prince appears obsessed with the Reds these days, sounding off on our players whenever he can.  I would say he's a wind-up muppet, but he's not, most of the time he actually talks sense.

He most recently chimed in on the Luis Suarez transfer saga, questioning whether 'El Conejo Loco' and Messi will be able to play together. “If Luis Suarez does sign for Barcelona from Liverpool, will Lionel Messi ‘accept’ him? Suarez is a centre forward and he won’t want to play out wide. I can’t see Suarez and Messi linking well together,” Scholes wrote on his Paddy Power blog.

He's not afraid to criticize his former club either.  On the Shaw transfer, he wrote, 'For a left-back to be worth £34m shows how silly the game has gone. For that money I want a centre-forward who’s going to score 30 goals a season.'  Preaching to the choir, my frienemy.

Before the World Cup, he praised 'the Liverpool way' of playing football and challenged the English to emulate it in Brazil.  On the subject he wrote, 'It would be refreshing for England to adopt Liverpool’s attacking mentality in Brazil. Really go for it. That means certainly four, and possibly five, Liverpool players in the England starting XI against Italy on June 14' and 'I’d love to see Roy be brave enough to play like Liverpool (or Man United teams of the past).'  Glad to see he realizes the glory years of his former club are in the past.

When it comes to Gerrard, he's had nothing but love, stating in the same post, 'Gerrard (a good leader who will have quickly moved on from that slip) has adjusted his game superbly, very much like I did' and 'That’s the big difference between Steven (Gerrard) and Lampard, for example. I’m not sure Lampard has the ability to control a game. He’s always someone who’s up trying to score goals.'  You know now he's expecting a nice Christmas present for the Gerrard household.

The best part is he gets a joke in here and there, for instance, 'Defensively Liverpool were poor – conceding 50 goals – but they can be contenders again next year IF they can get two world-class centre halves and a left-back. I’m talking about players of the standard of Jaap Stam and Rio Ferdinand.' Rio Ferdinand, world class!?!? Oh the wit.

It's too bad Scholesy wasted his career on the dark side.  He should have went to Italy or Spain, where he's actually more appreciated and wouldn't have played in the shadows of bigger personalities.  No matter what, I've never desired him to play for Liverpool and he has never been better than Gerrard.

Blame the FA, Hodgson, or the entire squad, not just Gerrard

It is sad and pathetic that the English press and the wind-up blogs are attempting, though ever so poorly, to blame Steven Gerrard for the early World Cup exit of the Three Lions. He did not pick the manager.  He did not pick the players.  He did not pick the formations, his own position, nor tactics.  All he did was go out and play to the best of his ability, trying to execute the plan of his manager.

Roy Hodgson is not truly to blame either, he is just doing what he has always done, but it is quite evident that his style of management doesn't work for the English side.  He is a blue collar manager if there ever was one.  He found most of his success at clubs in lesser leagues like the Allsvenskan or at smaller clubs like Fulham and West Brom which rely more on tactics than talent.  Let's face it, England is made up of big club players and it is hard for a big club player to revert to simple tactics, it is like asking a chef to wash dishes, he can do it, but he won't be happy nor necessarily do it well.

Capello utilized advanced tactics, but he also knew how to control the superstar egos of the English side.  You were either part of the team or watching from the outside, Hodgson is too much of a gentleman to command the Three Lions.  I'm not saying they lack discipline, because if anything they are seemingly one of England's more mature squads despite their age, I just think Hodgson's tactics and demeanor lack the authority to shape the squad to his liking.

Gerrard had a very poor performance against Uruguay and a medicore one, at least for him, versus Italy.  Neither losses can be fully pegged on him though.  In the Italy match, England's lack of a true defensive midfielder, which they don't even have in the squad, hurt them because no one could stifle the Italian attack.  Neither Gerrard nor Henderson are true DMs and it's idiotic to ask them to play such a role on the world's biggest stage.  Hodgson supposedly imploys zonal marking, so it was either executed quite poorly on both of Italy's goals or nobody listened.  The lack of coverage on the second goal and the careless positioning by Hart are clear signs of a insufficiently managed side.

The Uruguay match was just plain awful from everyone, even for Suarez.  He scored two goals, but was statistically one of, if not the, worst player on the pitch.  Uruguay overall had a passing rate of 64.7%, 53.9% in the England half, and did not connect on a single one of their 18 cross attempts.  Unfortunately the England defense went asleep for a total of about ten seconds and it cost them the match.  Hodgson's tactical approach is a support method of twos and the two centre backs, Jagielka and Cahill, failed to communicate on the first goal, allowing Suarez to sneak in and put away a brilliant header.

Everyone wants to blame Gerrard for the second goal since he miscalculated his header and passed it on to his Liverpool teammate, but it was the brilliance of Suarez to net at a tight angle with scorching pace.  Still it was Gerrard's error that gave him the ball and actually Cahill did a great job in cutting down Suarez' perspective, but Hart's indecisiveness to go for it or stay back was quite apparent and he ended up doing neither.  If he would have stayed back, he would at least had a chance of a save, but getting stuck in the middle left him little chance.

No one seems to be talking about Rooney missing three point blank chances, one in the Italy match and two versus Uruguay.  He connects on one of those, this post doesn't happen.  England still has hope against Costa Rica.  He better realize that if it weren't for Sterling, Sturridge, and Johnson, he would have had zero assists and zero goals, they better be on his Christmas card list.

Listen I can spew stats all day to disprove Gerrard's culpability and direct the blame on others, but it's just as stupid as being a sensationalist and blaming the captain for a total piss poor team effort.  The bottom line is, and it pains me to say this, they should have brought Michael Carrick and begged Gareth Barry to come, so they would have a true DM.  I don't want to get into why I would have picked a different squad, but I don't see the point in taking Lampard and an injured Oxlade-Chamberlain.

Also, if reports are true, and Hodgson still has a job after the World Cup, than the only people to truly blame are the donkey shepherds at the FA.  Hodgson is not the manager to take England anywhere, not even a watermelon festival.  They should go after a gaffer with balls, who that is, well I don't know, but I would even take André Villas-Boas at this point.

Was Glen Johnson really that bad against Italy?

There are calls for Johnson to lose his place in the England side due to his 'dismal' performance against Itay at the World Cup, but is it really warranted?  Let's compare him to Leighton Baines, who can step on a puppy and the English press would publish articles about the state of his injured foot.

	Johnson	Baines
chances created	2	2
pass %	90	93
back pass %	36.2	50
tackles	3	2
tackle %	40	33
fouls	1	0
interceptions	0	2
blocked shots	0	0
clearances	0	0
dribbled past	1	1
key passes	2	2
true turnover index	9	4

This is a great example of how my 'true turnover index' can be skewed, especially when it comes to defenders.  Glen Johnson has a higher TTI simply because he had more possession of the ball.  He possessed the ball 15 more times than Baines and England's attack was 15% more from Johnson's side of the pitch.  Of course, that doesn't excuse bad shot selection.

Defensively, Johnson did little if nothing, but he also had less opportunity than Baines.  Italy's attack was more focused on the right side of pitch than the left, 38% to 27%.  He did have more tackles and a higher tackle % though, despite Baines' 2 interceptions.

Where Johnson is clearly better is passing.  Baines had the higher passing percentage, but half of his passes were toward his own goal, which is really not a good thing when you are a left back.  Johnson's 36.2% back pass rating is outstanding to say the least, especially paired with his 90% success rate, but his attacking abilities have never really been questioned.

The bottom line is, if Johnson should be dropped, so should Baines and probably most of the first team for that matter as really only Sturridge put on an outstanding performance.  He never has been and never will be a top class defender, but he is an above average attacking right back.

Sterling showed his strengths, but exposed his weaknesses vs Italy

There's no doubting that Raheem Sterling did an outstanding job introducing himself to the world yesterday.  It is nothing new to us Liverpool fans who have followed his progression the past four years.  Unfortunately, what he does worse was just as apparent as what he does well. His defense and ability to hold on to the ball left much to be desired:

chances created	1
back pass %	57.6
errant passes	3
shots	3
shot %	0
dispossessed	2
take ons	4
unsuccessful to	3
turnovers	1
true turnover index	13

He basically did two things good, albeit very good, he set-up England's only goal with a brilliant pass to Rooney and he treated the Italian defenders like orange cones, dribbling pass them at will.  That's all fine and dandy, but most of it was all for nothing.

A back pass % of 57.6 for a winger is abominable.  That means of his 33 pass attempts, 19 of them were toward his own goal and at least one of those fell into Italy's possession going in the direction they so desired.  True turnover index takes in effect whenever a player gives possession over to the other team either by shots that lead to opposition possession, errant pass, dispossession, unsuccessful take on, or offensive foul (including offside).  Sterling had the worst TTI of Englishman on the pitch.  In comparison, Rooney had a TTI of 10, Henderson and Sturridge each had a 9, Gerrard had an 8, and Welbeck had a 7.

As I stated in my last post though, I'd much rather have a player who takes risk, but the results have to prove positive.  Sterling's back pass percentage severely skews his stats and makes it seem that he is not as risky and turnover prone than he actually is.  He is only 19 though and a whole lot of fun to watch: http://vimeo.com/98246489.

Would anyone take Balotelli over Sturridge right now?

Daniel Sturridge is king right now, the world is at his fingertips, but before January 31, 2011, he was a prisoner, an oppressed striker relegated to the wings and the bench of a Chelsea squad fiercely controlled by a maniacal Italian (that is called 'sarcasm').  Then he was sent out on loan to Bolton, where he scored  8 goals in 12 matches, and seemingly proved his ability up front, even with a lesser supporting cast.  Unfortunately, he got lost in the manager merry-go-round when he returned to Stamford Bridge and was oft-injured the next season-and-a-half.  I guess I should say 'thankfully', since those are the circumstances that led him to Liverpool.

Since joining LFC, he has been pure magic, scoring 31 goals and assisting 10 more in 43 matches (plus 4 goals in 6 cup matches).  He has had one major bout with injury and a few minor ones, which is concerning, but let's just hope that is behind him.  Otherwise, he's been outstanding on and off the field, which the same can't be said of his Italian counterpart.

I just don't understand all the hullabaloo over 'Super' Mario.  There's no denying his talent, but his crap attitude and spotlight antics are not worth the distraction.  I have no problem saying he was the reason City aren't three time champions, his efforts on the field were far less than off.  It's hilarious that he became such a prolific scorer for Milan, at least for the remaining of the 2012-13 season, I'm sure his lack of performance at City during the first half of the season was the Blues' fault and not his.

While I'm convinced Balotelli is more talented than Sturridge, he desperately lacks the maturity, self-respect, and work ethic that the latter displays.  Can you imagine how Balotelli would have reacted to having to play out of position for years (and young, developing years at that) like Sturridge did at Chelsea?  He would have cried and complained until his hair turned whatever color it hasn't been yet.

If there is any indication that he may be maturing and becoming more of a team player, it's the fact that he had 6 assists last season, that's 4 more than he had in any season at City and 3 more than he had his whole time there.  I won't hold my breathe though and with all that said, watch him go out and score a brace today, lead Italy to the finals, and get the most outstanding player of the tournament.  He and Sturridge are certainly both capable.

Gerrard is better than Pirlo

I have all the respect in the world for Andrea Pirlo, he is one of the few Italians that I admire, and that says a lot because I have no love for Gli Azzuri.  (There's too much blatant corruption and disrespect for the game in Italy, a history of rewriting itself for it's own greater good, but this blog is not about Italian football so I'll bite my tongue for now.)

He is not better than Gerrard though.  He does do some things slightly better, but overall, Gerrard is superior.  When I think of Pirlo, I think of George Best's quote about David Beckham: "He cannot kick with his left foot, he cannot head a ball, he cannot tackle and he doesn't score many goals. Apart from that he's all right."  Of course, Pirlo can kick with his left foot (though not penalties, right RVP?) and he's more than just all right and certainly preferred over Beckham in almost all facets, except for maybe self-marketing.

                                           Pirlo                   Gerrard
goals (pens)                           4                      13 (10)
assists                                    6                         13
pass %                                88.5                      86
chances created                    68                        67
successful dribble %              71                        71
dispossessed per                  1.2                       0.5
turnovers per                        0.3                       0.5
successful tackles                  43                        98 
tackle per match                   1.4                       2.9
tackle %                               29                        52
interceptions per                   1.3                       1.4
clearances per                      0.5                       2.7
dribbled past                        1.6                       0.6
blocked shots                       0.2                       0.4

As the stats above tell, Pirlo is slightly the better passer, chance creator, and is less error prone, but the Italian Medallion benefits from playing in a league better suited for a pace-challenged, technique-reliant 35-year-old.  It's no secret that Serie A is a slower-paced league, though I would disagree that the Prem is technically inferior (that's a subject for another day).  Also Pirlo makes less errors mostly because he is less involved in matches than Gerrard, Pirlo does very little (at least not well) if anything on the defensive side of the pitch.  One thing that did stand out for me though is Pirlo being dispossessed more per a match than Gerrard, I would figure with Stevie-G's more risque style, he would fall short in this category.

Compared to Gerrard, Pirlo is a defensive liability.  If he wasn't brilliant on the ball, he'd long be out of work. Gerrard doesn't just top Pirlo in nearly every defensive stat, he dwarfs him.  Though Pirlo's age does figure in his ability to contribute defensively as stats show he has become less involved over the years.  Regardless of all this info though, club football and international football (especially World Cup) are two vastly different animals.  So at the very least, Gerrard is better and more valuable at the club level.

Andriy Voronin's international career may be over

Well aside from Ukraine boss Oleg Blokhin taking some cheap shots at our boy, which I'll get to in a minute, Andriy Voronin, the bard arse striker we got on a free transfer from Leverkusen this past summer did not take kindly to his International manager's words late in his country's 2-1 loss to Italy yesterday. Voronin assessed the situation which led to a toe-to-toe confrontation by saying that his coach patronized him which was something that he as a man was not going to stand for.

Blokhin sounds like a real idiot to me and if Voronin never plays another match under the clown, you know I won't shed a tear. After the match, the Ukrainian manager had some alarmingly unprofessional things to say about his player. It was almost as if he was trying to pass the blame of the loss and his country's dire chances of qualifying for the Euro onto Voronin.

He basically called the player unfit, said he weakened the squad when he was on the pitch and was the reason that Italy scored their second goal. That's funny, a striker is the reason the other team scoring? What? Was he playing behind the midfielders and defenders? That's ridiculous.

I, for one, could care less. Voronin isn't getting any younger and at 28, doesn't have many years of top level ball left in him, so if he never plays for his country again, all for the better. The fact that he didn't even start against Italy should be enough to tell him that he's not really wanted there anyhow. I can understand Shevchenko starting in front of him, but not anyone else including Andriy Vorobei nor Oleksiy Byelik. The less he plays for his country, the more likely he'll be fit for us, which is why I expect him to play Saturday.

Graham Poll: Crouch targeted at World Cup

Former International and England referee Graham Poll has revealed that officials at last year's World Cup were told to keep a close watch on the Three Lions' Peter Crouch. He claims that they went as far as watching England warm-up matches so they would know what to look for, emphasizing the way the lanky striker uses his arms. A biased against an English player in the World Cup in Germany? Crazy.

A player being targeted by refs seems a serious subject to me, yet I've seen very little about it in the media. I know the German, Italian, and most other non-English European media will ignore any subject regarding discrimination against England and an English player, but if there is any truth to this, something should be done. Maybe England should just resort to the corrupt and cheating tactics of their European competitors, as it looks like that's the only way they're going to get a 'fair' deal in international competition.