Assessing Frank Lampard's Chelsea...

Firstly, I have to confirm that I adore what is going on at Chelsea. We have a club-legend-manager who is proving to be entirely competent, a glut of young talents finally showing their incredible worth, and a widely praised style of attacking football. Win or lose, it feels like these are halcyon times for Chelsea.

However, with so much positive feeling emanating from the club, a note of caution ought to be sounded. What Lampard has accomplished in his so far brief stewardship is impressive, but how much more work is needed before Chelsea challenges for the biggest cups?

In my view, there are three characteristics that define a truly great team: Identity, Quality and Consistency.

So where does Lampard's Chelsea stand against these qualities?

IDENTITY

Having a certified identity, or style of play, is important because it makes a team greater than the sum of its parts. This is evident because teams with lesser players can overcome the odds if they have a well practised mode of play and/or a cunning plan. If a team has an identity it plays like a team and thus benefits commensurately.

The most admirable aspect of Lampard's tenure so far has been his ability to impose a clear identity on his charges. Chelsea play forward with urgency, press high and work extremely hard. They play a possession game with purpose and verve. In this sense Lampard has planted the seeds of a dominant team that piles on relentless pressure.

QUALITY

Typically, the most successful teams have the best players. Unfortunately, Chelsea does not have the best. Although the likes of Rudiger, Kante, Jorginho and Willian constitute a sprinkling of experienced and excellent players, they are fast being overwhelmed by the youth. These players, like James, Pulisic and Hudson-Odoi, have played very well but are ultimately unproven. If they and the others blossom into the players they are expected to become, Chelsea can look forward to fielding one of the best teams in Europe at some point in the next ten years. However, that blissful state is not now.

The most concerning sector of this Chelsea team is the defence. As young players, it isn't surprising to see Zouma and Tomori have a few mistakes in them. However, going forward we can see that Kurt's physique and Fikayo's heroics contain immense promise. Chelsea's quality really falls down in the full-back area. Azpilicueta has been a hero, but his powers are fading both going forward and back. His crossing is appalling and defensive mistakes are creeping into his game. Crosses going over his head seem to invariably result in concessions. On the other side, we have Alonso. He can only be described as lumbering - his only qualities being taller than his winger counterpart and scoring odd goals. 

The best teams have great full-backs - Chelsea doesn't. James shows huge promise and should begin starting ahead of Azpilicueta soon, and hopefully Emerson can prove to be more enterprising and energetic than Alonso.

CONSISTENCY

To win the biggest trophies a team must perform at a high level every single game. They must attack effectively, expecting to score every game, and defend well, expecting to concede no more than one goal if any, every game.

Alas Chelsea are nowhere near achieving such a state of consistency. Although Chelsea's success thus far cannot be underestimated, it is also true that they have rarely owned a match in its entirety. Perhaps the most consistent things about Chelsea right now is their penchant for conceding goals. Obviously, this is mitigated by scoring more than the opponent, but this attitude is historically catastrophic. Having to score three goals to get a result every game is surely not the challenge Lampard is setting his players.

Furthermore, Chelsea have failed to get positive results against any 'big' team. I suspect this trend will persist throughout the season because we cannot be relied upon to keep clean sheets. Games against the best are often tight, where the margins come into play. Being consistent demands beating both the better and lesser teams since the three points are always the same.

Finally, Chelsea's home record isn't impressive. The most successful teams have crushing home records that intimidate opponents. At this juncture, my feeling is that teams coming to Stamford Bridge know there's a result to be had. This expectation must be deflated emphatically if home games are to be profited from in the long-run.

Overall then, Chelsea have a long journey to travel before the major trophies return. Nevertheless, the future is bright. The young players will eventually infest the entire England team. And with great players playing a particular way as a team, the consistency will follow.

KTBFFH

Same Treaty, Another Brexit Betrayal

Boris has come back with an amended Withdrawal Agreement (treaty) and a Revised Political Declaration (RPD). He has painted it as a wonderful 'deal' that delivers Brexit. 

Credit where it is due, he as essentially gotten rid of the Backstop that essentially gave the EU a veto on the end of Britain's transitional period. England, Scotland and Wales will eventually leave the Customs Union and Single Market. The fate of our compatriots in Northern Ireland however, is dubious.

But while all the attention has been on a border in Ireland, we have forgotten that this treaty is virtually identical to May's Deal. This same treaty that was voted down three times by our prevaricating and faithless Parliament.

However, a cursory look over the RPD shows how deplorable and unacceptable this treaty is. You can see why the Spartans (Brexiteers who never voted for May's Deal), couldn't abide it.

The following quotations from section no.77, entitled "Level Playing Field for Open and Fair Competition", prove that the EU is terrified of us becoming a successful economy independent of their undemocratic regulations. Note that we, having left, will also have no influence on those regulations whatsoever.

Let's pick out some salient and sickening sections:

'The Parties should... commit... [to] the standards at the current high levels provided by the existing common standards. In so doing, they should rely on appropriate and relevant [EU] and international standards, and include appropriate mechanisms to ensure effective implementation domestically, enforcement and dispute settlement."

We will have 'appropriate mechanisms' to force us to comply with EU regulations?! EU bureaucrats and courts will continue to have more influence over the rules running our economy than we will! 

Outrageous. 

But there's more if you can stomach it - do you wonder what areas of our national life will be dictated by the EU?

'...The Parties should uphold the common high standards in the [EU] and United Kingdom at the end of the transition period in the areas of state aid, competition, social and employment standards, environment, climate change, and relevant tax matters.'

This basically hands over control of every lever of our economy to Brussels. And what the fuck are 'relevant tax matters'?! Is Boris seriously agreeing to align our tax regimes in a perpetually binding international treaty? This beggars belief. I cannot begin to fathom this sickening turn of events. 

Furthermore, our poor fisherman, so totally hamstrung by the EU that they cannot fish their own waters while watching EU trawlers loot them with higher quotas, have also been screwed: (section 72: 'Fishing Opportunities')

'...The Parties should cooperate on the development of... rational management and regulation of fisheries, in a non-discriminatory manner. They will work closely with other coastal states... to manage shared stocks.'

Shared fucking stocks?! The fish in our waters are ours. An 'independent coastal state' should be able to discriminate against foreign fishermen stealing from our waters.

The degradation of our national sovereignty is enshrined in this heinous document.

The EU is shafting us and Boris Johnson is part of it. All he has accomplished is polish a huge stinking shit.

It is clear that the EU is wholly unwilling to let us leave in a way that respects our yearning for freedom from their institutions. If it was not obvious before, it is now - the only way to honour the 17.4 million votes of 2016 is to leave without any agreement whatsoever, whatever the supposed economic consequences.

However, I fear that this one path to redemption will be foregone by our treacherous Parliament. Jean-Claude Juncker, President of the EU Commission, has already said that an extension will not be granted. He has blackmailed us. On Saturday Parliament will have to vote either for May's Deal or No Deal. The EU has given them no other way out. 

Hopefully, that horde of brazen Remainers will be too stupid to realise that this treaty is tantamount to staying in the EU - which is what they want despite all their pathetic blather about confirmatory referendums and 'people's votes'. But I suspect the likely result will be our Parliament accepting this treaty, thereby dooming us to eternal 'cooperation'.

To paraphrase Winston Churchill: This is not the end, this is not the beginning of the end, rather it is the end of the beginning. 

The struggle for freedom from the EU will continue. Will it ever end?

 

Sleepwalking with Boris Johnson

Before I begin I want to say that I am no fan of Boris Johnson. However, I will give him credit where it's due - during his leadership campaign he said many things I approve of. But what Boris says and what Boris does are not necessarily the same thing. He has said and done things in the past which lead me to be skeptical about his character and intentions. Yet he might be exactly what this country needs. Nevertheless, I am reserving my judgement until the day after Halloween.

That being said, the point I want to make is this: 

People who shout the loudest tend to have the most to hide. 

Some people think it's clever to cry foul when they're the one who farted...

A New York state attorney general who rose to prominence by apeing the feminist #MeToo movement is being taken to court not only for assaulting women, but for using campaign funds to quietly shelve the accusations...

I'm not saying everyone who complains about pot-holes secretly takes a pickaxe to their streets, but as Aesop said 

"Those who cry the loudest are not always the ones who are hurt the most".

So how does this relate to our Prime Minister?

Because as soon as his ascent was announced all the usual suspects cried out the loudest. These folks seem to believe that Boris = Apocalypse. No one has offered any explanation as to why this is the case. If he is indeed the Four Horsemen tell me why? Show me your crystal ball.

So if you are reading this and you have publicly expressed distaste/horror/despair because Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson is the Prime Minister, I'm calling you out.

I suspect you who lament the loudest actually have no idea about him. You are merely parroting the mainstream media narrative. I think you have not looked at his record in any detail whatsoever. 

And the thing is, neither have I. I readily admit I have not done any real research into the man and his deeds. But I am not the one asserting his premiership means the end of the world.

So finally, if you have irrefutable evidence that Boris is the devil incarnate please let me know. If you can't, then you need to wake up. You're sleepwalking.

Climate Change and the UK

The climate changes. It has since the beginning of time.

Whether human-generated greenhouse gas emissions are causing climate change is another question.

That's not the question I will tackle in this article!

However, I did come across some interesting information that really contextualises the debate for the UK. It's about how much CO2 in the global atmosphere the UK is responsible for:

"CO2 levels at present are near 390 part per million of the atmosphere (0.039%)... 
The natural carbon cycle produces 2,960,000 tonnes CO2. 
Mankind's contribution is understood to be 33,500 tonnes which equates to 1.13%. 

The UK contribution of 458.6m tonnes equates to 0.0155%...

So, the UK's CO2 percentage of global atmospheric gas is: 0.0000000604%."

The USA produces ten times more CO2 than the UK.

China produces even more than the USA, not to mention the developing economies of the world.

Given this information, does it make any sense to set a carbon zero emission target by 2050?

Does it make any sense when the Chancellor, Philip Hammond, said hitting such a target would cost £1trillion?

Does it make any sense when taxes on energy companies to subsidise green energy projects are increasing our energy bills by £149 every year? 

Somebody tell me if I'm being illogical here: 

It seems to me that, even if we accept human-driven CO2 emissions are manipulating the planet's climate, it doesn't make sense for the UK to do anything unilaterally. Our supposed influence on the climate is literally zero.

Therefore if the climate change lobby want to save the world from CO2, they have to convince the USA, China and the entire developing world to go carbon zero by 2050.

Sound like madness? Is it impossible? Is this revelation the doom of us all?

Only if you believe CO2 is a problem...

PLEASE VOTE in the European Elections

Leave behind your stance on the European Union; shelve your opinion of the personalities involved; because this election is about Brexit. How we vote tomorrow is a signal to our government and the world - do we want in or out?

The strangest thing is that we already voted on this three years ago...

So actually tomorrow's vote is even more important than many people think. Dig below the smears and half-truths and we see that tomorrow is about democracy in Britain. Does our government implement the result of referendums or not?

33.6 million people, a huge 72.2% of the electorate voted in 2016. Between us we decided to Leave the EU. It was clear, legitimate and everyone accepted it. That's how democracy works.

Imagine if in 2014, the Scots voted to leave the UK. Three years later Westminster has not implemented independence and is actively thwarting it? There would be a righteous uproar! It would be braveheart all over again.

But then March came and went. The government broke it's promise to leave the EU. And then suddenly the Remain opinion leapt from the woodwork. Many who voted Remain changed their tune. No longer did they accept the result of the greatest democratic event in British history. This government, by breaking it's promise, has shown the entire country that it's ok to overturn a democratic result. That is pernicious, duplicitous and ultimately decadent. The values our ancestors fought for have become dust.

If we don't leave the EU in October you will know that your vote is as worthless as a vote in Turkey or China. I can't overstate this. Funding, milkshakes, posters, Farage and Cable - they're all irrelevant. The true question is this: Is our government democratic or is voting just a show to sell us the illusion of control? Voting for the Brexit Party is the best way to safeguard democracy in Britain.

It's that important. If we don't leave the EU this year that's the end of British democracy.

And since this is my last chance to influence anyone before tomorrow's vote I'd like to draw your attention to the rich irony in all of this: voting for MEP's is pointless. The European Parliament is the most magnificent, expensive and powerless legislature in Europe. So it is kinda funny that in this instance, voting to put our people in it has become a powerful symbol of democracy!

Let me prove it with the briefest research... The following quotation is from the European Parliament's own webpage entitled 'What are the European Parliament’s powers and legislative procedures?' 

'In areas such as taxation, competition law and Common Foreign and Security Policy, the European Parliament is “consulted”. In those cases, Parliament may approve or reject a legislative proposal, or propose amendments to it, but the Council is not legally obliged to follow Parliament's opinion...'

'Although it is up to the Commission to propose new EU laws, Parliament can take the initiative by requesting the Commission to submit a legislative proposal... If the Commission refuses, it must explain why.' [lol]

So when it comes to the most important subjects the European Parliament is nothing more than a talking shop; neither can it force legislation on the agenda, and take it from me, they can't change existing legislation because that requires new legislation! Instead, the unelected bureaucrats in the European Commission, who like nothing better than suiting the needs of giant corporations, run the show.

It's no wonder that our average turnout for EU elections is 38%. We're instinctively wise to it. Everyone knows deep down that voting in EU elections is utterly inconsequential. I dearly hope this feeling doesn't infect our future general elections and referenda...

I could talk all day about the crazy iniquities baked into the EU, but let me finish with a big picture detailing what the EU has done for us:

When we joined the EEC [EU] in 1973, Britain had thriving industries: aerospace, cars, ships, steel, fish; you name it we had it. Our working class worked. But then the 70's became an economic catastrophe. In the 80's Thatcherite medicine was as bad as the disease. In the 90's London prospered. Tony Blair opened our borders to eastern Europe and gave away our sovereignty. In the noughties Gordon Brown gave all our money to the banks and more sovereignty to the EU. We are only just recovering and still our working class are bereft. There is no manufacturing in Britain because we are just a small region in the EU - Germany does all the making, London does financial services. The rest of us? The EU doesn't care.

In return for our cataclysmic industrial decline we get what? Passport free travel? What have we given up? Just about everything: control of our borders, control of our laws, control of our waters, incredible amounts of our money, and control of our economy. And if we're not careful and leave while we can, they'll have our democracy too. The soul of our nation is at stake - vote Brexit Party.

Rule Brittania 

What is Democracy and why is it Important?

A couple of weeks ago I wrote a blog describing my journey from a Remain voter in 2016 to an avid Brexit supporter today. In that article I asserted that the credibility of democracy in the United Kingdom is now in question. That's because our politicians have miserably failed to take us out of the EU as promised. Following on from that I'd like to be reminded what democracy is, and why it's important. I won't be approaching this question academically, rather I will talk as plainly as I can and from the heart.

What is democracy?

Let's use a dictionary definition:

"government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system."

Let's break that down into sections relevant to our context:

"Government by the people" = We, the people of Britain, govern ourselves - no one else.

"...supreme power is vested in the people..." = British voters are in charge here - no one else.

"[supreme power is] exercised by... their elected agents..." = Via elections, we choose agents who exercise our supreme power for us. These agents are our servants and our will is their command.

"[agents are elected] under a free electoral system." = British voters suffer no impediment or intimidation when we vote. We are not obliged to vote because we are free. If we vote, our choice is never wrong, it is right - and our birthright.

Is democracy important?

Democracy is our way of life. Whether you vote or not, whether you think politics has any influence on your everyday existence, the fact is you live in a country built, shaped and ruled by your fellow voters - past and present.

Why is there a police force that enforces the law? Because two-hundred years ago our elected representatives voted them into existence. Why is smoking banned in public places? Because thirteen years ago it was voted for by our agents in Parliament. Why is this nation leaving the European Union? Because three years ago we voted to leave...

You may feel distant from politicians and the political process; you might feel that nothing ever changes whatever you vote; but it is clear that the everyday bubble we inhabit at home and at work has been made by past political decisions. If you know this then you know that politics could change your bubble beyond all recognition.

Our ancestors spent mountains of treasure and shed rivers of blood so that we could live free in a glorious democracy. Your vote next Thursday in the European Union Elections is a precious privilege handed to us by their sacrifice.* We should also consider that their fight did not only guarantee our way of life, it also saved that of countless millions world-wide. I shudder to think what Europe would look like today if Britain and the Commonwealth had not stood alone in 1940...

To live in the UK is to be envied. Why do so many people from all over the world want to live here? We are compassionate, strong, safe and rich by comparison; but most of all, we are free. We keep it that way thanks to our functioning democracy. Billions of people in the rest of the world are not so lucky. Remember it well, because there may come a time when, like our heroic forbears, we are forced to fight for our way of life.

In conclusion, democracy gives every single Briton a stake in their destiny. Democracy is a fundamental aspect of our way of life. Democracy is a gift from our ancestors. Honour their memory – cherish, use and protect your vote.

Rule Britannia

*I fully appreciate the irony of promoting democracy with regards a European entity that isn't democratic. I will be talking about this in my next blog.

My Brexit Story

June 2016: I voted Remain. 

I didn't do it because of any attachment to the European Union, I voted that way because it was the sensible option. I thought it was rash to make such a momentous decision in the fevered atmosphere of a viciously partisan referendum. I argued tooth and nail with friends, family and anyone who cared. I was utterly convinced of my righteousness. Common sense would prevail, I was confident...

Imagine my anguish when Remain did not prevail. It struck me like a physical blow. In a fit of pique I decided to ignore politics until Brexit happened. Nothing else mattered until it was finished. I was disgruntled, but I accepted it. So I waited.

General Election 2017: The main British parties both commit to delivering Brexit in their                                                            manifestos.

Over time the pain lessened and was replaced with anticipation. Britain's future and the path of its people was no longer a single highway. It had become a road-map, a plethora of paths from which we would choose. An independent, British future beckoned us all. So I waited.

March 2019: May's Deal or no-deal? 

When our politicians failed to do what appeared perfectly straight-forward i.e. Leave, I was non-plussed. When the 'deadline' was delayed once and then twice I was flummoxed. When it was pushed back to October, a full six months after we were meant to have left, I knew then that something was horribly wrong.

It dawned on me that our politicians might not do this.

They are betraying Brexit. They are cravenly and openly defying the democratic will of the British people. If you don't believe it I'm not surprised. I found the notion that our political class, minus some exceptions, would actively go against us is hard to fathom. Yet we all know subconsciously that these politicians have always pretended with us: The way they dodge questions, the way things happen despite widespread opposition (e.g. The Iraq War), the way promises are routinely broken. But ultimately we elect them to run the show, so we let them.

However, failing to leave the EU is the final ignominy. It is directly and obviously contravening the will of the British people. Every second we remain in the EU is treachery grown larger. They are betraying us all! If you doubt it now, what will you think if we haven't left by November? What will you think if we haven't left by the next General Election in 2022?

The notion that our government is accountable to us is in the balance. This juncture in our history is the most important since 1939. It's that fucking serious - no joke. I cannot convey strongly enough the gravity of this crisis. We all face this question: Who rules this United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland? Is it several hundred Oxbridge graduates? Is it several thousand foreign bureacrats? 

No my friends, it is us. But we have to prove it. We must fight for Brexit to demonstrate that we, the people, are in charge of our destiny. Because if we give up, if we allow our votes to become meaningless, then we become slaves. This cannot be allowed.

Rule Britannia.

Chelsea become Arsenal, woe is me!

Chelsea vs Wolverhampton Wanderers 1-1 

10 March 2019

Post-Match Reaction

Chelsea strike me as a team similar to Arsenal under Wenger - lovely football, excessive possession but no results. They will win most of their games (thereby competing for a top four finish), but any team that can defend well with sufficient quality in the counter-attack will succeed against them. How many times did we see Chelsea do exactly the same thing to Wenger's Arsenal? It bordered on the hilarious how obvious the gameplan was against that era's Arsenal team. That's why today's draw is so annoying - it's a sick parody of a method that clearly failed.

However, whereas this Chelsea team has disappointed in the same fashion as Wenger's Arsenal, it isn't for the same reason. Wenger had years to build a team which suited his style of play yet it was never good enough to win consistently against all types and levels of opposition. Sarri is miscarrying because his style of play does not suit this Chelsea squad. This fact was disguised by his initial undefeated streak. But where Conte employed a tactical sea-change to make a miraculous difference,  that trick with another Italian manager is not working. Conte the pragmatist won by innovating and adapting to the players available to him, Sarri the idealist needs players to adapt to him. This process takes time or money. One player who does not fit into Sarri's method is N'golo Kante.

Kante is not the only misfit in Sarri's 4-3-3, however his situation is emblematic of Chelsea's current problem. Sarri-ball requires a telepathic level of understanding between quick-thinking players who can pass the ball. This telepathy may develop over time, but turning the likes of Kante into an effective ball-player is highly unlikely. The amount of times Kante has received the ball and retarded Chelsea's momentum is sickening. He recovers and intercepts the ball like no one before him, but his imagination on the ball is non-existent. Frankly, this makes him next to useless on Sarri's teamsheet. Despite this, I suppose that his supreme defensive qualities must be included, even if out of position.

Nevertheless, this idea of square pegs and round holes is the only consistent theme in this Chelsea squad. If Kante is apparently irreplaceable on matchday, then the same is true of someone like 'David' Azpilicueta. David is another player defined by his defensive quality, but swinging in a few decent crosses does not make him suitable in Sarri's system. On the other side we have Marcos Alonso, who can be described as a wing-back who finishes. Neither of these players instinctively combine with their teammates with the requisite aplomb. In midfield, Sarri seems to think Kovacic is appropriate. He is good at retaining the ball personally, he makes runs with and without the ball, and he defends well, filling in for his comrades. But who can deny this favoured midfield trio outside of Jorginho is hopelessly unimaginative? For a team which dominates possession, it includes a lot of defensive players...

It seems then, that Sarri's first team is ultimately reliant upon defensive-minded players to play janitor whilst a talented front-four win the game. Unfortunately, Sarri-ball requires every team member to be confident on the ball. That is why he relies on Kepa - he can pass where Cabellero can't. That's why Jorginho is fundamental, he understands the system, retains the ball personally, and passes with imagination; and that's why Luiz is so important despite being well documented as a liability in a central defensive-two.

Therefore, the Chelsea heirarchy are faced with familiar circumstances: relatively poor results with a manager who clearly needs time to implement a strategy. History shows us that a Chelsea manager that fails to keep up with the Premier League's best is fired. Undisputably, this approach has reaped rewards thus far. But doesn't it feel different now? Chelsea may be able to hire the finest managers, but without expenditure comparable to the Manchester clubs, the squad will never compare and never compete. The way to overcome the odds, as demonstrated by Leicester and Conte, is to have a philosophy which gets value from every player by suiting their skills. Sarri has not had the chance to do that yet.

It is my hope then, like so many times in the past, that a manager gets the time to execute their manifesto. Because this time, it's obvious that it will take more than one man to make Chelsea great again.