Cod Almighty | Diary

Diary - Monday 6 September 2010

6 September 2010

Mardy Diary writes: Let's get physical. Physical. I want to get physical. Let's get a-physical. Or not. A lot has been said about the need to be strong and physical to get out of the Conference, but I'm sure everyone was saying that when we dropped down to the fourth division. Of course, you need to compete, so yes, you have to be physical and strong to a point - in any division - to compete. But not just physical, other things too. Luton were physical, York were physical - but neither team really added anything else to that. Sure they'll create chances, just through sheer brute force - but many chances? Not really. Histon, on the other hand, weren't physical. And so we have this strange situation where former League clubs assume that you need to be a really physical, strong side to get out of the Conference, whereas your traditional non-League teams seem to want to try and play football. I'm pretty sure Burton weren't a bunch of super-hard hoofers when they went up, and I doubt whether AFC Wimbledon are either (with an average squad age of 22).

So, let's not make the mistake that every team we play will try to kick lumps out of us. I've seen a fair bit of Conference North football over the past few years, and I've never seen teams try to kick the crap out of each other. I've seen teams try (and fail) to play football. I've seen players who looked young and lightweight, or old and slow. But not teams of hoofers trying to batter each other half to death. I've seen players trying to get in to the Football League, and players who've been in the Football League. We need to be strong, and compete - but no more so than we needed (and failed) to in the past ten years.

Which brings me on to my second point, really - which is that the game is largely the same as in the Football League, but with less ability. As it is down the tiers of the Football League. If a centre-back fails to make a 40-yard precision pass, or a winger fails to beat his man every time, or a shot goes wide, or a midfielder doesn't make a tackle here and there, or a player is a bit old and slow or young and inexperienced, or a decent looking player is a bit injury prone - that's because this is Conference-level football, people. The point at which any of our players become complete, faultless, injury-free players is the point at which they will move to a club higher up the league. That isn't to say that there isn't still a standard that we expect the team and players to reach - of course there is, and that standard should be high for this league.

So yes, we should expect a better performance against Hayes and Histon, because we didn't compete. And we should expect that players will be fit and will try. But we shouldn't expect a winger to play like some Premier starlet. We shouldn't be surprised and groan when a brick-shithouse central defender whacks the ball up field to clear his lines. And Mark Lever can make all the criticism he likes on the radio, but that's exactly what he used to do in the fourth division. Not that I think Mark Lever was rubbish, but just that I remember two things (mainly) about how he played: one - he would put his head where others feared to put their boots, and two - he did that ridiculous side-footed clearance all the time which ended up with the ball spinning directly up in the air about 15 foot. But I still thought he was great. Just flawed. Tillson, of course, he was a footballer. But then he didn't stick his head in dangerous places. And he was great - and got signed by a club further up the league.

So look back at those great teams with a critical eye: Sherwood would rarely venture from his line, Cunnington would only pass sideways, Rees didn't score much and was always trying backheels, Childs would drift in and out of the game, Woods was slow, Alexander was clumsy, Reece and Gilbert were small, Birtles and Futcher were old, Lever would lump the ball forward, Jobling lacked spatial awareness. Cockerill, er. Hmm. Anyway, they were a great team and a great set of players, but not without flaws. That's why they were playing for us in the third/fourth division. But we didn't go on and on about their weaknesses - we celebrated the great things they did. So let's hope that we look back similarly on the current squad, and let's give them the chance to show us what they can do without fear of their frailties being over-examined.

And if we get to the end of the season and they didn't try and they were rubbish, then they'll join a different list of players (mainly filled with names from the last ten years). But let's not assume right now that this will be the case, eh?

As you've probably guessed, there isn't really any news today, which is why I'm wittering on instead. However, the youthers have continued their good start to the season - now seven points from their opening four fixtures. Although, actually - that's a worse points-per-game average than the first team. Booo Fenty - sack that clown Stockdale!