There’s a narrative which flows throughout the media and its one on which the likes of Steven Gerrard can exploit when West Ham make their team look a bit silly…’it was all long ball’ ‘they’re too physical’ ‘the coach had to park half a mile away’ ‘the dressing room was too hot’ by the way when did Steven Gerrard become the Goldilocks of football?
The narrative to which I refer is the stereotype of Big Sam: Long ball, physical, archaic football devoid of any guile, grace or style. Whilst I cannot say that these stereotypes are 100% wrong what I can say is that these stereotypes have become a crutch for the opposition if a Sam Allardyce team bests them or gives them a really difficult game.
It’s a get out of jail free card: Sam didn’t mastermind a victory, he didn’t get his tactics spot on, he didn’t do anything other than instruct his players to boot the ball into the box and his players leave stud marks all up and down the opposition’s legs.
Anyone who watched the game between West Ham and Liverpool last Sunday will have seen that West Ham competed with Liverpool, snapped into tackles, pressed them, played good football at times and the incredibly direct tactics which we witnessed in the fixtures against Manchester United and Hull City were simply not employed.
Yet Steven Gerrard the captain of England instead of giving credit where its due would rather lurch onto that crutch, that narrative of Sam Allardyce ‘the caveman’ and his band of neanderthals played every dirty trick in the book to disturb saintly Liverpool and make them look a bit ordinary.
Its not only Gerrard; other managers/players have said the same thing; Alan Pardew for example when we drew 0-0 against Newcastle at St James’ Park blamed the Toon’s shortcomings on a direct West Ham performance despite Sam’s side playing the better football that day.
It must be wonderful for the likes of Gerrard and Pardew to fall upon the narrative of Sam Allardyce which is so familiar in the press/media safe in the knowledge that gullible journalists/pundits/fans will eat it up as the gospel truth.
Ever wonder why so many managers/opposition players slag off Big Sam? It’s because on occasion his teams give them a hard game, make them look a bit average and dare to even take points off them and rather give credit where its due, they’ll harp on back to the well known stereotype to cover-up their own shortcomings.
maybe i watched a diffferent match to you, all i saw was long balls aimed at carrol. yes in the first half it was pretty equal, but in the second half there was only one team in it.
So it’s a “narrative” but the only goal was achieved by punching the opposition goalkeeper from 2 meters away and the only other near goal was a header from a 60 meter hoof. Narrative indeed.
The article focuses on current largely irrelevent details. The bigger picture is whether big Sam is going to be remembered for the sort of football that West Ham are remembered for. I can still just about remember the days when West Ham produced great players and played football as it should be played but that is only because i go back a long way and have a good memory.
Stats from Opta:
Liverpool and West Ham both attempted the same total number of long passes during the game (48). The trouble is that this isn’t a real measure. As a percentage of overall passes, the long ball was used by the teams respectively:
14.9% for West Ham: 48/(48+274)*100
7.75% for Liverpool: 48/(48+571)*100.
So in essence, West Ham used the long ball nearly twice as often as Liverpool. Gerrard wasn’t really wrong.
No mention of me? Surely I was the most damning of your caveman tactics.