Barclay Talks Sport

Take a look at this piece from the arch publicity seeker himself.

Here, encapsulated, is why I am driven mad by the tunnel-vision of football managers. Here goes the 'special one', handing out criticism while being unable to draw parallels with his own team. Nestled in the piece is a bit about diving...

It was the statement that Man Utd have won the odd game (at least) due to the diving antics of Christiano Ronaldo. And maybe they have. Ronaldo does fall down easily. I'm not defending him. But the clear inference is that Chelsea do not benefit from such behaviour. I have two words for you Jose: Arjen Robben. A man in the blue shirt of Chelsea who is surely knocked over by falling autumn leaves such is his paucity of strength and balance.

And both players are far too good to need to dive which is another story entirely and please don't get me started on that or I'll develop a Homer Simpson-sized stress bump. Oh just a bit then... have some pride, damn you. Most of us would sacrifice close relatives to be blessed with your skill. So why are you in such a hurry to drop to the ground rather than show it off at every possible moment? And more often than not you chose to drop like a snared weasel when to stay on your feet would be so much more advantageous. Develop some backbone, please.

Oh and finally, Jose, every team wins games they don't deserve. That's how teams win titles and trophies. Like you did on Sunday. Work it out.

If you, like I did, watched the six nations clash between Ireland and England on Saturday, you too might find it hard to focus on the game itself. This is because the British national anthem was played at Croke Park, the scene of the Bloody Sunday massacre of 1920 when British auxillaries gunned down players and supporters in a revenge attack.

There are people alive today whose friends and relatives died that day and you could be forgiven for assuming the Irish crowd would react negatively to the anthem being played at the scene of such an emotive historical event. But not only did they applaud the English team out on to the pitch, like all rugby crowds treat their opposition, they stood in respectful silence while God Save The Queen was played and applauded warmly afterwards. It brought a lump to the throat, it really did.

I'm posting this in the football section too because every moronic anthem-booing England fan should take note of how to behave, how to move on and accept, if not to forgive, the errors of the past. I still have no idea why some England football fans boo opposition national anthems beyond some pathetic attempt to upset that nation's team but I do know that the Irish would have had a stronger case for doing so. 87 years of hurt for starters.

As for the game, England were outplayed in every area of the pitch. We lacked pace in the centre and it was exposed. The Irish pack was more powerful and passionate and the flair was all from the men in green. The kick through for Horgan's try was sublime. We could only really have hurt them on the wings, in my opinion, but the Irish defence strangled our possession, won plenty of our line-out ball and stopped us working it wide. The one time we did, the debutant Strettle scored and he was a bright point for us. England didn't necessarily play too badly, they were just outclassed.

Oh and one final thing... Scotland v Italy. What the hell was that first six minutes all about? I have never seen the like in my life. And if you didn' see it, get a video and watch it. It is amazing and, for an Englishman, extremely amusing.

Have a quick look at this item. Talks about the rescinding of a red card an Ipswich player received in the FA Cup tie against Watford on Saturday.

All fine and dandy; the lad is free to play against Wolves tonight and will serve no ban. Doesn't help with the defeat on Saturday though, does it? And it cannot be argued that the sending off did not influence the game. It clearly did. We played with 10 players for 45 minutes, a massive disadvantage that proved to be totally unnecessary.

I'm not going to have a go at the ref but this is surely a case for video review immediately following the incident. There are a few decisions that change games so dramatically that there should be no doubt the correct decision has been made. A sending off is one. A penalty is another. The ball crossing the line or not for a goal is a third. I firmly believe that the captain of each side should be able to appeal three decisions in a match and have them assessed by a video ref. If the appeal is upheld, you still have your three strikes. If not, you lose one. It happens in some tennis tournaments already and adds to the excitement rather than diminishing it. Rugby and cricket have adopted video for key decisions too.

Crucially, it does not undermine the official. Actually, they often get it right. And before the cries of anguish over how it will strangle the spectacle gain too much volume, I suspect that most decisions could be reviewed in the time it takes for the average milling throng of outraged players to be waved away by the referee to allow a restart.

So much can rest on a game these days. Jobs can be lost. Teams relegated with the disastrous financial implications that can have. And in this particular case, a good footballing spectacle was ruined by a wrong decision. Fans deserve better than that. And referees need all the help they can get because they truly are alone out there.

Football must look at technology and use it appropriately. This is appropriate and it will not ruin the pint-after-the-match debate one jot because three appeals is not a big number in 90 minutes. Think about it.

I really didn't think I'd be speculating on this. Not so long ago, with the Aussies pulping England in the Ashes series and then destroying both England and New Zealand in the tri-nations one day series league games, it would have been a ridiculous question to ask. But now, with the World Cup just around the corner, there are serious cracks appearing in the armour of the invincibles.

First, from nowhere, England beat them three times; and did so reasonably comfortably to win the tri-nations tournament. And in the last six days, New Zealand have pulled off a quite stunning 3-0 whitewash. They condemned the Aussies to their first ten wicket defeat in a one day international and followed that up by chasing down 336 and then 346. Extraordinary stuff. And those last two defeats must really damage morale. Any side that scores 300+ must surely expect to win.

Perhaps that is the problem. Perhaps Australia's unshakeable belief in their ability has led them into complacency. I won't accept injuries and players resting as reasons either. Every team suffers injuries. England were not at full strength their whole tour and in the last ODI, New Zealand had no Vettori, Oram or Bond. Key players. The team that takes the field must be the best available and be expected to perform. Anything else is unprofessional.

Here's a match report of the last ODI NZ vs Aus

So will the Aussies still win the World Cup? They are a formidable team. At full strength a fantastic side. But they are coming off a run where no one was injured and no one out of form and are discovering they do not have the strength in depth they might have imagined. I'm not sure I'd make them out and out favourites now. For so long, their assumption that they would win was infectious and oppositions had beaten themselves before a ball was bowled. But now England and New Zealand have punctured the balloon.

Don't get me wrong. Any side taking it easy against the Aussies will get slapped badly. But teams can now go against them knowing they are prone to pressure and are beatable. That blunts their most powerful weapon. I think the great thing is, it leaves the World Cup wide open. South Africa, New Zealand, Australia, Pakistan. All can win it. England, West Indies and India? Not so sure but a run of form can take you a long way. They are dangerous sides with match winning players. And never discount Sri Lanka.

The Australian captain, Ricky Ponting has been talking big about his side scoring 400 in a one day international. He may get his wish. My question to him is: But will that be enough to win you the match, Ricky?

Adding fuel to my fire of how well Andy Murray is going to do and how much he is going to achieve, Britain's No.1 has won the San Jose open every night. And yes, I can call him Britain's No.1... this is not an Englishman claiming a Scot on some spurious pretext. Henman was always Britain's No.1 too.

Anyway, enough of that. I'm not going to wax too lyrical but what is important about this victory is the manner in which it was achieved. It began iin the semi final against Andy Roddick, where Murray beat the American using a baseline game, the game at which Roddick, top seed for this tournament, excels.

The final against Karlovich was a triumph of intelligent tennis, determination and supreme shot making. Murray refused to panic as the big aces boomed down, instead watching and learning the rhythm of the Croat's major weapon. He didn't crumble when going a set and a break down. His belief in his ability to tun the match around led to him continuing the things he does best and grinding his way to parity and then into a lead, reading the serve and making sublime returns at times. What is so encouraging about Andy Murray is his capacity not just to learn fast but to apply that learning on the instant. He won the tournament with an ace of his own having run Karlovich ragged with an all court game. Extremely impressive.

No1 at 21. I'm still going with that.

Who cares if it was a penalty in that game on Sunday between Wigan and Arsenal? Wigan's manager, Paul Jewell is raging at the wrong man. For those that didn't see it, Emile Heskey went down in the box after powder puff contact with Arsenal's Flamini. It might technically have been a penalty but the point is this.

All Heskey had to do was keep on running and he would have had a clear shot on goal from closer than 12 yards. He would probably have scored. Instead, he chose to fall over. I absolutely refuse to believe that the contact with Flamini was enough to unbalance him. But Heskey is famous for this. He is a big, strong man but appears to have all the balance of a new born foal on an ice rink. He spends more time on his arse than his feet some games. Sad, really.

So, Mr Jewell, whether or not a penalty should have been given is actually neither here nor there. There should have been no decision to make. Rage at Heskey. Implore him, no, order him, to stay on his feet. He will score more goals and you will win more games. Look inside for the answers to your problems and stop bleating about refs.