Juventus' new crest shows football is purely a business not a game.

Juventus' old badge in comparison to the new modern look.

Last night, Juventus unveiled at one of their high profile black and white and more events the future club crest which will stand for Juve in future seasons. Nothing about this new crest says to me that it represents the second longest running football club in Italy and neither does it say the most successful Italian side of all time If anything it feels like one of the lower clubs trying to modernise and attract new supporters and it's confused me beyond belief.

In case you missed it, The Old lady, as they've come to be known, announced a couple of months ago about a rebranding of the club to take Juventus into the future of football. Part of this rebranding would be the high profile and exotic Black and White and More events, how exciting. I kept an eye on it from across the internet in my University room just so I could see how Juventus would take themselves forwards. After showing off promotional footage which looked like it deserved to be at Comicon for a C-rated Superhero movie with it's awful over the top narrator. They unveiled the new "Logo" and I put emphasis on Logo. Juve no longer wants it to be referred to as a badge clearly, throughout the event and the discussion of it on Twitter and across the web they constantly refer back to it as a Logo, not a crest. I am sorry but for me, my club's crest is not a logo, a crest represents a football club and a logo represents a business. Which takes me to my point, this rebranding is far bigger than we all imagined. Juventus is no longer just the biggest football club in Italy, it has surpassed that. It wants to become the brand of Italy and the business of Italy.

Realistically, none of this is surprising and to be fair to Agnelli (Juventus Club president or CEO whatever) he stated from the day these events were announced that this rebranding is to make Juventus' business sector far larger than ever before. With the way football is heading, having to compete with the wages that China can offer, Europe's top clubs have to be able to boost their finances in some way to make sure they can sustain competing with the orient and not collapse financially. Juventus have made a smart business move in broadening their horizons and making Juventus far bigger than the stadium, a training complex and a squad of players. Agnelli plans to make Juventus THE footballing brand. A brand that will be connected in any way possible shown by these black and white and more events which each take on different targets and personas. Last nights was aimed at how it will affect the club directly at first glance, hence the unveiling of the new JD sports insignia in Milan. The next few events will discuss taking Juventus forward on an electronic scale, a digital scale and then even further on a physical scale. I don't necessarily think there is anything wrong with that, what I take issue with is the idea that Juventus keeps talking about the new crest as a logo and discussing how big they want to make the Juventus as a brand and how they can make Juventus the go to for sporting wear and even regular clothing, but where does the team fall into this brand?

We've been discussing how the game has been becoming a business for years now and that eventually, owners won't even care about the teams' actual success, caring more about their financial success. Arsenal being the best example in Britain. After moving to the Emirates, Arsenal had to enter a period where they had to be far more financially prudent in regards to transfers and wages. Wenger was fantastic during this period and this is probably why he still has such weight around the club (along with his success he has had) but this financial mindset has stayed inside the Arsenal board, or more predominantly the majority shareholder. It would appear that the powers that be inside Arsenal care more for finishing in Europe purely on financial grounds and not for the club's success. They have the foundation to be one of the best sides in England if they pushed, instead they seem content with how they work currently. Whilst Juventus have had the success to appease their fans, it would seem that they are now going down a route which on the first layer looks to be in support of the club's footballing future, if you look a bit deeper it would seem that it is quite the opposite. 

The whole rebranding move screams business and not football. On a business level Juventus probably are one of the best teams to take this step and if you look at it, not from a footballing perspective, only one or two clubs could have a better foundation to do so. The head of Interbrand, the group who helped organise and structure the rebranding, stated "If there is one club capable of taking that step, it’s Juventus – the brand is synonymous with ambition and excellence and these are principles that can inspire truly unique experiences. The new visual identity has been designed to boldly take the club’s spirit into new, unexpected realms". Even though Juventus are one of the best clubs to take this step into the business world, it is a surprising one for me. They have one of the best fanbases worldwide, and yet this move into unexpected realms will surely lead to a distancing between the club and the fans. This business reboot of Juventus wouldn't have shocked me if someone like Real Madrid or Barcelona had taken that step before them, instead, Juve has made the jump from one of the elite prestigious clubs in Europe to the next brand in sports business. I can't see it stopping there, though, now Juve has done it, I feel that Real, Barca, Bayern and even clubs like United or City taking the step away from sporting club to sporting business.

It's sad to think that our dad's ramblings about sport being a business nowadays is more true than ever.

FA Cup isn't magic anymore, it's an investment.

I don't like the FA Cup, I don't get it anymore. There have been some cracking fixtures in the past and some incredible finals, but really, I don't understand where everyone keeps talking about the "Magic of the FA Cup". What really is the magic of the cup? I was listening to TalkSport the other day and they had Darragh MacAnthony on the show to discuss the Peterborough match against Chelsea. MacAnthony is the owner of Peterborough and gave his opinion on the fixture, explaining that even though he loves the idea of beating a heavy favourite like Chelsea, as unlikely as it may seem, he prefers the financial royalties over the bragging rights. Shocking right? That an owner of a Football club doesn't care as much about the result and more about the add-ons. Wrong. Who cares anymore. It is the same every year that we hear about an upset, one of the big boys' fields a team of reserve players and kids and then they lose because they were complacent or on maybe potentially one of the relegation candidates in the Premier league lose to one of the sides in the Championship, realistically what is magic about that. We mistake luck, complacency and form for magic and then every season as the third round takes place we hear the same worn out sentence "Oh, what an upset, it truly is the magic of the FA Cup". I am bored of it really. 

I sat down and watched the Liverpool vs Plymouth game on Sunday, in all honesty hoping for some goals. Liverpool fielded a team with an average age of 21. Their youngest starting lineup in the club's history and it shows that the club has a bright future if it can keep all these players, however, with youth comes inexperience and watching that game showed how little experience these kids had in running a game. Some might argue that part of the "Magic" is that the future stars get a chance, and in some aspects that's true. Watching Ben Woodburn get a run out for Liverpool, where he looked very promising, may be a sign that some sides are looking to give youth a chance. Realistically, this is once in a blue moon. Klopp would not have given most of the youth players a chance if they had drawn a club in the Championship, maybe even league one. Some may look at it like as giving the kids a chance, I see it more as rotating out the important first team players to keep them fit for the league cup game against Southampton.

Maybe the magic is a lower league belief, a feeling of David vs Goliath, a way to put themselves on the footballing map. We all remember how incredible it was when Luton, who were at the time in the Blue square premier, beat Norwich 1-0 at Carrow road. With all fairness, it's an upset. It isn't special simply because it is in the FA Cup, we see upsets most weeks. I don't agree with the magic angle because it falls into the tactical failure category. Luton carried more of the ball and took their chances. Not taking anything away from Luton at all, but what makes this magic in comparison to a normal upset? Let's compare it to Wigan's FA Cup victory over Manchester City in 2013. Now that is the magic of the cup! How could tiny Wigan upset such a powerful side like Manchester City, and in the season they were relegated from the Premier league. In that same season, they managed to win 1-0 at White Hart Lane. Wigan had been infamous for creating an upset, it was crucial to them staying up for as long as they did, they had no magic, but the desire to win far more than their opponents, We could even argue that the FA Cup condemned them to where they are today? A cup run that ended Wigan's premier league stay. Magical.

I feel like this is all coming across as slightly cynical, but in all honesty, I just don't understand the love for it. I have been on the right side and the wrong side of this magic. Cardiff beating Leeds in 2002 was enormous, and whilst I don't remember it first hand, it has become folklore in Cardiff's history. At a time when we were languishing in the lower leagues, we managed to knock Leeds off their perch and even though it was a dark time for the club with Sam Hammam trying to recreate the crazy gang in Cardiff. It definitely made a lot of people feel good and made everyone see how gritty it can be. That is where the FA Cup had magic, back when football wasn't so distant from each other. With the ever growing distance between the Premier league and the lower leagues, these upsets only happen when big clubs play kids. How is that Magic? it's simply throwing complacency back into the faces of the big clubs. The whole "Magic" theme has become a simple way of making sure everyone stays interested and keep the ratings up on the cup and the majority of lower league teams get that, they'll play their full side and the windfall they will receive from an away game at Chelsea may be the crucial tie to help fund some big moves in January.

Is Schneiderlin the answer to Leicester's rut?

Leicester are on the track to have the worst title defence in history, saving Chelsea’s blushes from last season. This lacklustre performance in the league has been attributed down to losing Kante and it was always going to be a hard task to replace him. Ranieri must have felt the burden could be split between Daniel Amartey, who arrived from Copenhagen last January and appeared only a handful of times last season, and new summer signing Nampalys Mendy who has only made 3 appearances so far for Leicester. Currently lying in 15^th, Leicester look uninspired and tired, most likely still carrying a hangover from the celebrations of last season. However, it’s time for a cup of coffee to shake that hangover off because they’re in contention with a relegation battle if they can’t improve in January.

Kante was the star player for Leicester with 175 tackles in the Premier league and 156 interceptions, a rare commodity is finding a player who can top both tackles and interceptions in the same season and by such a margin. His pure energy and endless reserves of stamina made it feel like Leicester had 12 on the pitch. With the comparisons to Claude Makelele, it was clear that Chelsea needed a player like him and off he went to play with serious title contenders.  Maybe signing Amartey in January was preparation for losing the star man, but a much more obvious replacement was Nampalys Mendy. Playing for Nice last season, he received multiple plaudits for his work alongside Ben Arfa, averaging just under 2 tackles a game and 2.2 interceptions. This is barely half on Kante’s stats who managed an incredible average of 4.7 tackles a game alongside 4.2 interceptions. Mendy has featured only twice in the Premier league and clearly isn’t quite ready to be a replacement for Kante, instead, Daniel Amartey has featured in his place. However, the Ghanaian hasn’t produced much better, only managing just under 2 two tackles a game and barely more than an interception a game. I feel this lack of drive and energy in the midfield has been a key reason behind Leicester’s rapid fall.

Morgan Schneiderlin could help fix this. In his three years at Southampton, Schneiderlin managed around 4 tackles a game, his average interception rate in his first season in England was 3.9, whilst this rate dropped to roughly 2.5 he still was a strong tackling force in the defensive midfield area. Since his big money move to Manchester, he has found playing time hard to come by in the North and this has had a negative effect on his statistics. In his 32 total starts since his move in 2015, he has only managed roughly 2.5 tackles and 2.4 Interceptions. Everton are favourites to sign the French Midfielder and whilst he wouldn’t be cheap, I feel it would be a tactical risk. Leicester need to find that bite in their midfield which they lost when Kante left for London and if Schneiderlin could find the form that he left in the South Coast, he’d be invaluable to getting Leicester’s season back on track. No one believed they could match the season they had last year, but I think we all felt they could do far better than this. Schneiderlin could potentially help tape up the defensive holes left by Kante. If they have a spare £24million that is. 

The Poppy in British football

Remembrance Sunday, we will always remember the horrific scenes that happened at the Somme 100 years ago and to remember all those who have lost their lives in the name of the British people in any war since then. A common sight around this time of year is the poppy. A small red badge for all to see that we will remember them and that we are commiserating the lives lost for these Isles, and not only do we see everyday people wearing them but also sewn into special kits for the fixtures that fall onto Remembrance Sunday. Many agree this is a great tradition and shows solidarity, but is the gesture truly what we believe it to be? With the large influx of foreign players in our Premier division and, especially as of late, the Championship, do these players truly understand what the Poppy stands for?
Roughly two years ago James McClean refused to wear a poppy embroidered on his Wigan top during a Championship game. The outcry followed of how the young Northern Irishman had disrespected all those who had lost their lives in the First and Second World Wars. He should be sacked, he should never play again and other over the top reactions followed. Understandably people should be angry that someone could be so disrespectful, and yet they weren't thinking about what else the Poppy represents and this connects to my problem with what the Poppy has become in the Premier league and English football.
The Poppy doesn't just represent those who have lost their lives in the two World Wars, it represents those who have lost their lives serving the British Armed forces in every conflict Britain has been involved in since the end of the Second World War. One of these conflicts that we commiserate includes the Troubles which took place around Northern Ireland from the 1960's until the late 90's. In case any of you reading this need a quick run down on what the Troubles were, it was an attempt by the IRA to claim control of the Ulster area for the Republic of Ireland and was to a large extent a Guerilla War. During the Troubles, the British forces were involved in a horrific slaughter of the Northern Irish people which became known as Bloody Sunday. After a non-violent protest against the planned Internment by British forces refuses to disband, the armed forces in the area proceed to fire on the protestors, killing 14 in the process and injuring several others.
This very event is McClean's reasoning behind the refusal to wear the Poppy. McClean's argument, in short, is that one of the conflicts that our Poppies stands to represent was behind an atrocity that is still haunting the people of Bogside near Londonderry. Should he be forced to wear something which he feels is a betrayal to his people? I believe that by this man not wearing the Poppy, not only is he exercising his right to freedom of speech and belief, but he is remembering those who were affected by the wars we have been involved in. Similar to the way we wear the Poppy to remember the loss of our own, he refuses to wear one to remember his own.
Regardless of whether we believe this to be right or wrong, he has his reasoning and most likely knows far more about it than most of the people who have been mindlessly attacking him for his refusal.

We can see how furious McClean's refusal to wear the Poppy has left some of the population, but what should make you madder, a man refusing to wear the Poppy to stand up for what he believes in or a man who wears the Poppy not knowing what he is representing? The reason we look at each other on the streets and see someone with a Poppy and think "What a good gesture" is because we have made the conscientious decision to spend some of our money to acquire a Poppy and are therefore proud to wear it on our chest. Let's look at it from this point of view, though, imagine if it was compulsory to wear the Poppy, does the gesture remain the same. Eventually, we get to a stage so far distant from what we were intending the gesture to stand for that we forget the point of the Poppy altogether. The point of that little idea? All players in the Premier league are obligated to wear the Poppy unless they specifically ask otherwise, as in McClean's case, but are they, therefore, wearing the Poppy because they feel they are doing the right thing or because they couldn't care whether they wear it or not? This is not to say that secretly Diego Costa is secretly vandalising a war memorial and Robert Huth is humming the German anthem during the minute's silence, but in fact is reminding those that were so angered about McClean actually having a reason to not wear the flower that they have in fact forgotten that the majority of these players in the Premier league most likely couldn't be bothered on whether or not they wear the icon. We are outraged whenever a footballer with actual valid reasons not to wear the Poppy doesn't, but we wouldn't dare stop a person in the street if there jumper or jacket is Poppy-less. It has simply become an extra icon on the kit for most of these players, not necessarily the British ones. The Poppy matters more to us as regular people than those who are representing our sides on the pitch.

This then leads to a far bigger question. Is the Poppy really still what it was made to represent? This year, one of England's World Cup qualifiers falls on Armistice day against their oldest rival, Scotland. A monumental occasion in which both FA's had felt that it would be an honour and their duty to wear poppies on their kits to represent those lost in conflict. A simple request to FIFA to ask if they had the go ahead has led to national outrage after the Football governing body denied this right due to their stance on International sides wearing Religious or Political messages on their kits. This rule is completely understandable, however, this now begs the question of whether or not the Poppy is a Political symbol? Anyone who knows their history understands that the Poppy was chosen because of the opening line of the poem In the Flanders Fields and is purely made to represent those who have lost their lives in the name of their country ever since that inconceivable loss of life. Surely, now, however that the Government has become involved since FIFA's denial of the use of the Poppy for both England's and Scotland's kit during the game, as well as for Wales who had requested to wear the Poppy in their qualifier against Serbia, they have in turn made the Poppy far more than what it was ever intended. Now in this situation, it has become this contorted argument for the British Government against FIFA. No longer is it the right to remember those who we have lost but the way our MP's have reacted has created this pathetic idea that it is us against a group of Bureaucratic millionaires. Sadly, I don't believe we will be allowed to see the Poppy used in this match, and with how the events have unfolded since our Prime Minister has become involved I don't believe we will ever see it involved in the International scene. We all know how stubborn FIFA can be when they are rivalled, and now it will leave them increasingly annoyed that anyone dared to challenge their rules.

Harry Spindler

Arsenal, the dark horses of the season.

7 games into the new season, teams are starting to enter the form that will carry them through the year. Some are languishing near the bottom, others and trotting along within mediocrity and the upper echelon teams are powering through. One of the teams which have impressed me the most is Arsenal. 4 wins, 1 draw and 1 loss is a very nice record to have at this point in the season. 15 goals scored and 7 conceded is a solid start, and whilst some of the teams they have played aren't exactly the best teams in the league, the bigger sides that they have faced haven't been dominant. Let's look at the start, begin as you mean to go on some would say, Arsene Wenger would agree after a 4-3 loss at home to Liverpool. Even though you gain no points from a win, offensively they looked full of quality and scored 3 very nice goals. The defence was the issue in this case. Improvement defensively followed by the next game with a dominant 0-0 draw against the reigning champions Leicester. Whilst no goals were scored, Wenger could sleep well knowing that his side wasn't in any danger of losing that match after Leicester could only manage a single shot on target across the whole 90 minutes. Improvement to defence, now the goals needed to make a return. A dominant 3-1 over Watford, a narrow 2-1 against Soton, 4-1 against a Hull side in disarray and the icing on top of the cake, a crushing 3-0 defeat of Chelsea.

What do these results say about Arsenal, though? A loss is never good to have on the board, along with a goalless draw and only just being able to grab a 2-1 win over a mediocre Southampton you might be thinking "Well how does this make them out as dark horses for the title?". Arsenal started last season with a less than impressive start. Losing to West Ham at home, drawing 0-0 to Liverpool at Home, as well as a loss to Chelsea and very narrow victories over Palace and Stoke damaged Arsenal's season way before it had even begun. Now however Arsenal have dismantled one of their biggest rivals and have been scoring for fun. Whilst I have taken notice of the usual mid-season stumble that Arsenal always experiences, I feel the signings have been adequate and some of the mistakes they have been making over the past few years look to be fixed or swept under the carpet at the very least.

Arsenal look like potential champions, not because of the way they can destroy their opponents but how they can grind out results against the teams who put 11 behind the ball and believe a point is as good as 3. In previous years, Arsenal has always been undone by those sort of teams and have found it impossible to grind out results consistently. Already twice this season both Southampton and Burnley have looked to hold out for a singular point against the London side and on both occasions they have managed to steal all 3 points away from their opponents. Whilst I understand that the Burnley result may have been down to an incredibly large slice of luck seeing as the goal shouldn't have stood, I want to remind you how many times the big teams have stolen all 3 points with lucky goals and unfair advantages. Manchester United are the best example we can use. How many occasions were there when we would speak the day after a United game and all gasp at how unlucky their opponents were to lose the game because of an offside goal or a shot that was ushered in with the player's hand. Luck plays a huge part in the game and most of the time, the luck falls on the side of the bigger sides.

I am definitely not saying Arsenal will ease to the league title this season, however, I am saying that with the right slice of luck they can do it. Man City only have to lose a handful of games, a bump in the road is assured on any side, as we saw with their last match in London. Arsenal simply has to make sure they have less bumps than their rivals. Is that possible? Of course, but Arsenal have always been well known for their bottling ability.

My Potential GB Squad for 2016

Will Team GB make a return to the Olympics in 2016?

In 2012, London hosted the Olympic games for the first time since 1948. As football is an Olympic sport, we were presented with an automatic place in the tournament due to London being the hosts. You would therefore think, that means an English Olympic squad would take part, that would be wrong. The Olympic committee looked upon London 2012 as an Olympic event for Great Britain, not England, therefore meaning a Team GB squad of players from Wales, England, Scotland and Northern Ireland would have to be assembled.

There was stern opposition from the Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish FA's as soon as this idea was proposed, but nevertheless went through and we witnessed the first Competitive appearance from Team GB in 52 years. I, as a Welshman, actually loved the prospect of Team GB. I had no fear that it would take away the integrity of any of the Home Nations' FA's and truly relished the opportunity to see Ryan Giggs, Craig Bellamy aswell as some of the English fringe players take part in a major tournament.

The issue of a Renewed Team GB has popped up again with the large possibility of one of the Home Nations' U-21 teams reaching the quarter finals of their respective tournaments (U-21 European Championships also are the European Qualifiers for the Olympics) and whilst this article may appear to be a little ahead of itself seeing as there is still a long way to go for Qualification, I have put together my ideal Team GB for the Rio 2016 Olympics, and just to clarify the rules, all players must have been born on or after January 1st 1993 with the exception of allowing 3 overage players.

Formation = 4-2-3-1

Goalkeeper - Craig Gordon

I use my first overage spot on my Goalkeeper, Craig Gordon being 32. I was very tempted to pick Jack Butland, who was in the 2012 squad, but felt his lack of football would of been a weakness for the squad. Gordon was a fantastic keeper back at Hearts and showed that skill at moments in his rocky spell with Sunderland. Back into Football with Celtic after two years out, he has shown he hasn't lost a single bit of his quality and has pulled off some sensational saves for the Scottish Giants, whose defence has looked an empty shell compared to last season and having a great goalkeeper has been more important than ever for them. 2012 position - Jack Butland.

Right Back - Eric Dier

Whilst at Spurs he has stated he would prefer to start plying his trade in the centre of the defence, I feel that the ability he showed for Sporting Lisbon and Spurs at right back has been amazing and in a position where the other options either haven't been playing enough or this isn't their natural positon, I feel the prospect could step up and help limit any supply from the right. Callum Chambers was my second option but I feel he has been shaky at Arsenal and has looked a bit lacking in confidence, whilst Dier looks like he is ready for anything, even against Diego Costa and Eden Hazard in the League Cup final.

2012 position - Ryan Bertrand.

Centre Back - John Stones

Roberto Martinez has thrown this man into the starting lineup at the start of the season after the rich vein of form he showed in the latter stages of the premier league last season. This faith in the 20 year old has payed off as even though Evertons season has been far from exciting, their defending has not at all been their issue and John Stones' performances are something the Evertonians can be happy with. Preferred to Distin to partner Jagielka, he has shown he has the potential to be a future England stalwart and would not look out of place with the squad now. 2012 position - James Tomkins.

Centre Back - Ashley Williams

I am using another of my overage positions for my second Centre Back and also my captain. I think with the defence I wanted not just someone who can sit further back from Stones but is also a defined leader in his position, Williams being the captain for Wales and Swansea. He has been a key player for the Swans this season, being a true covering defender as he mops up balls into the box and clears them away, covering for the rest of his team. A team full of youngsters is bound to make errors and to have a defender like Williams, who is linked with a move to Liverpool, in the back will be essential or the young team. 2012 position - Micah Richards

Left Back -  Ben Davies

The player who most would think of here would definitely be Luke Shaw, fits the age gap and has a lot of potential to be an England great, but his move to Manchester has hindered him and his form has not impressed anyone, so he wouldn't really warrant a place here. Ben Davies however has made a move to Spurs from Swansea, and at the risk of being called Bias, is Wales' answer to Shaw, except his move has allowed him to grow more and showcase his ability. His first few appearances for Tottenham were shaky at best but he has grown into his role and many have questioned why he is playing second string to Danny Rose. Alongside Williams there is already a jelled partnership on the left and his ability to cross the ball will help with the attacks. 2012 position - Neil Taylor

Centre Mid - Will Hughes

Dipping into the Championship is no doubt a risk, but his ability he has shown not just for Derby, where he is a key player in their team at the age of just 19, but also for the U-21s's has been magnificent. For me he would be the more roaming playmaker of the two CM's and would try to create the plays from finding space around the pitch and filling in for other players. No doubt does this kid have talent but he also has a very mature look on the game and whilst I could understand why someone may use an overage spot in the centre of the park, I feel Hughes is mature enough to come into a side like this and showcase why people believe he will be a future England star on the level of Gerrard and Lampard. 2012 position - Aaron Ramsey

Centre Mid - Nathaniel Chalobah

Another Championship lad, on loan from Chelsea, Nathaniel Chalobah shocked the Championship fans with his combating displays for Watford, Middlesborough, Forest and now Reading. His main role is a defensive Box to Box, and with his stamina and strength you would have no questions why, being able to go the full 90 minutes at 100% is amazing for this lad and not only can he win the ball with some perfect tackles but he is well known for his ability to smash shots towards the goal and cause havoc in the opposition box. Burnley amazed me with the lack of football they gave him but their loss is Readings gain after they acquired the 20 year old on loan and he has already impressed the royals with one of his stunning long shots as well as his tireless performances. 2012 position - Joe Allen.

Left Wing - Raheem Sterling

Raheem Sterling has really stepped up since the start of the new year, whilst he struggled in the first half of the season, he has reiterated his push for national team caps and has managed to go from appearing off the bench under Dalglish to a key player for Brendan Rodgers. Similar to that of the following Winger Ryan Gauld, he is unpredictable, whilst he is more keen to cut in and draw defenders away from supporting strikers he has a better scoring record than the Scot on the right and would be able to work fluidly with the player I have planned to play in the Centre role. 2012 position - Scott Sinclair.

Right Wing - Ryan Gauld
The young Scot is only our second player from North of the border, but my god does his potential ability warrant a place in this side. In 2014 he made a move to Sporting Lisbon after 2 years with Dundee United's first team, and the performances he put in there deserved him a 3 million Euro move to the Portuguese capital. Whilst questions will be asked about the lack of first team football, for their B team Gauld has impressed like he did in Dundee with threatening runs from the left where you're never sure if he will carry on out wide or leave you for dead with his quick instinct cutting in. Gauld has promise and has already been compared to Scottish Greats like Dalglish and even the Northern Irish legend George Best. 2012 position - Craig Bellamy.

Centre Attacking Mid - Gareth Bale
I don't really think there is much doubt why he is in the squad, even if he is not performing to his best in Madrid at the moment, he is still performing better than most. His ability and skill would be a cherished commodity for an Olympics squad. Accommodating him was the hardest part, his natural position on a pitch is the left side, which is currently being used by Raheem Sterling, then when playing for Madrid he is on the opposite flank, again being occupied by another one of my players. Whilst Raheem Sterling can play in the centre role, I feel he is best equipped for the wing. Bale showed his ability for Tottenham in his last season in England playing in the hole and really just running about the pitch and filling space, a role he has filled for Wales too. At times he can carry any squad on his own, which we saw in the copa del rey final last season, and at times you would need him to do the same for this team. You would have no doubts that he could though. 2012 position - Ryan Giggs

Striker - Harry Kane
If this squad does come about, Harry Kane no doubt has to go to the Olympics, even if he goes to the Euro's too. I can understand that may risk him being worn down but for me if I was being unrestricted in my choice, I wouldn't have to make any hard decisions here. As soon as the idea of this squad came into my mind, he was one of the first in. The form he has been in has been so much more than the spurts of form you saw from players like Januzaj or Wickham from last season, he has just played well, if he hasn't scored he has created the attacks, he is just a good player. Even if the goals dry up, he still plays well for the whole team, an unselfish striker that still scores... how refreshing. Whilst he has only just truly burst onto the scene of the Premier league, he has been decent with loan moves to Orient and Millwall as well as in the English youth teams and with 26 goals in all appearances this season, he is too much of a talent to leave behind. 2012 position - Daniel Sturridge

Substitute shout outs
Whilst these following five players didn't make it into my starting 11 I would say that with their performances they deserve a place in the squad too, I won't go into depth but after looking into their stats or what they could bring, these five would be my bench;
Goal Keeper - Jack Butland

Right Back - Callum Chambers
Centre Mid - James Ward-Prowse
Right Wing - Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain
Striker - Saido Berahino

And finally the manager, this is nearly as important as the players, with young players that you would have in this squad you need a strong man manager who knows how to bring youngsters into squads and get the most out of their talent. Last time around we had the Ex-England U-21's manager Stuart Pierce, I disagreed with this choice as I felt he struggled with the U-21's anyways but I think I would go along a similar path this time around, and by that I mean Gareth Southgate. He has been doing exceptionally well with the U-21's team and if the reason that there is an Olympic football side is because the English U-21's made it to that stage then wouldn't you allow the man who got them there to take the British side over.

The Plight of Black managers

The Football Manager, the man who picks the team, dictates the style of football and sometimes is even the face of the club. However controversy has reared its ugly head once more with the question, where are the black managers in top flight football? Or even more so, where are the black managers in football all together? Off the top of your head how many black managers can you name currently with a team and without? Because before I searched into it I thought that there would be at least one in each level of English football. Alarmingly, I was completely wrong. 

At the start of last season there were only 5 black managers employed out of the 92 opportunities within the top 4 flights in England. The main question however, is why? Why are there so few black managers in England? Recent statements from Ex-England defender Sol Campbell would have you believe that the issue is that the owners of clubs and the suits at the FA are racist and have an agenda against black players and black managers. On the other hand the FA have released a statement arguing that the main issue is that the few black managers that are in the game are simply not good enough at their jobs, neither sides really add up or have enough evidence to back their points.

If we look at the argument that the world of football is racist then we need evidence on this and how do we do this? We look at cases of racism in football, and just for this articles sake I am only looking at racism within English football. Looking at racism cases within English football, the situation has improved hugely over the past 10 years. Previously racism in English football was really handled let alone looked into. Now however as soon as a racist complaint is placed, an investigation is started, this was not the case when players like Stan Collymore and Garth Crooks were abused by fellow players and their own fans. Ten years ago, Millwall were the first club to be punished for racial abuse coming from their fans, which led to radical change in how racism from the fans was handled, as shown in 2009 when John Euell was abused from a Stoke fan whilst he was on the substitutes bench. The fan was dragged out of the ground, banned for life from the Britannia and fined. In the wake of the incident managers came in to back the decision, Harry Redknapp even came in and stated "That is disgusting, there's no place for that in the game. Surely we can't have that sort of behaviour now? Anyone who does it should be put in prison, not banned from football. Stick them where they belong, in the nut-house. It's wrong." Ten years previous and people would barely turn their heads, the way racism is handled has come leaps and bounds and that is why I struggle to agree with Sol's view that racism is the key part in the lack of Black Managers.

However this doesn't mean that racism has no part in the decisions. Due to the older age of most owners, racism was most likely the normality when they were in their youth, and have grown up around it. This is not an excuse, it is a whole new world and just because it used to be like that does not mean it is acceptable today. Some owners who have those tendencies will most likely refuse to look into hiring a black manager, and whilst previously this may have gone under the radar, now that the issue is under the microscope, we are starting to see that potentially teams could be looking past black managers due to the boardroom. This leads me to a potential solution. In Gridiron, or American Football, there is a rule known as the Rooney Rule. The rule states that if there is a vacancy within a coaching team at least one black coach has to be interviewed for the opportunity, a similar rule has been put forward by members of the FA as way of beating this covert racism. Whilst at first glance this looks like a good idea, by allowing this opportunity for Black managers to be interviewed for more club roles when before they may have been overlooked may cause more black people to become involved. However there are two key flaws to this rule. Keiron Dyer and Titus Bramble have before expressed disapproval of allowing black managers this free chance at any job interview just because they are black, Titus went on to say "At the moment, I think the Rooney Rule is a disgrace, I think it’s disgraceful that someone might be shortlisted for the job just because of their skin colour. You could say it’s just as bad being given a job because of your skin colour as it is not being given a job. My skin colour certainly wasn’t a problem for Ipswich at any stage, either as a player or a coach. I think they have employed me because of what I’ve achieved in my career as a player."Even if the Rooney rule is implemented, who do you interview for the roles at clubs like Chelsea, Arsenal or Liverpool? Could you really see Chris Hughton honestly being interviewed for the role at Chelsea and having a chance when he compares his CV to the other managers brought in for interviews? Linking back to the statement from Kieron Dyer, If the Rooney rule is in place, is there a really a point in going to an interview which you are only getting because of your skin colour, and not your managerial honours? All fair points.

Flipping the coin now and moving on from the race issue, the other side feel that skin colour never was or has been the issue. Instead the issue is the lack of managerial examples to show off to the younger black males who might want to become managers at the end of their careers or from the start. I am just going to come out with this now, I struggle to agree with this point, whilst I can understand the idea that because there is a lack of black managers, it means that black people might struggle to have someone in the occupation they can relate to who has been successful. When I ask myself which managers do I look up to, I think of José Mourinho, Mark Hughes and Glenn Hoddle, I struggle to think of a black manager I could see as being successful, only Chris Hughton falls into that category for me. This doesn't mean that the lack of interest from the black community is the reason why there is such few black managers, but in my opinion, it all comes back to a lack of support at grassroots and entry levels. The FA are no longer in the position where they can shrug off the calls for more black managers, Greg Dyke already tried this and has been crucified for trying to say there is no issue. Once again the pathetic attempt the FA has in Grass roots football appears, and in my opinion is the reason why there are only 2 Black managers currently employed in the top four flights of English football. The FA needs to encourage young black men or retiring footballers to take their coaching badges, I am not saying give them an easier ride, management is a tough career, but there needs to be much more encouragement in place to get the black community into management and not just out on the playing field.

Some at the FA have also stated that the lack of black managers is due to the lack of managerial ability from the ones we see in the public eye. Originally I scoffed at this point, but upon second looking, it has merit to the argument. Looking into the win percentages of the 5 managers in charge of clubs last year, and as well as this adding Keith Curle, current Carlisle manager, to the mix I have seen that none of these managers, except Chris Hughton, have had a win rate of more than 50% at any club, the closest being Keith Curle with 45%. Anything below 40% as an average when you add all their win percentages at each of their clubs up is below average, bordering on poor. Only Chris Hughton and Chris Powell have 40% or more. On paper this point then makes sense, if black people are looking at black managers who are struggling to be successful, why would they want to be a manager, too bad the FA are not telling us everything. Most of these managers have taken on poor teams who they need to rebuild which will therefore mean they are prepared to lose more than win, Paul ince being at Blackpool meant he had to build a squad around his son Tom Ince. Keith Curle has had to rejuvenate an out of form Carlisle side and bounce back to league one and even Chris Hughton has spent most of his career at teams he has had to fix, most famously guiding Birmingham to 4th in the championship in 2011-12 season as well as a narrowly missing out on a round of 32 place by one point in the Europa League. So by the FA saying because they stats are bad, they aren't giving you the whole picture, and more importantly are trying to make sure they don't have to fork more out on Grass roots management.

I feel that the issue comes from the entry level, any person can do their coaching badges, any person can get involved in football, but the main problem is there is a lack of encouragement from the FA, as well as from groups like Kick it out and Players association to lead retiring black players onto management. If the current black managers also put their eggs into the same basket they could easily start a movement to help black men to move into a career in football management. For now it looks like we have to stick with Keith Curle and Chris Powell as our black managers, the FA have launched a committee to find the solution for what luck that may do and has already pledged to help black managers into jobs, but if this means implementing a rooney rule like they have proposed, does that really help? Finally I think we have to really look out into Europe and see managers like Frank Rijkaard, Patrick Kluivert, Ruud Gullit, Jean Tigana and Claude Makelelé and realise they are making the steps to improve the place of black managers, so to does the FA, racism will always play a some sort of part in this issue, but it is the FA's Job to make sure we get around that.

Thanks for reading everyone, leave a comment if you have your own opinion and don't be afraid to share with others.