Sometimes, I'm a little concerned that my absolute loathing of Stoke is founded on a cliche based on a cliche with a little FA Cup Quarter Final exit resentment mixed in. I watched them play Chelsea, on the opening weekend, and can confirm that no, my absolute loathing of Stoke is fully justified.
Some part of the Stoke story should appeal to me. Once great club, back in the top flight after decades away. Mixing it with the big boys but on a budget. Triumph of grit and determination over style. Those things should appeal to the underdog lover in me. But, then I go and spoil it all by doing something stupid like watching them...again.
'Anti-football' is now an oft used phrase, applied pretty much exclusively to Stoke, unless you're Arsene Wenger and then it's deployed in scatter gun fashion. Andre Villas-Boas wasn't slow in coming forward with his view of the Stoke tactics after his first chance to see them in action. I say 'tactics' but I'm not sure it really deserves to be plural. It could all be summed up in 'don't concede and we'll get a set-piece sooner or later. When we do, hurl the ball into the box, elbow anyone who gets near it, and if the keeper catches it, kick him into the back of the net'. Obviously that's the 'Pulis way' broken down into it's most basic form, but there's very little dressing and garnish to be applied to that tactic.
There were exceedingly brief passages of play where Stoke moved the ball around with a pleasing fluidity. They were overly reliant on Etherington to take it down the wing and get a cross in, and the same with Pennant, except, anyone with any sense knows that's asking a lot of Pennant. When Etherington withdrew with an injury, any hopes for anything remotely resembling football vanished. It had been pretty scarce beforehand, but then, almost inconceivably, Stoke became even more unpleasant to watch.
Left with no outlet on the wing, other than the ponderous Pennant on the right, Stoke continued to try and muscle the ball through the middle. Remember 'Bedknobs and Broomsticks'? The football game? That. That's Stoke that is. Except, they mixed up forcing the ball down the middle with a succession of long aimless punts up field, whether in possession of defending. The only time any creativity was on display was when they were showcasing their new levels of thuggery in the box at corners, throw-ins and free kicks. I wouldn't bat an eyelid at ear biting or eye gouging as a prelude to a Rory Delap throw arriving in a crammed penalty area. Pushing, shoving and pulling is hardly an alien concept in the modern game where set-pieces are concerned, but Stoke do need credit for taking it to new more tiresome heights.
They offer nothing beyond physicality. Not one thing. It's a survival instinct for sure, and one that has seen them safely mid table for 4 seasons now, but you'd kind of like a club to evolve wouldn't you? I can't imagine being a supporter, watching that week in and week out, which is a strange statement considering Stoke play Premiership football while West Ham sit a division down. Chances are we'll be playing a less expansive, attractive brand of football in a bid to guarantee clean sheets and a return to the top flight, but the day it becomes a physical, muscular, war of attrition is the day I stop watching. It's not cricket. It's not football either.
No comments:
Post a Comment