From the ”Wally with the brolly”, to the “Prat in the Hat” and now a total “Psycho”...

Following the recent resignation of Fabio Capello (Thank god), England U21 boss Stuart Pearce has been given temporary charge of the England team and today released his first and possibly last squad selection in readiness for our friendly against the Dutch.

Whilst many of us were hoping for some big changes and removal of dead wood, instead we got a very mixed bag, most of which consists of the usual suspects...again...

My first surprise was in regards to the Goalkeeper selections, whilst Joe Hart is our obvious number 1, the other two places are very much up for grabs and on this occasion have been handed to Scott Carson and Rob Green. As a Norwich fan, I've always had a lot of time for Greeno, the problem is that he's never looked the same for England as he has for his club sides, and he's also currently playing in the Championship.

Now I don't have a problem at all with selecting players from the Championship – as long as there aren't better or similar alternatives in the Premiership, or at least in one of the high standard European leagues such as Spain or Italy, and here's where I have my first issue – there is better or similar available.

I've already stated my position as a Norwich fan, so it should come as no surprise that I'm championing the selection of Norwich keeper John Ruddy for England. He's been in excellent form all season and performed consistently well, drawing praise from managers and pundits alike, and yet despite this consistent form and playing at the highest league level we offer, he's not seen as a better choice than Green – never mind Scott Carson...

Carson first appeared on the scene just under 10 years ago, as a promising young keeper at Leeds, since that point he's travelled a fair bit round the country and despite a couple of good seasons here and there, has struggled to maintain form and has also made a number of high-profile errors during this time, including a torrid performance for England against Croatia.

Having been sold in the summer by West Brom to Turkish side Bursaspor, his chances looked very limited, and yet despite playing in a relatively poor league at a side that's struggled badly this year and currently lie 9th in the Turkish league behind 'giants' such as Eskisehirspor and Genclerbirligi, he's somehow seen as a better option than Ruddy is...

I'm really struggling to understand the logic that's being applied here. Both of the keepers selected ahead of Ruddy have made bad errors in their limited England games, both are playing in worse leagues and haven't displayed the same form as Ruddy has all season, and whilst I can live with Green's selection as a more 'senior' keeper at the age of 32, Carson's selection in front of Ruddy is simply baffling.

Leaving the keeper situation behind for now and moving onto the defenders, and I have to say that I'm generally pleased with the selections Pearce has made..

There isn't a single player who really shouldn't be there, and the inclusion of players like Jones and Smalling who I think will help form the backbone of the English defence for the next 10 years (injuries and form allowing) is a very positive step. It's somewhat of a blessing in disguise that John Terry got injured before the team choice was made otherwise I think he'd have been included despite average to poor performances this year and the court case hanging over him which could easily have destabilised team morale.

Moving into the midfield and this is where the cracks re-appear.

First into the firing line is Stewart Downing, who despite some strong games last season at Villa, has been a total damp squib since his arrival at Anfield over the summer, and with a single goal to his name this season and no assists, it's a shocking return so far for the £20 million Liverpool paid, and certainly not the sort of form that should make international selection a consideration. He's never really looked right for England either, and in my mind clearly isn't our best option on the left side of the pitch - or the left side of the changing room for that matter...

Downing is joined by 2 other members of the 'old guard' in the shape of Liverpool team-mate Steven Gerrard and Man City's Gareth Barry.

It's fair to say that Gerrard has been one of the stand out midfielders produced by England in the last 20 years, however his obvious talent has been derailed in recent seasons by a string of injuries restricting his playing time. Liverpool's talisman has only managed 11 league games this season and although he still doesn't seem like he's back to his best, I can understand his inclusion, particularly in the absence of Frank Lampard, as their constant internal battle to be the key attacking midfielder has caused no end of problems for England as they simply can't play together whilst getting the best out of them.

I don't however understand Barry's selection. If we're playing a holding midfielder then one of Pearce's other selections in the form of Scott Parker offers a much better option, and I'd also rather play Phil Jones in the role than I would Barry. His tackling is average at best, his passing isn't anything to write home about - as it's usually sideways or backwards, he has no pace and hasn't looked anything special for years now, I'm actually surprised he's got as much game time as he has this season at Man City.

A couple of positives to take out of the midfield options however are the inclusions of both Tom Cleverley and Adam Johnson. Both have been restricted in playing time, Cleverley through injury and Johnson through rotation under Mancini, yet both are clearly talented players and deserving of their chance. The problem is likely to be that they won't get to play however, as the manager appears to want to stick to what he knows, so it's probably going to be Gerrard with either Parker or Barry in the centre which leaves Cleverley out, and Downing and Walcott on the wings which rules out Johnson.

I quite like Walcott being in the squad, I just don't like him as a midfielder. Walcott's best games have pretty much always been from playing upfront, either for Southampton or England (Wenger seems reluctant to give him a chance there), and that's exactly where I like to see him. His distribution is hit and miss and sometimes his dribbling gets the better of him, but stick him on the shoulder of the defender, play a good ball past and see if anyone can catch him...

The remaining midfield spaces go to James Milner and Ashley Young, again both have struggled for strong form this season, with Young in particular suffering from both form and injury problems. When he's had a good game he's been brilliant, outside of this it's been a bit disappointing. Similarly Milner hasn't recaptured the form at Aston Villa that saw him recalled to the England squad, although this can be somewhat explained by him being moved wider at City than he was at Villa.

Neither of them are bad selections, and certainly an on-form Young can be a strong player, the question is will he be given the chance and be on form if he does?

I would have liked to have seen Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain given a call-up if I'm honest, he's been electric for Arsenal over the past month or so and although he's still very raw, the potential is clear to see, and he certainly offers more threat down the left than Downing does.

I'd also have liked to see Josh McEachran given a chance, as I mentioned briefly in my article on Torres, I think this lad has the potential to a be a world class superstar, and his loan to Swansea is not only giving him much needed match fitness, but it's in a side that fits perfectly with the passing ethos he's so talented at.

It's arguable whether either of them are truly ready for the international stage, but if nothing else the experience would have been valuable for their development.

Finally we have the strikers, and again I see a player on great form with an excellent scoring record this season - ignored completely. I am referring to another Norwich player – Grant Holt.

The big man has been vital for us this season, with outstanding performances against very good defenders, he offers something that none of our other options do. Often misclassified as a simple 'battering ram' by many, or described as a 'classic English no 9' by others more in the know - including potential England manager Harry Redknapp, Holt has the ability to hold the ball up, be strong against even the biggest defenders, has great ability in the air and is no slouch with the ball at his feet either.

He'd be a perfect foil to many of the other players we normally select, but apparently being the joint top 3rd English goalscorer in the league (behind Wayne Rooney and Danny Graham) and being on a great run of form matters not if you don't play for a 'big name' side...

Instead of Holt, Pearce instead decides to call up Fraizer Campbell...

Now I don't think Campbell is a bad player, but he's only just come back from over a year out injured, and he's also a very similar striker to the other inclusions of Daniel Sturridge and Danny Welbeck, so why select Campbell instead of giving Holt a chance? Out of the 5 strikers selected, Campbell has be classed the 5th choice option, and it also means that if we want to change the style of play, we don't have a striker to naturally play the role that Holt can.

Previously we've had Crouch or the lamentable Heskey to play as hold up men, yet now it would have be either Rooney or Welbeck to take over the job if needed, and this doesn't play to either of their best abilities.

Darren Bent makes up the 5, and whilst I can't argue against his goalscoring record in the league, he's been very limited for England, and he also relies heavily on getting decent supply as he's not the type of player to go chasing opportunities like Rooney or Welbeck will. It's not like we're overflowing with top class options here so Bent is a fair choice, but not giving Holt a run is annoying.

Chances are that even the better selections made by Pearce may get a limited chance, as if his team selection is anything to go by, he'll be choosing mainly what he knows rather than taking the opportunity to see what other players can offer.

We all know what the likes of Rooney, Gerrard and Barry offer, so we learn nothing by playing them, whereas giving the chance to players like Johnson, Cleverley, and Jones could help us in the future, not to mention seeing what players like Oxlade-Chamberlain, Holt and Ruddy could have offered.

It's a badly missed opportunity in my opinion, and Pearce has simply taken the safe option, which from a man known as 'Psycho' who was never afraid to get stuck into a challenge, his relatively limp selection is both a disappointment and surprise...

Living legend or past his sell-by date?

Following the recent defeats at the hands of AC Milan and Sunderland, Arsenal manager Arsene Wenger is arguably under more pressure than he's ever been during his tenure at the club. No trophies in the cabinet for years, top players going elsewhere, and declining league positions have seen many fans come to the conclusion that the end is nigh for 'Le Professeur', and at this time I think there's no more apt phrase to remind them of than “You don't know what you've got till it's gone”.

What Wenger has achieved in his reign as Arsenal manager is truly unbelievable and I'm going to try to demonstrate why I think this is through the use of facts and figures.

The general rule of thumb when deciding if a manager is good enough usually comes down to a few key factors:

A) What titles they win
B) Quality/Style of football
C) Man Management
D) What they win in comparison to expenditure on players

Now looking at these points we see that Arsenal have won the league 3 times under Wenger, finished runners up 5 times and have never finished outside the top 4 during his 16 years at the club. On the cup front they've won the FA Cup 4 times and runners up once, been runners up in the league cup on 3 occasions (where Wenger tends to use his youth players) and won the Charity shield 4 times whilst being runners up twice. So domestically that's a pretty impressive record.
They haven't fared as well on the continent, with a single Champions league runners up medal and single UEFA cup runners up medal to claim, although they have featured prominently in the final stages of the Champions League throughout.

The football that Wenger has got Arsenal playing has been nothing short of brilliant and at times unstoppable, as epitomised during their “Invincibles” season where they didn't lose a single league game.
A short, passing game where Arsenal dominate possession is the order of the day, where vision and technique and teamwork are highly required. The only other teams to really play this type of football at this level are Barcelona and Spain – so that's the club regarded by many as the best club side in the world, and current World and European champions. In fact, many have dubbed Arsenal as “Barcelona Lite”, in reference to their similar style of play.
When on form and playing their game, Arsenal are virtually unstoppable, unfortunately this has been less and less the case in recent seasons.

From a man management perspective, it's again hard to argue against Wenger. A man noted for his generally calm demeanour (apart from when throwing water bottles down after bad decisions!), former players have nothing but good things to say about him both as a manager and an individual, and he's often been the calming influence needed to bring players into line and help them develop. This is probably best illustrated in the form and ability of Robin Van Persie, who when signed by Wenger had a bit of a reputation of having a poor attitude and temper problems, something which Wenger has managed to restrain and since helped the guy hone his talents on the pitch into one of the best strikers of the modern game.

Ok, that's all well and good you may say, but where are these 'facts and figures' you claim to have to back up this conjecture?

The truth is that I've saved them for this point because more than anything, I feel they display exactly what Wenger has achieved under point D in my 'key factors' table.

If we take some of the top clubs from the premiership, lets see what they've spent/recouped on players during the same period as Wenger, and what they've achieved with this spending:

Man Utd
£460,000,000 spent - £284,675,000 recouped - Total net outcome is -£175,325,000

9 League titles, 2 FA Cups, 3 League Cups, 7 Charity Shields, 2 Champions Leagues and 1 world club cup.

9 league titles in 16 years is phenomenal by any standards, and love or hate Man Utd, they are the dominant force in English football, both historically and in the last 20 years. World class players along with one of the best managers ever to grace the game, they truly are deserving of respect for their achievements. That being said, a £175 million loss during this time period is not insubstantial, and whilst there are other teams with higher losses, this has to be taken into perspective and if we were to split this evenly throughout, then that's an £11 million pound loss EVERY season in order to achieve their results.

Chelsea
£720,830,000 spent - £216,185,000 recouped - Total net outcome is -£504,645,000

3 League titles (with 4 runners up places), 3 FA Cup Titles, 3 League Cup titles, 3 Charity shields (4 runners up places), 1 UEFA cup winners cup and a runners up place in the Champions league.

So the same number of league titles as Arsenal, but with 1 less runners up place, 1 less FA cup title and the rest is fairly even. A string of different managers during this period, along with the appearance of billionaire owner Roman Abramovic who's seemingly unlimited finances allow Chelsea the freedom to pretty much buy who they want, has seen mixed results and mixed football, from the relatively free flowing football under Gullit and Vialli, to the 'effective' football of Jose Mourinho, the Chelsea fans have seen a number of changes during the period, although a badly ageing squad is currently an issue for current manager Andre Villas-Boas, and whether or not he'll be given the time and funds to change this is a matter of much speculation.

Using the same theory as with Man Utd, Chelsea have spent the equivalent of £31.5 million a season to achieve their results.

Man City
£628,800,000 spent - £155,543,000 recouped - Total net outcome is -£473,257,000

1 FA cup, 1 runners up Charity Shield

With £453,270,000 of their spending coming in the last 4 years, Man City have taken over the reigns from Chelsea as the Premier League's 'Big Spenders', thanks in no small part to the investment of owner Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, who's personal net worth of over £17 billion means that like Chelsea, the sky is the limit in regards to signings and wages. Despite heavy expenditure on players in recent seasons, it's only this year that Man City have managed to wage a genuine title run, and whilst they current top the table, arch rivals Man Utd are nipping at their heels all the way. Current manager Roberto Mancini has struggled at times with player control, notably the recent 'Tevez affair', and consistency on the pitch has been patchy. A league title will go some way to resolving this, but many argue that despite their recent form, as a manager, he can't compare to the likes of Sir Alex Ferguson or Arsene Wenger

Man City have spent the equivalent of £29.6 million year to win pretty much nothing so far...

Other notable spending includes:

Liverpool
£523,330,000 spent - £318,870,000 recouped - Total net outcome is -£204,460,000

2 FA cups, 2 League cups, 2 Charity shields, 1 Champions League

Equivalent of £12.8 million a year for their results, with no league title.


Tottenham
£392,650,000 spent - £217,927,500 recouped - Total net outcome is -£174,722,500

2 League cups (with 2 runners up places).

Equivalent of £11 million a year in exchange for 2 league cups and no league title.


But how about Arsenal? What has Wenger done that's so special? Let's see:

Arsenal
£314,750,000 spent - £310,524,000 recouped - Total net outcome is -£4,226,000

That's right, just a £4 million loss on the player front in 16 years of management, during which time they've signed world class players like Pires, Henry, Vieira, Anelka, Fabregas and Van Persie, won numerous league titles and played top class football.

That's an equivalent of only £264,125 a season to achieve their result, so when the fair play rules kick in shortly and clubs like Man City and Chelsea are desperately trying to explain their spending and somehow cover the shortfalls from expenditure, Arsenal will be sat there smiling, showing how they are not only breaking even, but even reducing their debts, and all the while they have a manager who's getting top 4 places EVERY SINGLE SEASON. They have a top class new stadium with highly manageable debts that are reducing every year, and despite all of this fans are not happy.

Seriously?

SERIOUSLY????

In a world gone mad with spending and excess, Wenger's management is a guiding light of how things should be done, even business expert and Spurs fan Sir Alan Sugar has given Arsenal credit for their financial strategy, but to implement this whilst still maintaining title challenges every year is truly incredible.

In my mind, there isn't another manager out there to replace Arsene Wenger. There are managers who will get good football, and managers who may get results, but how many of them can get all of this whilst, spending a relative pittance comparatively speaking, and bringing through young talent like Wenger has done consistently?

All fans want trophies and titles, that's understandable, but I think the fans at Arsenal really need to sit back and take stock of the overall picture, as if it wasn't for injuries and some form issues, Arsenal would likely have been challenging for the title again this year, and even so, a Champions League place is NOTHING to be sniffed at, most clubs would kill for these sort of results and league positions, yet many Arsenal fans appear ambivalent to their success - I just don't get it.

As I said at the start, “You don't know what you've got till it's gone”, and if the fans push Wenger out, then I think this motto will come back to haunt them forever...

The Lazarus Connection

I think it's fair to say that we've arguably not seen a player collapse as biblically as Fernando Torres has in the last 2 seasons, and unless some serious changes are made, then his re-incarnation as a world class striker is not only unlikely – but also verging on criminal waste.

The problems here are relatively simple, yet fixing them is anything but, and what's more, it's not something that's going to happen under the current system at Chelsea.

The first problem is simply down to the style of football and system that Chelsea play – it just doesn't suit Torres' own style and leads to him being forced to play in a way that's not only uncomfortable for him, but also highly unproductive.

What's intriguing here is that this isn't the first time this has happened at Chelsea, in fact there was a very similar situation over a decade ago when Chelsea signed Chris Sutton from Blackburn for a strong £10million following Blackburn's relegation. In this case you had a player who's previous performances and goalscoring form had been excellent – particularly as part of the infamous SAS (Sutton and Shearer) combination, but who then suddenly went from almost guaranteeing you 15 goals a season, to scoring 1 in 28 at Chelsea.

The reason was incredibly easy to see – the system didn't suit him. In Sutton, Chelsea had a striker who whilst being solid with the ball at his feet, excelled in the air, with strong, accurate heading being a trademark of his game, so what did Chelsea do to get the best out of him? Played the ball into feet CONSTANTLY and then wondered why the guy wasn't scoring...

Yet despite it being obvious what the problem was, there was never any chance of Chelsea changing the way they played, so Sutton was instead written off as a poor signing and a bad player despite never having been given the correct ammunition to prove otherwise. It was almost like giving someone a cannon, but then loading it with sponges and then wondering why no real damage was being done...

We're now seeing something very similar with Torres, in that he's being asked to play a different role in a different system, and it's simply not what he's good at. Torres is being asked to play like Drogba and is then being criticised for not being Drogba. I genuinely feel that if you want to get Torres back to goalscoring ways, you need to change the system and formation that will allow him to play to his strengths – and one problem with that is that it's never going to happen under the management of Andre Villas-Boas.

I'm not going to turn this into an attack on AVB, but I'll simply suggest that his focus will always be on playing a 4-3-3, and that this alone is enough to limit Torres, never mind the other stuff that comes with AVB such as odd player selections, strange substitutions, arrogant and bizarre press interviews and the seemingly inability to actually turn a game around through clever changes or tactical switches.

If we ever want to see Torres brought 'back from the dead', then he either needs a move to another club, which is highly unlikely considering the huge amount of money Chelsea paid for him, or for Roman Abramovic to swing his infamous sack hammer, and put a manager in charge who will recognise what he's got, and make the relevant changes to bring about this transformation.

Taking into account current player abilities, on/off field problems and everything else, here's how I'd set Chelsea up to get El Nino ripping people apart again:

This sort of setup gives Torres a definite strike partner, whilst being supported by technically strong players with an eye for a pass. McEachran will be a surprise inclusion for many, especially considering the omittance of Frank Lampard, but he's another young star in the making if you ask me and whilst comparisons claiming he's a combination of both Xavi and Iniesta are undeserved and somewhat strong at this point, there is some evidence to suggest that if he continues to improve as he is doing, those claims won't be far wrong. Lampard will still provide an option in midfield depending in injuries, form etc., but he can no longer be relied upon to get 15+ goals a season, nor should Chelsea have that sort of reliance on a single player, but he's certainly a good player to have if the likes of McEachran or Ramires aren't performing.

I've also dropped the ageing John Terry who's inability to stay out of the press along with declining form make him a risk, along with the hapless David Luiz who seems to have fooled a lot of people into believing he's a top class defender when in fact he's more like the stereotypical Brazilian centre halves we were used to seeing 20 or so years ago. Bosingwa is in purely because he's still a valid attacking threat which supports the formation, and frankly there's little other option with the current squad aside from another ageing player in Ferreira or playing Ivanovic there, which means finding another centre half instead. Depending on Essien's recovery from his injuries, this might not be a bad shout, with Essien playing at centre half with Cahill, which then allows either Romeu or Mikel to slot into the more defensive role in midfield.

Frankly though, this is all merely idle conjecture at this point, as the 4-3-3 isn't going anywhere at Chelsea as they're still stuck in the past with a team full of players past their prime, and until you get a manager in with the balls to admit and accept this, they're going to have issues and the player who's going to suffer most is Torres.

The real question is whether Torres can become Lazarus, or whether he's simply going to be left to rot as no savior is present to perform the miracle needed...