That's What Naz Said

Striking Out

2012-01-04T15:12:00.001+08:00

The Christmas-Boxing Day-New Year's period is always a frantic one for the Premier League. Arguments and debates regarding a winter break aside, you're almost guaranteed some fantastic talking points with action just about every day. This year's run of games was no different, with shocking results all around in what has been a most engrossing season. Other than upsets though, the last few weeks have also seen a few strikers hit the news for various reasons.

I've written about Arsenal numerous times, and for a long time I've felt that they've been lucky to have finished in the Top Four and qualify from the Champions League. Since their stunning team of Invincibles, each incarnation of Arsene Wenger's Gunners has been significantly weaker than the last, and they are only where they are this season because of RVP's goals, Gervinho's addition and Vermaelen's return. Given that their star man is due a long-term injury soon and Gervinho will be off to the African Cup of Nations, the loan signing of a certain Thierry Henry might be perfect. Wojciech Szczesny says that his side "needs" the return of the Frenchman, and that statement raises a few pertinent questions.

The former Arsenal frontman and skipper returns to a side that barely resembles the one he left - Ljungberg, Gallas, Baptista, Flamini, Lehmann, Adebayor and Aboue have all left alongside the other big name Cesc Fabregas (also to Barcelona). Their replacements have turned in performances at varying degrees of success (you'd pick Wilshere over Flamini, surely...) and Robin Van Persie has certainly supplied the goals that Arsenal have needed. But what else are they lacking?

Szczesny said that Henry would provide a dressing room presence that the club needs, a telling line that might suggest that the London side still lack a leader - an accusation made even when Fabregas had the armband. This Thierry Henry is not the Henry of old, though, arguably the most dangerous striker on the planet (possibly out-performing Ruud Van Nistelrooy near his peak) and Arsenal will hope that his short-term deal will pan out as well as Henrik Larsson's did for Manchester United in 2007.

The Red Devils themselves have a strange striking situation. Dropping the league's top scorer at the start of the season isn't a luxury afforded to many sides, but United are still the only side to have scored in every league game this term. Most of the attention, of course, is on Wayne Rooney, the talisman United have craved for since the days of Eric Cantona.

But it is on the dropped striker that the Cantona comparisons are made, with Dimitar Berbatov's relaxed approach to the beautiful game drawing as much praise as it does criticism. Linked with a move to Juventus recently, the Bulgarian has often said that he is very happy to remain a squad player at United (a sentiment shared by the forgotten Michael Owen) but has started firing again in recent games, and one wonders what the future holds for the silky striker.

United do need him, though not as much as Arsenal need RVP, but Berbatov offers the option that Rooney, Welbeck, Hernandez, Owen, Macheda, or Diouf (that's a lot of strikers...) don't. When I wrote a few months ago of the importance of Tom Cleverley in allowing Wayne Rooney to play at his best, the main point was that the young midfielder offered a fulcrum to which the rest of the team could revolve around. Dimitar Berbatov is that sort of player as well, if utilized properly. He is not a big targetman like Edinson Cavani. He will not run behind defenders like Filippo Inzaghi. He is not going to score from 35 years like Gabriel Batistuta. And he will not run, terrier-like, as Carlos Tevez once did for Man Utd.

It is perhaps unfortuante, then, that the purchase of Berbatov was seen as a factor in driving out Carlos Tevez, who in many ways is the polar opposite of his former team-mate.

Never staying anywhere for long, the vagabond Argentine has been courted by both AC Milan and Internazionale, as well as big-spending Paris Saint-Germain. City's former captain, and now public enemy number one, the man's career is a transfer saga in itself. There isn't much to say about him except that the move in many ways has been long overdue, and that at his best, there are few better in the world at the position. It says much for City, sitting pretty at the top of the BPL, that they are so willing to offload the player that is probably the reason for all their success now. Would David Silva and Yaya Toure have flourished without Tevez? Would they have even been persuaded to move to Eastlands?

The departure of one South American hitman coincides with the absence of another, the former Ajax maestro Luis Suarez. Banned for eight games after the incident with Patrice Evra, details are sketchy to this day, with Liverpool saying it a matter of one man's word against another. The fact that testimonies from the Liverpool players and officials (including Suarez himself) don't add up though, speak poorly for his case.

On the pitch though, he is the dynamo that Liverpool have lacked since injuries cripplied Steven Gerrard's playing time. An on-form Suarez makes Liverpool as dangerous as they did when Torres and Gerrard terrorized defences across the country. However, the striking difference is just that, the striking.

With a strike conversion rate of less than 10% (and only about 50% of his shots hit the target at all), to call him wasteful might be generous. But the form of Andy Carroll, the conversion of Dirk Kuyt to winger, and the inability of Stewart Downing to find or create a goal this season does not bode well for the Reds, still seeking a top four finish even after this morning's crushing defeat to ten-man Manchester City.

How can Liverpool cope without him? Andy Carroll did so well at Newcastle because Joey Barton, Jonas Gutierrez and Kevin Nolan supplied him the kinds of balls that the big man thrives on, enabling him to reach doubel figures before Christmas. The delivery has been lacking at Liverpool, despite the management bringing in Adam, Downing and Henderson becuase of their apparent chance-creating prowess. Indeed, Charlie Adam has been almost ever-present (though not Carroll) but it almost looks like he has ceased to chance the glorious long balls to the targetman that made him so effective at Blackpool. It is notable that Steven Gerrard did supply Carroll with those balls in the game against Newcastle when he came on, and the ponytailed forward looked immediately more dangerous.

The next few weeks will be very interesting for many sides, and many players, not least the strikers we've looked at today. Be it a returning hero, a languid trickster, a wantaway maverick or a misfiring misfit, you can be sure that something is going to happen.

Even if nothing does, that in itself is surely something to talk about.

Happy new year everyone!

For everything football related, "Like" ESSAFC (linked on the left) and follow us at @ESSAFC.

The Oil Firm Derby

2011-12-13T12:09:00.003+08:00

A rampant Manchester City side visiting an embattled Stamford Bridge, where players and some members of the media have been exiled by a young manager under pressure. Chelsea, who had already lost two of their last three home games, and had lost games against United and QPR as well, were billed as vast underdogs as they awaited the visit of Roberto Mancini's men.

And after the fiery Mario Balotelli opened the scoring after two minutes, you could be forgiven if you were already penning the eulogies for a certain AVB.

Last week, I wrote about how Chelsea had abandoned their high line and how it proved to be an effective tweak in AVB's highly-favoured "Porto 4-3-3". Against Newcastle, they were defensively sound and kept a clean sheet. Their abandonment of the high line against Valencia also proved beneficial, but for some inexplicable reason, the London club decided to opt for this tactic yet again against City.

I've already touched upon why the high defensive line isn't suited for Chelsea and their squad (last week), and against City - especially with the livewire Sergio Aguero - it seemed an almost comical decision. And it was Aguero who found is strike partner early on, and Balotelli almost turned provider for the Son-in-Law-of-God a few minutes later, as the plodding Chelsea backline kept with AVB's protocol.

An argument for his case might be that AVB opted to put pressure on the City midfield, and David Silva in particular, as Liverpool did so well in their 1-1 draw recently. There, a fired-up Lucas Leiva took David Silva out of the game completely, making him a non-factor with a quite brilliant display of man-marking in midfield. The difference here, though, is that no man-marking role seemed to have been assigned to anyone among the Chelsea trio of Raul Meireles, Oriol Romeu and Ramires. David Silva was then free to drift to either flank, as City lined up with their own trio of James Milner, Gareth Barry an Yaya Toure behind the Spaniard.

La Masia graduate Romeu again played the role of deep-anchorman, almost always sitting alongside Terry and Ivanovic while Cole and Bosingwa moved forward, turning the 4-3-3 into a 3-4-3. Again, this is something we've seen all season with Chelsea, with varying degrees of success. Romeu and Meireles (when deployed there), have been much more influential and effective than a certain Jon Obi Mikel, culpable for Liverpool's first goal in their own clash last month.

Early on, City's 4-3-1-2 formation (the one Mancini preferred at Inter, and also something I praised highly very early in the season) seemed to dominate AVB's 4-3-3/3-4-3. With an unmarked David Silva finding gaps to play despite the high line, Sergio Aguero and Mario Balotelli exploited the space behind the Chelsea defense, who struggled to cope with the attacking trio early on.

Again, it is strange to see AVB revert back to his instruction of a high defensive line after success without it, and especially against a side who have the pre-eminent midfield Trequartista in the league (if not the world) and two skilful and mobile strikers. Roberto Mancini may have had that high line in mind when selecting his lineup, picking Balotelli ahead of the less mobile Dzeko, or Samir Nasri, who would have gotten in the way of David Silva in midfield, if anything. This is the same Mario Balotelli who, only a few weeks ago, that Roberto Mancini said he would not pick in the big games due to his temperament.

With all the focus on Man City's attacking prowess though, the goal they conceded was sloppy, if you're being kind. Former City man Daniel Sturridge breezed past Clichy to whip in a ball towards Meireles to volley home. This, during a passage of the game where City had visibly slackened. A cynic might suggest that should Nigel De Jong have started, he might have helped City maintain their lead with his no-nonsense, hard-man approach. But De Jong started on the bench, only coming on for Silva after they were reduced to 10 men and hanging on, during a period where Chelsea were enjoying up to 80% possession even against 11 men. The tactical analysis, of course, flew out the window after Clichy's dismissal (not a good day for him...), and Chelsea piled on the pressure and eventually found the winner.

On a side note, one wonders why City paid so much money for Gael Clichy, who is arguably far inferior to Jose Enrique at Liverpool.

This isn't the first time that City have let a lead slip due to a drop in work ethic (Fulham early on) and with the red card, penalty, and overall performance in the second half one wonders if the City collapse that so many have predicted (or hoped for...?) has finally come. Chelsea, too, have questions and issues to face themselves; persisting with the high-line, shaky defensive pairing, the futures of Malouda, Alex, and even Drogba and Lampard and probably Mikel.

Overall, Manchester United and their supporters will be delighted with Chelsea's victory, their joy second only to Chelsea themselves who have both qualified from a tricky Champions League group and have handed the league leaders their first domestic loss since the Community Shield. A bad week for Roberto Mancini, who saw his own side knocked out of Europe's premier competition, of course (while an even less experienced Napoli side went through). After a weekend where all eyes were on El Classico early Sunday morning, the Premier League title race may have just been reignited by the result at "El Cashico".

For everything football related, "Like" ESPN Star Sports AFC on Facebook, and follow @ESSAFC on Twitter!

Chelsea's Line-Dancing

2011-12-05T10:06:00.002+08:00

Ever since Roman Abramovich took control of Stamford Bridge in 2003, the revolving door at Chelsea has been ever-turning, with players and managers alike moving in and out of London with perhaps an alarming frequency. I've written about their latest boss before, and while I've been a fan of the man and his principles, the pressure has been growing on the young manager, who only recently claimed that his employers can't afford to sack him.

Promising a more adventurous and entertaining approach to football, Andre Villas-Boas has certainly done well to dispel the pragmatic Chelsea style that counterpart and former mentor Jose Mourinho instilled into the side. Unfortunately for AVB though, one of the key components of Mourinho's all-conquering side was their defensive solidarity, and that seems to have evaporated quite suddenly. In 2004-05, the season Mourinho first won the title at Chelsea, their side conceded just 15 goals all season, compared to the 17 the current Chelsea team has already shipped in.

In many games this season, Chelsea have deployed a "high defensive line", a tactic employed by many, including the current Barcelona side. This tactical ploy affords opposition forwards space behind the defence, but also increases the likelihood of them being caught offside, and squeezes the play in midfield, pressuring the middle of the park. Unfortunately for AVB though, the gambit cost them more than it helped. Off the top of my head, the Blues allowed clear cut chances against West Brom, Norwich, Man Utd and Arsenal due to catastrophic failures of their high line.

Against Newcastle though, the Chelsea high line was almost non-existent, and AVB's side came away with a very good three points, and a clean sheet at St. Jam - oh, I mean the Sports Direct Arena. The defensive performance, of course, was helped by an immense display from John Terry, including clearing an effort off the line to preserve his side's lead. Far cry from the black mark he has been receiving recently from many corners (including me) especially after his slip-up against Arsenal.

But Terry's stalwart display was indeed helped in no small part by the abandonment of the high line. Looking at the areas in which he made and won interceptions, tackles and headers, you can see that Chelsea played much, much, deeper at Tyneside.

One of the important factors that determine the success of a high defensive line is the presence of pacy defenders. This is due to the fact that they need to be able to compensate for the inevitable failure of the offside trap, and get back to make amends for any errors on the part of their fellow defenders or officials. We can all agree that even a youthful John Terry never was never a sprinter, and so playing a much deeper line suited him and Chelsea as a team.

The discipline of the entire back-line is also important for the deployment of a high-line, and while Mourinho's side (who didn't play high) had Ricardo Carvalho beside a John Terry on top of his game, AVB has to work with Branislav Ivanovic or David Luiz, both of which are prone to bookings and have been shown to be vulnerable to pace as well. The fact that wingbacks Cole and Bosingwa aren't the best defensively doesn't help matters. Playing the Serbian at right-back alleviates that wing-back problem, but then you have him as well as Luiz alongside Terry, since AVB seems not to fancy Alex. Tactical discipline is another matter, with the great Milan side of Arrigo Sacchi marshalled by legendary Franco Baresi, master of the offside trap and flanked by Alessandro Costacurta and a prodigal Paolo Maldini. The defensive gaps that Chelsea have allowed (in addition to the failed offside traps) against Liverpool and Arsenal in particular, as well as David Luiz's tendency to bomb forward, suggest that this tactical discipline is another issue.

Finally, perhaps a very important difference between Jose Mourinho's selfish Chelsea and AVB's charitable one is the presence (or absence) of one midfielder specifically. While many have called out Arsenal for not replacing Patrick Vieira, Chelsea have similarly not replaced Claude Makelele. Both Frenchmen were the anchormen in the midfield of their London sides, adding much-needed strength, grit and stability to the back-line by acting as a buffer or shield in front of the back four. Other notable anchormen include Mascherano at Liverpool, Gattuso at Milan, and Tiote at Newcastle, who was missed against Chelsea of course.

One of the aspects of his AVB's imported "Porto 4-3-3" (as I like to call it) is the role that the holding midfielder plays. AVB has rotated between Jon Obi Mikel, Raul Meireles and most recently Oriol Romeu as that holding midfielder, who does still serve to protect the back-line, but is also supposed to act like a third ball-playing defender while the wingbacks attack. Indeed, the attacking contribution of Cole, Bosingwa and Ivanovic (when played there) have been very important to Chelsea this season, but it is currently imbalanced from a defensive standpoint.

This tactical nuance is most keenly seen at Barcelona, where Sergio Busquets (and sometimes Keita) plays as that "third defender", who is still able to play clever passes from the back to add to the attack. It is this passing ability (or lack thereof) that has seen Javier Mascherano move from defensive midfielder to central defender (a limited defender, some will call it) in the Catalan side. Mikel is not that sort of clever player. Meireles has a great range of passing, but his talent is wasted playing too deep (like Wayne Rooney). It is no surprise then, that it looks like the best person suited for the job (as seen in the past two weeks) is a graduate of the La Masia academy. Romeu isn't a long-term solution though, as Barcelona already have very clever clauses to buy him back at a cut-price if he does succeed at Chelsea (which he is expected to), like Bojan Krkic at AS Roma.

So it does look like AVB has abandoned the high-line that has been so risky for the London side, at least for now. Additionally, he has put faith in the young Romeu (and Daniel Sturridge) for now to help integrate his vision of how a 4-3-3 and how football should be played. It will be interesting to see if Chelsea continue this trend, and either way, how the futures of AVB, John Terry and Chelsea pan out in the months to come.

For all football-related news, views and more, be sure to follow @ESSAFC on Twitter and to "Like" ESPN Star Sports AFC on Facebook!

We Built This City

2011-11-22T11:05:00.003+08:00

Originally and optimistically billed as the tie that saw the unstoppable object meeting the immovable force, that end result allowed a Highlander-esque "there can be only one" to be uttered around the BPL and its pundits, analysts and viewers.

Not there was ever any doubt.

As written earlier, a firm and formidable Newcastle side had (and still has) done fantastically well to be in fourth place after 12 rounds of fixtures. Above the likes of Chelsea, Arsenal and Liverpool, beating your cross-town rivals, and also doing better than the "big sides" against the teams that they have faced.

But unlike rock and roll, which Starship built their city on in their "classic" track, Man City have built their recent and meteoric success on newly-acquired financial muscle and, at least as importantly, a manager who knows what he's doing.

Only an exuberant Manchester United and a rampant Bayern Munich and have recorded wins over the Citizens in any competition, while Napoli and Fulham managed to hold them to draws within four days of each other. Even then, it could be argued that their best striker (Aguero) was not fully fit for their first result, and the others were flukes, blips or simply off-days. Even Barcelona and Spain draw and lose from time to time, right?

But are Man City being compared to the current conquerors of both world and club football (Sorry England & Costa Rica, friendlies don't usually amount to titles...)? Many already do, pointing at their dominant play and the way opposition teams set out against them. That City's success is inevitably a result of David Silva's play is also one telling point, and that the player himself has been used in the "Messi role" when Spain line up against most teams recently. Many predict that it is indeed Man City, and not the likes of United, Bayern, Milan or even Real Madrid, who possess a squad that can challenge Barcelona for major honours.

That's all very far-sighted though, one feels. What about domestically, in the league? Is it a foregone conclusion that they will finish at the top come May, and that there will be fewer reasons for "ticker" banners to be strung up around Old Trafford? Are the remaining BPL fixtures now only a matter of who will finish in the top four, or to see who goes down, or if Torres and Carroll can manage ten goals between them? Looking at the results and performances, one might argue that such a bold prediction isn't too far off.

That being said, no team in invincible. England beat Spain, which speaks volumes. With all due respect to supporters of the Three Lions, looking at the Spanish and English squads, you can tell the gulf in class. The visitors enjoyed the comfort of bringing on Reina, Puyol, Fabregas, and Mata and not even using Valdes, Llorente and Jesus Navas. The hosts had Bobby Zamora on the bench. Yet, the win went to the less-fancied side.

England achieved that result with some gutbusting defending and a solitary goal from a set piece. Their game plan was obviously to strangle the game, not allowing Xavi, Iniesta, Xabi Alonso and David Silva the luxury of time and space on the ball for them to tear England to shreds. In the BPL, we've seen sides like Everton, Blackburn and most recently Newcastle United attempt the same but fail.

Here is where the Barcelona and Spain comparisons end.

For a while now, I've felt that as good as Spain are, they only have one game plan. Given that they usually execute it to perfection and it is very difficult to stop even with the best players (Holland, Germany and Portugal will agree), it's hardly a fault of theirs, perhaps. But Man City, for all the comparisons, and for all the glowing tributes to David Silva and the Son-in-Law of God Sergio Aguero, have more than one side to them.

And so, playing incredibly deep and inviting pressure will get you slaughtered. And we've seen that so far this season.

The argument, of course, is that if you play expansive football, you will get caught and punished. I might point out that attacking football gave Man Utd and Bayern their wins, and served Aston Villa and Newcastle well in the opening half hours of their games. (That, and hauling off Rio Ferdinand in the Community Shield...)

Is that the answer to the wrecking ball that is Manchester City? It's hard to say, until a talented and well-organized side can bring their A-Game when the tie comes. Right now, it's down to Liverpool, Arsenal, and/or Chelsea to slow down the blue tide, and believe me when I say it, I would never use both "talented" and "well-organized" when describing any of those three sides now. But anything can happen, and I will admit that I will be happy to be proved wrong. Perhaps a moment of brilliance from Luis Suarez or the dazzling form of RVP can overcome the City machine. Maybe Torres will bag a hattrick. (Ha!)

In the end, while "We Built This City" was once voted to be one of the worst songs of the 80's (and this writer might feel that even then it's still much, much, better than most of the music today...), there is a harmony in the Etihad Orchestra. The leader of the band is quietly confident, donned in his trademark scarf, and even the troublesome diva of the group looks to be on his way out. It remains to be seen how the rest of the season will play out, but for sure, the Manchester City starship will hope that their title track will instead be "Nothing's Gonna Stop Us Now".

For anything football related, "Like" ESPN Star Sports AFC (ESSAFC) on Facebook and follow us on Twitter @ESSAFC!

Toon Titans

2011-11-08T10:36:00.003+08:00

One wonders how what the odds were at the start of the season that going into November, the only unbeaten sides in the Premier League would be free-scoring Manchester City and a resurgent Newcastle United. Many still find it hard to believe that the Magpies are sitting comfortably in third, above the likes of Tottenham, Liverpool and Arsenal.

Many had written off the side from Tyneside, who have, historically, the tendency to underwhelm and underperform. Even during the days of Alan Shearer, the closest they ever got to silverware was a Premier League runner's-up spot in the 1996-97 season, and even then they beat eventual champions Manchester United 5-0, and Shearer himself bagged 25 league goals. But even then, few would have thought that they would be relegated to the Championship about a decade later, in a stunning collapse that perhaps only Leeds United can better (worse?) in terms of recent English club disasters.

One of the shining lights in that dismal and disastrous campaigns was the acquisition of a certain Jonas Gutierrez from Mallorca. The Argentine winger was somewhat of an anomaly, but after a virtuoso display during his Premier League debut against Man Utd (who Newcastle seem to have good results against...), he proved his quality. Still at the club, he, along with the likes of Fabricio Colocinni and Steven Taylor, alongside Ryan Taylor, Alan Smith and a few others have remained at St James' throughout the tumultuous few years since their relegation and immediate promotion the following season.

Indeed, those first few names - Jonas, Colocinni and Taylor (both of them) - have been integral to Newcastle's excellent run thus far. The ponytailed Argentine is a key component to Newcastle's midfield, serving both as an attacking outlet and as defensive foil to either fullback on a consistent basis. The centre-back pairing of former Milan player Colocinni and Steven Taylor has been the rock upon which countless attacks have broken this season, and the only time they have conceded more than once in the league this season was against Spurs in a 2-2 draw, which included a Rafael Van Der Vaart penalty.

Many fans, neutrals, skeptics and critics looked at the transfer dealings in the calendar year of 2011 and predicted that the Toon Army would be halted, and possibly even sink back down to the Championship. A side that many feel was (or is) mediocre, at best, losing the likes of Andy Carroll, Jose Enrique, Kevin Nolan and Joey Barton would be crippled, surely. Their home-grown star forward, who inherited the famous No. 9, the outstanding left-back in the league (alongside Leighton Baines), the inspirational club captain (who was last season's top scorer), and the man who arguably dragged Newcastle back from 4-0 down to draw against Arsenal in one of the greatest comebacks in recent memory.

And yet, Newcastle have confounded their doubters. Indeed, they have shocked many of their loyal fans as well with this current unbeaten streak. While it's true that one might argue that they have not been truly tested yet (we'll come to that later), the results, statistics and performances speak for themselves. Here are some numbers looking at this season compared to last.

2011/12

Played 11

Won 7

Drawn 4

Lost 0

Scored 17

Conceded 8

2010/11

Played 11

Won 5

Drawn 2

Lost 4

Scored 18

Conceded 14

That's significant, if you ask me. Even looking past the fact that they had already lost four at the same time last season, they have scored almost the same number of goals (and last season's period included a 6-0 win against Villa) and conceded far fewer, turning losing results into draws and draws into three points. We'll take a look at the numbers again though, this time analysing the exact same fixtures that they have played this year as the corresponding ones last year.

2011/12 (2010/11)

Newcastle 0-0 Arsenal (D 4-4)

Sunderland 0-1 Newcastle (D 1-1)

Newcastle 2-1 Fulham (D 0-0)

QPR 0-0 Newcastle (NA)

Aston Villa 1-1 Newcastle (D 1-0)

Newcastle 3-1 Blackburn (L 1-2)

Wolves 1-2 Newcastle (D 1-1)

Newcastle 2-2 Tottenham (D 1-1)

Newcastle 1-0 Wigan (D 2-2)

Stoke 1-3 Newcastle (L 4-0)

Newcastle 2-1 Everton (L 1-2)

Discounting the QPR fixture, which had no corresponding one last season (unless you count a 2-0 defeat to Blackpool during the same weekend last time round), that translates to...

2011/12

Played 10 (-QPR)

Won 7

Drawn 3

Lost 0

Points gained: 24

2010/11

Played 10 (-Blackpool)

Won 0

Drawn 6

Lost 4

Points gained: 6

That, for lack of a better word, is progress. People talk about Man City improving, but there are few other sides in Europe with such a drastic leap forward in the space of less than a season, if you ask me. 18 more points from the same fixtures, seven more wins, no losses. That, my friends, is pretty special.

Of course, the next few games for Newcastle are tricky, to say the least. Away trips to Manchester City and Manchester United followed by hosting Chelsea at St James' means that if they actually do go into the next game against Norwich with another more than the number of points they've already amassed, it would probably be a good Christmas for the black and whtie part of Tyneside. It's also worth noting, of course, that whatever those results may be, historically no team that has collected 25 points after 11 games has finished outside the top 6. Something to think about for fans and rivals alike.

A few weeks ago, I planned to write a piece on the Yohan Cabaye and Cheick Tiote partnership in the heart of the Newcastle midfield, though I then got sidetracked and the article turned into an analysis of Tom Cleverley (I get distracted easily...). This time though, I'll spend a few moments talking about those two players, who, like the defenders behind them, have played a large role in the recent success of the Magpies.

Many great teams are grounded on solid midfield pairings, in almost any formation they play. Perhaps the best Liverpool side in recent years had Xabi Alonso and Javier Mascherano, Arsenal had Patrick Vieira and Emmanuel Petit, Manchester United looked to Roy Keane and Paul Scholes for so long, Milan enjoyed great success with Andrea Pirlo and Gennaro Gattuso, and even now Barcelona are marshalled by Xavi and Andres Iniesta (Sergio Busquets and Cesc Fabregas don't exactly play in the middle in the strictest sense of the word). Of course, to liken Cabaye and Tiote to any of those pairings would be optimistic, to say the least, but such a midfield axis provides a solid and important anchor to which a team can move about on.

Not quite (but almost) the same as the "double pivot" that many classic and current Dutch and Spanish teams make use of, having the whole team move around two deep, central midfielders allows a side to retain its shape in both defence and attack, but requires a few things. Tactical awareness on the part of the players and staff, a good work ethic, and tremendous talent from those midfielders. In the above examples, those things are all accounted for, and while I did say that to compare this Newcastle side to any of those winning teams would be premature, recent performances suggest that Alan Pardew, his Magpies, and most importantly the core of the team do understand and are able and willing to pull it off. Like I alluded to in my Tom Cleverley piece, a good central midfield pairing can make or break a team.

It remains to be seen how long Colocinni and Taylor can keep the goals out, or if Cabaye and Tiote can boss the midfield when facing the bigger sides. It's also almost unfair that I haven't even spoken about Demba Ba or converted left-back Ryan Taylor (and how some believe Enrique's departure contributed to Newcastle's solidity). But I think I've rambled long enough already, and it will be a fascinating few weeks to follow after the international break.

Will the Toon Army march on?

PS: I'd like to extend my warmest congratulations to the newlyweds Jeryd and Janet, huge Newcastle fans in their own right. Good luck in all you do!

For everything football related, "Like" ESPN Star Sports AFC on Facebook, and follow @ESSAFC on Twitter!

Quick Notes from Matchday 10

2011-10-31T10:19:00.003+08:00

I usually write (or ramble...) at length about a particular topic after the weekend's BPL matches, but due to time constraints today I'll just have a few short snippets of things that have happened or developed over yet another quite startling week of Premier League action.

Arsenal are beginning to find their stride, but Chelsea need to rethink things

Celebrating their win at Stamford Bridge (where they've had great success in the past, it has to be said) like they've won the Champions League, the much-maligned Gunners came out on top in a thrilling 5-3 encounter. What was more remarkable is that Daniel Sturridge, Ramires and especially Gervinho could have added to the scoreline. Long gone are the days where defensive solidarity was a hallmark of both London clubs' framework. Theo Walcott had a rare storming game, and Gervinho and the in-form RVP looked dangerous. Gunners fans will be very happy to see Thomas Vermaelen return, and that could be even more significant than scoring five against the Blues. I've written before of my liking for AVB and his 4-3-3, but defensively his team are wanting. Attacking fullbacks and a high defensive line aren't suited to overrated wingbacks and an England captain who has never possessed pace to begin with.

A Rooney-Cleverley partnership can contribute immensely to United's success

As I've written on more than one occasion before, I've always believed that Tom Cleverley is a great and underrated talent, even today when the spotlight is shining upon him more than ever. Starting against Aldershot in midweek and at Goodison on Saturday in midfield, the young playmaker bossed possession alongside surprise partner Wayne Rooney. The Roonatic has always preferred to drop deep, but in earlier games with Cleverley in the side he did so much more rarely. Here, it was apparent that he was instructed to sit very deep (as the deepest in a midfield 5, most often) and the Rooney-Cleverley axis enabled United to move the ball around even under constant pressure from Rodwell and Fellaini, creating chances for Welbeck, Park, Hernandez and the marauding Phil Jones. The withdrawal of Cleverley led to a scrappy period for United until Dimitar Berbatov came on, another player with brilliant technique and vision. Rooney the new Scholes? The player himself has distanced himself from the comparison, but it will be interesting to see if United continue with this.

Man City can be beaten

The first half at the Etihad Stadium was quite an intriguing one, with the league leaders hosting Wolves, who had only just barely managed to stop a horrendous losing streak. To add to the mayhem, City had just hammered Wolves 5-2 at Molineux in the Carling Cup a few days before, and everyone was expecting a mauling. What we saw instead was an open game of football in the first 45 minutes, where both sides had chances to score. An inspired performance from Wayne Hennessey kept City out, though only until he himself was caught in possession, his mistake cancelling his earlier heroics. It is interesting to see that Nigel De Jong remains benched, and that Yaya Toure has been converted (back?) to a holding midfielder. Should a side go on the offensive (like Wolves) from the start and open the scoring instead of sitting back (like Everton and Blackburn did), one wonders what the result might be. Fulham's result in September suggests that the City isn't impregnable.

Gareth Bale isn't a one-trick pony

After his performances against Internazionale last season, many hailed Gareth Bale as one of the best wingers of all time. His hattrick and the way he single-handedly dismantled Maicon and co suggested that he was finally living up to the billing of being the next Ryan Giggs. Later in the season though, he began to fade, especially after teams and opposing right-backs (most notably United and Rafael) simply showed him onto his weaker right foot, reducing his effectiveness. Recently though, he's shown that he is more than able to drift infield, mixing things up as a sort of inside forward as well as a traditional winger, with a combination of pace, power and panache. The two goals against QPR were prime examples, the first where he drifts in from wide and later on, starting from a central position.

Wigan and Blackburn are in more trouble than we thought

Roberto Martinez turned down the chance to move to Aston Villa (and coach the likes of Emile Heskey) in the summer, stating his commitment and loyalty to Wigan Athletic. I wonder if he regrets it now, especially after losing Charles N'Zogbia and seeing his side slump to seven straight defeats and hitting the woodwork twice in their latest loss. Steve Kean, similarly, has seen his side take no wins from five games since that incredible result against Arsenal (who tend to have incredible results, one way or another). Could the latest one, at Carrow Road, be his last? Throwing away a two-goal lead isn't something that bodes well for the embattled manager, and the Canaries might just have forced the hand of the poultry giants that own Rovers. Bad luck for both Wigan and Blackburn for sure, but as the saying goes, you make your own luck.

That's all for today (though maybe not this week), and I may or may not expand on one of these topics if work allows me to. I decided against writing about certain topics in particular for one reason or another (lack of objectivity, for example) so let me know what you think, and if you agree or would like to hear more.

Unhappy Birthday, Wayne

2011-10-24T10:26:00.003+08:00

Wayne Rooney must be one unhappy boy. Six in the City has surely been repeated more than "Happy Birthday" today.

That's a line being repeated again and again online and on air across the footballing world today (or at least the parts that care a lot about the BPL). And with good reason, perhaps. The Manchester derby last night was quite something, in many aspects. Leaving work on Sunday evening, a certain presenter here at ESPN-Star Sports asked what I expected from the big game, having called the Anfield result the night before. "I don't have a good feeling about it, but hope it's close" was my answer. I was half right, I guess!

This isn't the first "seven-goal thriller" that the fixture has produced, but here the red side left feeling blue, and smiles were reserved for the contenders, challengers and ultimately, conquerors. Talk of paradigm shifts and the balance of power in the city has been rife for the past twelve hours and would probably continue well into the season.

Perhaps the most disappointing thing about the game (from a United perspective) was the way the team capitulated near the end. Losing 3-1 against a City side that has been rampant and ruthless, a ten-man United decided it was best to go on the offensive. Of course, playing at Old Trafford against your noisy neighbours might mean that was a given, and having pulled a goal back it did seem like a good idea. But then the Red Devils conceded another, and another...

And even after the fourth, it looked like they honestly believed that they could get something from the game, pushing numbers forward. It's one thing to be brave and look for a realistic result (I salute you once more, Mr. Villas-Boas) but another thing altogether to be naive and simply stupid. Leaving only two at the back (one of them a noticeably sub-par and demoralized Rio Ferdinand) and having Danny Welbeck the only one tracking back? That's poor. Very, very poor. Amateurish, even.

Take nothing away from Manchester City, they were very good. But then the players who performed well at Old Trafford have been doing so at that level all season (or longer). No surprises to see David Silva pulling all the strings, getting into and finding pockets of space. James Milner has been a personal favorite of mine since he broke into the Leeds team and broke Wayne Rooney's record of being the youngest Premier League goalscorer. The explosive Mario Balotelli found the scoresheet again, and even that wasn't much of a surprise (the goal and the fire) nowadays.

As mentioned before, United are sorely lacking a midfielder who can link the player between defence and attack. I've said before that their poor play recently can be traced back to Tom Cleverley's injury, and the fact that United dominated the second half of the Community Shield suggests at least some credence to the claim. Missing this sort of link, Wayne Rooney was continually forced to drop deep (even deeper than Darren Fletcher) to claim the ball and start any kind of attacking thrust for his side. Lacking a strike partner, Welbeck was left isolated and was then easy pickings for the ever-impressive Vincent Kompany. One might wonder why Dimitar Berbatov is still denied game-time, and Javier Hernandez has been relegated to the role of Super-Sub (since his very poor showing against Barcelona). The situation was compounded, of course, by the frustratingly useless Nani, who I have never been a fan of.

The second half of the Community Shield also saw the withdrawals of Rio Ferdinand, who was poor then and was poor last night, though not nearly as horrible as Jonny Evans. The Irish defender has always been vulnerable to a striker with the slightest of pace (Liverpool know this very well) and his sending off was the invitation City needed to run riot. And they did. Such a rash, idiotic, and laughable decision from Evans, who should have known better.

But the red card would not have changed anything, from this humble United fan's perspective. Like Liverpool's thumping from Spurs a few weeks ago, the other team would have won, and were already comfortable regardless. Fingers will be pointed at players who let their heads drop, or managers who didn't sign Wesley Sneijder. But in reality, United were beaten - comprehensively - by the far better side on the day, and it remains to be seen if the blue half of Manchester will celebrate come May. Judging from this outing though, they are in with a glorious chance and United will need to hope that that Chelsea, Arsenal or Liverpool (Newcastle?) can do something to halt the City charge.

Oh right, happy birthday, Wayne Rooney.

Boy Wonder

2011-10-17T09:42:00.002+08:00

Robin has always been the subject of ridicule as a certain caped crusader's sidekick, be it for his little tights or overzealous exclamations in the heat of battle. That being said, the Robin roosting at the Emirates is now, more than ever, the only gun firing on all cylinders there.

Another brace over the weekend, relieving some pressure from an embattled manager, the former Feyenoord man is truly the main attraction at Arsenal, and has attracted interest from Man City as well - but then they tend to cast covetous eyes towards the area anyway, as attested to by Kolo Toure, Emmanuel Adebayor, Gael Clichy and Samir Nasri. Contract speculation aside, "RVP" has been at the club since 2004, and has played alongside such names as Vieira, Henry, and Bergkamp, as well as Fabregas, Nasri and, well, Jenkinson. Such is the situation that he has gone from substitute and sidekick to captain and catalyst. The one true flying Dutchman in the Gunners now (though with Bergkamp's famous fear of flying...), they can ill afford to have him fly off, be it to a rival or the treatment table.

The son of two artists, the artful Van Persie's attributes and contributions are matched by few. Be it a close clinical finish, a swerving freekick, a slaloming run or a Cantona-style chip against Sunderland (they do seem to fall victim to those...), the maverick striker is indeed Arsenal's main striker (much to Chamakh's chagrin). That being said though, he has never finished a season playing more than 30 league games. The closest he has ever come to that came in the 2008-09 season, where he finished with only 11 goals (but was still top-scorer for the club). The tally is not a black mark against the man though, having played as a wide or supporting player for much of his early career, such figures are still respectable, but perhaps unacceptable for the coming season.

His form and fitness notwithstanding, the difference and challenge he faces today is that of the supporting cast. For so long one of them himself, the burden of goalscoring (and creating, it seems) has now fallen on his shoulders alone. Mikel Arteta and Gervinho, quality players in their own right, are not like-for-like replacements for Cesc Fabregas and Samir Nasri - a point hammered home by everyone it seems - and one look at Fabregas' and Nasri's stats and achievements since their moves might suggest the same. And even before that, the likes of Dennis Bergkamp, Jose Antonio Reyes, Robert Pires, Freddie Ljungberg and of course Thierry Henry could pick up the slack. Not any more.

Many Arsenal (and opposing) fans believe that Arsenal's success in tied directly to Van Persie's performance. From what we have seen so far this season, that isn't too far from the truth. More than a century of goals from the man who has stepped out of the shadows of those before him, it's time for Robin to go from sidekick to superhero. The Gunners will hope that it happens, and that they can hang on to him after.

Men in the Middle Part I

2011-10-04T10:22:00.002+08:00

Over the past few weeks, we've seen one striker reach a hundred goals for his side, two hit the headlines for reacting angrily after being substituted, another refusing to come on, one score and get sent off, one failing to score after promising he would, and another miss a game through an injury revealed via his wife's Twitter account.

This week, Frank Lampard scored a hattrick.

Not too long ago, I was examining the case of the (soon-to-be-former?) England international and how his days may be numbered at Stamford Bridge. It seemed he had lost his verve, his energy, and his ability to command a place in Andre Villas-Boas' interesting 4-3-3 gameplan. At the Reebok a few days ago though, Harry Redknapp's nephew reminded us all of what he still had to offer.

Or did he?

Lampard scored 3 of Chelsea's 5 against a hapless and helpless Bolton side that had not won since an opening day trouncing of QPR (who just conceded six against Fulham). They've been hammered by Liverpool, Manchester United, and - perhaps most tellingly - Arsenal since then, and have even managed to engineer a loss to Norwich City (no disrespect to Paul Lambert's side). One can't read too much into scoring a bunch of goals against a side that looks as poor as any I've seen in a long time. Darron Gibson starred against Schalke in the Champions League last season, but he was never touted as the future of United's midfield.

And it's United's midfield, rather than a single Chelsea midfielder, that I'd like to turn my attentions to today.

It seems an awful long time ago now that Manchester United were playing fluent, fluid football and people were already pencilling them to face Barcelona in the Champions League final once again (Real Madrid and Bayern Munich might have something to say about that). With the likes of Wayne Rooney, Ashley Young and Nani ruthlessly leading the line, United had looked dangerous since the second half of the Community Shield. Then on September 10th, one reckless tackle sent a spanner in the works.

A certain Kevin Davies slid in late and hard on a Man Utd midfielder, forcing him off the pitch with a foot/ankle injury. United still scored five that day, but then again, we've already looked at how incompetant Bolton seem to be this season, especially without Stu Holden.

With a last name like that, Tom Cleverley might be a football writer's dream subject (second only to Eden Hazard?), especially looking at his intelligent use of the ball and space. Analyzing his stats and passes in the league games he played fit (West Brom, Spurs, Arsenal), a quite fascinating conclusion can be drawn.

Manchester United play that much better with Tom Cleverley in their side.

In those three games, his passing rate did not drop below 88%. That's even more impressive when you consider that the majority of his passes are positive, forward ones, Long diagonals searching for a winger (Young was his main beneficiary) or intricate threaded balls to the forwards. He also made a tremendous amount of passes (and challenges) in the middle third of the pitch, which might sound strange to point out, but when a similar analytic gaze is placed

on Darren Fletcher or (oh no) Michael Carrick, the differences are glaringly obvious.

Fletcher has bundles of energy, but tends to only stay on the right side of the pitch. He started his United career as a right-sided midfielder (opposite Kieran Richardson on the left) and so he does that naturally, and to good effect of course. Michael Carrick, on the other hand, plays a disturbingly large number of passes very short to his own defenders, or long to his keeper David De Gea. It frustrates me as a fan, and recently it has come to my attention that it frustrates his own team-mates as well! If you can, take a look at Michael Carrick's backpass in the 71st minute against Chelsea.

Tom Cleverley's work-rate and passing also lead to another indirect, but hugely significant, benefit for United. His attributes contribute to the early-season performance of Wayne Rooney as well. With Fletcher's hesitance to drift to the left side of the pitch and Carrick's lack of confidence to look for the forward pass, the "Roonatic" often drifts very deep and United lack another attacking body up front. While dropping deep has been a hallmark of Rooney's career thus far, it can be observed that without Cleverley, he is forced to do that to such an extent that United sacrifice potency in attack. You wouldn't expect Carrick of Fletcher to roam ahead when Rooney invariably drops deep anyway, but Cleverley starred in such a capacity in his loan spells at Leicester, Watford, and Wigan, being named Watford's Player of the Year.

Much was made about Paul Scholes retirement in the summer, with eager eyes looking towards the San Siro as Wesley Sneijder's move to United was said to be the way to fill the void. Indeed, fans and pundits have been saying for ages, it seems, that United lack creativity in midfield. I've always felt they were right, and right now, more than at any point in this fledgling season, that charge seems poignant and prudent. It remains to be seen if Ferguson can find a quick solution for the games against Liverpool and City to come, and he will do it as he has always done.

Cleverly.

The Benchmark

2011-09-26T17:38:00.005+08:00

Carlos Tevez and Frank Lampard. Between them 650 Premier League appearances and 209 goals, 5 league winners medals, 4 FA Cups, numerous awards and countless accolades. And zero minutes played over the weekend. Interesting, to say the least, how two players who have, even as recently as six months ago, been the central to the success of their own clubs.

They were joined on the sidelines - at least for a time - by Mario Balotelli, James Milner, Didier Drogba, and Florent Malouda respectively, while the likes of Ryan Giggs, Steven Gerrard, Andrei Arshavin, and Marouane Chamakh sat our varying periods of Manchester United's, Liverpool's and Arsenal's own Premier League commitments. Stellar, and in some cases legendary, names. But then some of those, established as they may be, were returning from injury, or have already been consigned (resigned?) to the part of a squad player for months or even years.

There are very few players who can and who have single-handedly galvanised a team or won a game. Roy Keane and Steven Gerrard famously did it for Manchester United and Liverpool on many occasions, most notably perhaps against Juventus and AC Milan in the Champions League. It is no stretch, perhaps, to say that without Carlos Tevez, Manchester City would not have enjoyed all the success they have in the past few years. His arrival and presence at Eastlands/the Etihad was a welcome, necessary and and for most of his stay he seemed altogether indispensable. But then he completed his traditional two-year stint at a club (the longest he has stayed at any one side since originally leaving Boca Juniors) and wanted out. Crisis, headlines, spanner.

I have previously written about Chelsea, and when I saw the team sheets for their match against Swansea, I was actually excited. No Lampard? Again? AVB stamping his authority on a Chelsea side and dressing room that has for so long appear to have dictated the squad selections of Avram Grant, Luiz Felipe Scolari, Guus Hiddink, and Carlo Ancelotti? Potentially huge news, the exclusion of the midfielder with the most goals in Premier League history. While it was evident that Lampard fit poorly into AVB's preferred 4-3-3 formation (which differs from Mourinho's in many aspects), many curious minds wondered if the young manager would yield to perceived player and perhaps supporter pressure to select the England man. But even Capello has started to lose faith in the former Swansea player who once made over 150 consecutive league appearances for the Blues.

And yet, even with a skipper that wants to leave and a key midfielder performing markedly below his previous standards, Manchester City and Chelsea continue to perform excellently. Second and third in the league, only because of the brilliance of Manchester United (and possibly the inconsistency of Arsenal and Liverpool), the futures for blue sides of Manchester and London seem bright.

Kick in the Arsenal

2011-09-21T09:57:00.002+08:00

"Bloody hell, French? I've got to play for a Frenchman? You must be joking."

The quote has long been attributed to legendary Arsenal hardman Tony Adams, upon hearing that Arsene Wenger would be the new manager of the side. I feel it's quite poignant right now.

I've come to realize that I tend to write a lot about Arsenal, even though I am far from a fan. Again, as mentioned before, I don't mean to demean or put down a club that is clearly going through a horrendous period of time, but these events are exactly what needs to be looked at.

The last time I took a long, hard, look at the Gunners, they had just been shot down at Old Trafford, and were still winless this season, with the worst defensive record in the league. Since then, they've managed a win, draw and loss in three games and truth be told, I'm still far from convinced that they will exit this slump anytime soon.

Their solitary win came at home against a side that at the time had not scored in the BPL (and looked like they should have against Arsenal) and they drew with the reigning Bundesliga champions in Germany. The latter result seems like a good one, but considering Dortmund were fourth seeds, it speaks volumes for the European credentials that Monsieur Wenger has gone on for so long about. And to be frank, his London side were battered throughout the game, and the lead they took was unlikely, at best. The Black & Yellows were surely disappointed to have only gone away with a point. I won't even start on the win against Swansea, which only came about due to an uncharacteristic blunder from unsung hero Michel Vorm.

I watched and examined the Blackburn-Arsenal game in great detail, as did many others, I'm sure. It goes without saying that once again, the Arsenal defence was in shambles. The terms "diabolical", "disastrous", "calamitous", and "amateur" have been used, and are thoroughly deserved. And this is an Arsenal defensive unit that welcomed back Alex Song and Bacary Sagna.

Now, Song and Sagna aren't exactly Vieira and Dixon. Nor are they Campbell or Cole. Heck, they aren't even Johnson and Agger, Bosingwa and Alex or even Rafael and Carrick. And I deplore Michael Carrick.

But those were two of the names missing, two of the reasons that many Arsenal fans (and staff) pointed to when they conceded 8 against United. They were back, and conceded four against Blackburn. Blackburn Rovers, who were until that point winless in the league, led by the only man that might have been under even more pressure that Arsene Wenger. And Song and Sagna were helped by the presence of new recruit Per Mertesacker, German international and who has played at two World Cups.

Or were they?

Mertesacker looks twice the player of Koscielny and Squillaci (put together), but that might be his biggest problem. He's huge. For so long, Arsenal's defensive frailties when dealing with set pieces and crosses have been picked apart - 51 of the last 100 goals they've let in before the win at Shrewsbury have been from such situations - and the big man's arrival was seen as Wenger's answer to that. We remember, of course, that Mertesacker's (panic?) purchase was only because the pursuits of Gary Cahill and Christopher Samba were in vain.

But even with Mertesacker, two of the four Arsenal conceded came from crosses and set pieces. His presence has failed to offer a solid base for the Arsenal back line, which was also evident in the (two) failed offside traps that led to Yakubu's opener. And Yakubu isn't even the sprightly sort of forward that is known for breaking the move. Andre Santos, another new defensive purchase, was most at fault for the goal, being yards behind his team-mates (who weren't in line anyway). But back to Mertesacker, there were times during the game where his addition to the side failed to help Arsenal against Rovers' set-pieces, especially in the first half.

With the transfer window shut, there isn't really much that Arsenal can do to address these concerns, other than wait for the return of Thomas Vermaelen. The way a side with such a history and (supposed) pedigree is banking so much on one defender speaks volumes for the aspirations and ambitions for the club that went a season unbeaten not so long ago. Their rivals have managed to get through even more injuries (United & Tottenham), player bans (City), loss of form (Chelsea) and even fewer options (Liverpool).

I have long accused Arsene Wenger for poor or even a lack of long-term planning, most recently after the 8-2 debacle at Old Trafford. If that was just a blip, albeit an astounding one, conceding four against Blackburn - when it could have been more - suggests that their defensive weakness is a problem that will only get worse as the season progresses and more and more teams start looking to exploit it as their primary game-plan. Purchases and player returns have not helped at all, and what lies in store for the Gunners?

Arsene Wenger has apparently survived a "vote of confidence" from the Arsenal board, which suggests, ironically, his position is more tenuous than it has ever been in all his years in charge, despite the Arsenal ship veering so dangerously and dramatically off-course in the past year (or more). Tony Adams is the kind of player most Arsenal fans have deemed missing from their side, and perhaps like he said so long ago, such defensive solidarity might elude Arsenal for as long as Wenger steers this domed vessel.

A Tactical Analysis: Chelsea

2011-09-12T12:27:00.002+08:00

I've been looking forward to writing this for a long time, and not because I'm keen to critique Chelsea or their players. In fact, this is the first time Chelsea has interested me in a long time, and I find myself looking forward to Chelsea games every weekend, though not necessarily due to any support for the club.

Much was made of the London club's acquisition of young manager Andre Villas-Boas. His heritage and meteoric rise to fame - spectacular league and European success - drew quick comparisons to former mentor Jose Mourinho, and in many ways both can be said to be cut from the same cloth. It remains to be seen if "AVB" is tailor-made for Chelsea as Roman Abramovich continues his barren quest for European glory.

AVB's Porto finished the league season unbeaten, winning 27 out of 30 games, with the most potent attack and the best defensive record in the league (conceding only 13 goals). Admittedly, it would have been difficult not to stroll to success in one of the "lesser" leagues with a squad boasting the likes of Hulk, Falcao and Joao Moutinho, but their domination continued in Europe as well. Starting with a 7-2 aggregate victory of eventual Belgian champions Genk, they finished the group stage unbeaten and claimed the scalps of CSKA Moscow, Sevilla, Spartak Moscow, Villarreal and league rivals Benfica on the way to lift the trophy. That they did so with some style (scoring 5 goals three times in the knockout stage) is more than impressive.

For the vast majority of the season, Villas-Boas employed a 4-3-3 formation home and away. While many variations of this formation exist (think about the difference between Mourinho's Chelsea and Guardiola's Barcelona), I personally find AVB's permutation quite interesting. A key component of AVB's 4-3-3 is the way his central midfielder (Fernando) drops deep to allow the defence (particularly the wing-backs) to push up to provide width for an otherwise narrow line-up. The fact that the "wingers" of Varela and Hulk cut inside and scored hatfuls of goals suggests that they aren't the typical wide men that many would expect (more on Hulk later). Additionally, his left-sided central midfielder, Joao Moutinho (a Football Manager favorite) acted as his chief playmaker.

As far as the forward line goes, the central striker (Falcao) was the speedy finisher, while his right-sided wingman (Hulk) wasn't really a winger at all but an intelligent and dangerous striker with pace, power and panache that would and could drive inside and either take or make a chance (Henry at Arsenal, Ronaldo at Man Utd, etc). The left-sided forward was a more traditional winger, though the number of goals Silvetre Varela scored would suggest he is more than that as well.

Looking at the Chelsea team, recent purchases and the last four games, one can see how AVB has attempted to drape this winning formula over a side that is expected to do well.

Attacking wingbacks? Ashley Cole and Jose Bosingwa. Ashley Cole, in fact, has been found to be the farthest man forward for Chelsea in most of their attacks. Deep-lying central midfielder? Jon Obi Mikel for three games, though his lack of creativity meant that a reunion for Raul Meireles was on the cards. The former Liverpool man played this role excellently against Sunderland, linking up with his team-mates and initiating several moves (including a goal). Left-sided playmaker? Frank Lampard has featured in this slot in every game so far this season for Chelsea, and stats have shown that he has actually created more chances for his team-mates than anyone else in the BPL. He might be more effective driving forward (a few years ago?) but this is the way he plays - or more poignantly, is asked to play - now. Chelsea's dogged pursuit of a certain Luka Modric also hints at AVB's preference for a player that fits this framework. Finally, the forward three have rotated almost non-stop since January 2011, when Fernando Torres joined from Liverpool. The sacked Carlo Ancelotti was faced with the problem of how to play Drogba and Torres together. AVB simply didn't (save one game). Instead, he opted for the Spaniard despite his dismal form. Why? As mentioned earlier, AVB's 4-3-3 needs a speey central striker, a Falcao-sort. And for so many years there were few better than El Nino at that role. Left winger? Frank Malouda, and now Juan Mata. Strong right-sided forward? Surprisingly not Drogba most of the time, but he originally played Salomon Kalou there, and Belgian prodigy Romelu Lukaku (the mini-Drog) and athletic Daniel Sturridge featured on the right wing prominently when they have played this season.

In my opinion, the purchases of Mata and Lukaku, and the failed one of Modric, point to AVB trying to fit his Chelsea players into the formation that has brought him such huge and quick success in the short managerial career. It remains to be seen how effective this would be, but judging from their most recent game (Sunderland away), the pieces are fitting rather well. Meireles, Mata, and Sturridge/Lukaku may hold the key to this formation's (and Villas-Boas') success or failure, and perhaps the only flaw in this venture is that Villas-Boas lacks that central playmaker and a consistent central striker (Anelka might be his best short-term solution).

I'm intrigued as to how Chelsea line up against Manchester United this weekend, as the Red Devils aim to continue their simply breathtaking form. Between AVB's 4-3-3 and United's swarming red tide, it promises to be either a wonderful spectacle, or a tactical chess-match. Or both.

Gunned Down: What's Wrong at Arsenal?

2011-08-29T08:28:00.006+08:00

Originally, I had planned to write about either Chelsea or Liverpool, Andre Villas-Boas and what appeared to be his attempt at harmonizing his successful 4-3-3 from Porto to the Premier League or Kenny Dalglish's revitalized Liverpool, led by Uruguayan conductor Luis Suarez. But after what transpired last night though, those topics play second-fiddle to what's going on at Arsenal, surely.

Looking at the team sheets prior to kick-off, I was reminded of last season's FA Cup tie, where Manchester United fielded a team that included the Da Silva twins, Darron Gibson, Chris Smalling and Wes Brown, with the likes of Gabriel Obertan on the bench. On the day, the Man Utd reserve team engineered an unlikely 2-0 win at the Emirates, and as Arsene Wenger prepared to lead his side onto the pitch at Old Trafford, the way the pundits talked about what they expected sounded eerily familiar.

Then I realized that this was Arsenal, and laughed.

But to be perfectly honest, the situation at Arsenal is an intriguing one, to say the least. Shorn of Fabulous Cesc and mercurial attacking midfielder Samir Nasri, facing mounting injury woes that would make David Moyes cringe and with every debutant seeming to aim to be sent off, Monsieur Wenger is having a hard time.

The accusation that Arsenal have lacked dominant and consistent players all through the middle of the park has echoed across the lands for years, and many lament the losses - and lack of able replacements - of the likes of David Seaman, Tony Adams, Patrick Vieira and Thierry Henry. Manuel Almunia, Laurent Koscielny, Tomas Rosicky and Nicklas Bendtner aren't names that inspire confidence even in the most fanatical of Arsenal supporters. That the trophy drought that has plagued the North London side has coincided with the departure of the last of those former names is likely no small coincidence. Over the past few years, the Gunners have been increasingly reliant on the trio of Fabregas, Nasri and Van Persie to keep playing the tune that Arsene Wenger has been harping forever - playing attacking, positive football and being focussed on developing youth. Two of the three have departed though, and the last remaining is perhaps bested only by Louis Saha and Owen Hargreaves in ability limited by fragility.

Two of the longest-running and most-followed transfer sagas over the summer involved Fabregas and Nasri of course, with Barcelona's ultimately successful three-year courtship of Arsenal's skipper angering many in the red part of London. Man City's hijacking of their own city rival's interest in Samir Nasri was much more rapid, but no less damaging to Arsenal. Each might have his own reasons for choosing their destinations - a long-awaited homecoming or what is termed "sporting ambition" - but both probably has the same things going through their minds when they made the decision to leave proper. Manchester City forced Manchester United fans to take down the (in)famous "counter" banner as they lifted the FA Cup last season. And a telling statistic would be that Cesc Fabregas' 8-year stay at Arsenal generated the same number of trophies as an 8-day period at Barcelona. For so long key components of Wenger's symphony, the two maestros appeared to have lost belief or patience with Wenger's song. Few can blame them, perhaps.

Is there hope yet for Arsenal, who have conceded more than Swansea and Norwich put together? Polish keeper Wojciech Szczesny was not at fault for most of the goals last night, and the way he could still crack a smile might suggest there are some positives to take from recent times. Henri Lansbury was the only other Arsenal player who looked somewhat cheery, though I had attributed his laughter to the fact that he could say he wasn't on the pitch when United scored the vast majority of their eight goals. The past three weeks have been harrowing ones for Arsene Wenger, and surely he has never been more glad of an international break to retreat and regroup.

From my count, Arsenal were missing seven players as they went up against the reigning champions at Old Trafford; Sagna and Vermaelen were late omissions, Song, Gervinho and Frimpong were each serving deserved suspensions for idiotic offences while Wilshere and Squillaci missed the trip due to injury. Now, while some sympathy must be directed at Arsene Wenger for having such a "crisis" to contend with, the reality is that United were missing many players as well. Rio Ferdinand, Nemanja Vidic and Rafael - arguably three of the first-choice back four last season - picked up injuries in recent weeks, while Darren Fletcher has been sidelined with a mysterious virus since March. Michael Owen, as always, as unfit as well. Immediately, it becomes evident that when Arsenal are bemoaning missing Squillaci and United seem comfortable naming a changed defensive line, Arsene Wenger's ability to plan long-term is called into question.

For so long, the Frenchman and his supporters have been clamoring for time and for patience, insisting that "next year" will see the maturation of their Gunners. The reality is, though, while Manchester United beat Tottenham comprehensively last week and Arsenal were lucky to escape with only a 2-0 home defeat to Liverpool, both sides fielded squads with the same average age. The two proven youth talents that Wenger has nurtured in recent times have left, and he has failed to strengthen those, if not any other part of the squad. The failed pursuits of Mark Schwarzer are moot with the emergence of Wojciech Szczesny (how I hate to type that name), but with no progress on the likes of Gary Cahill and Christopher Samba and as Juan Mata picks Chelsea over Arsenal, things look bleak. Debutant Mata, unlike Gervinho and Frimpong, made the headlines for the right reasons this week.

Arsenal as a club have long championed the cause of refusing to splurge on marquee signings, going against the norm and precedent set by their rivals. Liverpool's captures of Carroll, Suarez, Henderson and Downing were all fairly significant as far as chequebooks go, and Chelsea have 50m-pound Fernando Torres, David Luiz and the aforementioned Juan Mata among their new acquisitions. Man Utd of course, spent big on Ashley Young, David De Gea and Phil Jones and Man City set the bar as far as spending goes. After selling Fabregas and Nasri for a combined total of over 50m themselves - as well as Eboue and Clichy - why don't the Gunners shoot for someone (or some people) who can lift them as a whole? It astounds me that their bids for the players previously mentioned continue to be rejected for being "derisory".

With a "full" squad of course, Arsenal's fortunes will improve. Eventually. Arsenal's last twenty games though, have seen only four wins. Two narrow ones over a depleted Udinese side, and victories over League One side Leyton Orient and the relegated Blackpool. How much time will it take for Arsenal to find their rhythm again? Will Wenger still be at the helm by then?

A Tactical Analysis: Manchester City

2011-08-25T11:06:00.004+08:00

I've been meaning to write something for a long time, and have been thinking about a football-ish piece for most of it. Drawing inspiration from similar daily discussions at work, here's my first shot at what I hope to be a weekly (optimistic!) shot at what I've noticed about the world of football in general.

Most of you will know that I'm an ardent Manchester United fan. I don't go out to claim the scalps of Gunners or Koppers, and I don't agree with many of Chelsea's or Manchester City's antics, but here I'll touch on a few tactical observations I've made from an objective standpoint.

Since Manchester City has become the love-child of the Abu Dhabi United group, they've grown from strength to strength on and off the pitch, evolving from a bottom-feeder that Liam Gallagher turned down to a team that will probably finish within the top two in the Barclays Premier League.

The man at the helm of this project, pitch-side at least, is one Roberto Mancini. For a man who finished his playing career at Leicester City, he seems to be doing rather well for himself. Boasting an impressive CV (at least before that stint in Leicester), many questioned his appointment at first, but it seems like he's doing something right. One FA Cup so far means he might even be ahead of the Arab schedule imposed by the Sheikh.

His most successful period by far was as manager of Internazionale, where he won three back-to-back Serie A titles - though one of them will always be "tainted" - and brought Inter back to the pinnacle of Italian football. After replacing Mark Hughes at the Eastlands, it was immediately apparent that the scarfed-one wanted to lay down his own ideas, ideals and identity to an under-achieving Manchester City. Aside from dropping key players like Craig Bellamy (and replacing them with Jo), Mancini attempted to import his successful "Inter Diamond" from the San Siro, the tactical framework that served him so well in Italy.

Connoisseurs of Football Manager might recognize the phrase as a description of Mancini's variation of the "4-4-2 Diamond", or the "narrow 4-1-2-1-2". At Inter, his team-selection invariably revolved around the same rigid, effective principles, which many expected (and have since observed) in England. And lately it's my belief that he's finally done it.

Let's take a look at their starting lineups at Inter and Man City side-by-side:

In defence, Julio Cesar and Joe Hart as a regular, solid goalkeeper. Maicon/Maxwell and Richards/Kolarov as strong-running attacking fullbacks. Two steady centre-backs (Burdisso, Chivu, Materazzi/Kompany, Lescott, Kolo Toure).

And the midfield is where it gets interesting. At its base, Mancini often deploys one anchorman, a destroyer-type, a role fulfilled by Cambiasso and De Jong, accompanied by two other "Box-to-Box" type of midfielders, of which Mancini would regularly rotate at Inter (someone partnering Zanetti, primarily). These three act as a shield for the defence while the remaining players do the damage in attack. At City, players like James Milner, Gareth Barry, and Yaya Toure fit here. It's also interesting that Mancini brought one Patrick Vieira to Eastlands as well, someone who fits this system perfectly.

At the base of his attack, or the head of the midfield, is his playmaker, the Trequartista, if you may. It's easy to see who fills that spot now, with the ever-elegant David Silva pulling all the strings. Inter continued with this even after Mancini left, by recruiting Wesley Sneijder to replace such names as Figo and Recoba. Finishing off the lineup, and the chances, are two strong and skilful forwards. Zlatan Ibrahimovic, Julio Cruz, Adriano, Hernan Crespo, and Mario Balotelli fit the bill at Inter, while Man City currently boast Sergio Aguero, Carlos Tevez, Ediz Dzeko, and a repeat appearance from Balotelli. And Jo.

Over the past 18 months or so, we've seen David Silva perform magnificently "in the hole" behind one or two strikers - usually just the one when Tevez is fit and mentally-sound - and it's something he continues to do. Many point to the recent Bolton-Man City game and call it a regular or flat 4-4-2 that Mancini put out, but after looking at the game in great detail for hours (no exaggeration), I've found a few things.

1. Yaya Toure just about never stepped ahead of Milner and Barry.

2. Milner and Barry covered a lot of ground up and down the pitch.

3. David Silva spent more time in the middle of the field, and not the right wing, than anywhere else.

4. David Silva made few, if any tackles, even going to far to allow an opponent 3 yards from him to run unimpeded while another team-mate would close him down.

5. Edin Dzeko and Sergio Aguero linked up especially well with each other, fed by Silva.

Point 1 is an interesting one, and would probably not have been observed had Nigel De Jong been fit (Toure would have displaced Barry, perhaps the last vestige of the Hughes era). Still, it was a role he played well at Barcelona, despite his obvious ability in storming forward. When De Jong is fit again, I would expect the Dutchman to play the Anchorman, and Toure and Milner probably to flank him, as in Point 2. Points 3, 4 and 5 perhaps best illustrate why I feel that Mancini has finally gotten his "Inter Diamond" working at Manchester City; David Silva's role as the Trequartista. And it's working beautifully.

Sharp-eyed readers and quick-minded football analysts would be quick to point out that this system leaves little room for the likes of Adam Johnson, and I agree. Mancini's 4-2-3-1 perhaps does, but that necessitates playing the lone figure of Carlos Tevez or Mario Balotelli, neither of which are dependable for their own specific reasons. And past and recent history suggests that the ways of last season at a Plan B, at best, and that the pairing of Aguero-Dzeko, supplied by Silva and guarded by the others, is the way Mancini envisions his team.

How this will pan out against the likes of Manchester United and Chelsea (with Andre Villas-Boas' tactics my next project) remain to be seen of course. Mancini, so long accused of being too negative, had a team that scored more than "attacking" Tottenham Hotspur last season, and also led Inter to a record number of points and goals during his last season at the club. And witht he addition of Samir Nasri, this whole analysis my become moot by the time anyone reads this. Another factor to consider is the possibility that want-away Tevez will change his mind and Mancini his tactics to accommodate his former skipper, but for now, I'm fairly sure this is what is actually happening when Man City take the field, and not the 4-4-2 that you might see flashed on your screen.

Hmm.

2011-07-31T23:49:00.000+08:00

Been wanting to write in this space forever, but things keep piling up. That and the fact that I haven't had three consecutive hours of sleep in a week is kind of a downer.

Soon.

Jackass

2011-06-26T21:01:00.001+08:00

Kinda old, and I've already mentioned it on a few other portals, but it seems that the discussion about Ryan Dunn's death is still dividing opinions everywhere. Personally, I have very little time and sympathy for anyone who is speeding while drunk, and has a passenger as well. Twice the legal limit, is what has been reported.

Yeah, I cannot stand anyone who drinks and drives. You do that, and you get hurt, you deserve every little cut and scratch and bruise and broken bone and shattered spine you get and more.

Jackass.

X-Men: First Class - Spoiler-Free Review

2011-06-03T02:45:00.002+08:00

"I am going to watch this again."

Up until a few hours ago, only 300, The Dark Knight, Avatar and Inception have impressed me enough for that line to be uttered less than midway through a movie. Right now though, a fifth film has made its way into that list, and it is a first class one.

See what I did there? Ha!

My expectations for this film were absurdly high. That, of course, is a dangerous game to play with Marvel films. Look at the spectrum of movies that have been churned out. Two solid Iron Man films, an electric Thor, and incredible Hulk, the dull Blade, the less-than-Fantastic Four, to name a few. Don't even get me started on Spiderman 3. Of course, the X-Men franchise itself is something of an enigma. A good opening act, an amazing second, and a very disappointing third. This one, like the upcoming Spiderman film, is a reboot-cum-prequel, of course. The trailers - and thus the hype - for the latest Marvel offering have been buzzing around online for ages, with teasing spots and dramatic poses aplenty. And the end product does not disappoint.

An appreciative and informed audience at The Cathay made the experience that much more enjoyable, with gasps and applause and more than one "Ooohh..." at the right moments. There are more than a handful of such instances scattered throughout the film that will give the attentive fan an absolute geek-gasm. No spoilers, as promised, but "Fuck off!" garnered an immense response. Also keep your eyes and ears peeled for mentions and hints of many characters and events not alluded to in the trailers released.

Story-wise, this prequel traces the origins of the older members of the X-Men, as some might call the "Blue Team", though I believe that term isn't accurate in this film - not that it's specifically used, but the jumpsuits are pretty spiffy. Charles Xavier and Erik Lehnsherr are the main characters, of course, and the movie guides you through their transformation from adolescents to the icons we know and love. Alongside them are many recognizable members of the X-Men (and Brotherhood...) and other associated Marvel characters.

Before I go any further, I will addess the issue that some others have or will point out. Some of the characters are not entirely true to the comics (in various ways) and while it is a minor annoyance, I guess some of the changes were necessary. Not all of them though, which does annoy me.

I'd say the action sequences are quite spectacular. Not the Michael Bay formula of explosion and slow-motion women - though there are booms and boobs - but most, if not all of the fights play out fantastically well. Fans will remember the awesome opening of X-Men 2, and they will be rewarded with similar sequences here. Also always nice, of course, to see how each character uses their powers in their own unique way. Always a plus.

Not much more I can say except that if you're a fan of Marvel at all, this is definitely a must-watch. Then again, I caught it with a non-fan and she's alright with catching it again as well. Like I will do.

Best movie of the year so far? Quite possibly. Best Marvel movie ever? Quite possibly.

P.S. No after-credits scene, which actually pissed me off. I had my guess as to what it could/would be, but alas!

Man Utd 2-1 Chelsea

2011-05-09T09:27:00.002+08:00

Everytime I think about Man Utd and Chelsea, what comes to mind? Mark Hughes, who played for both sides (Bosnich and Veron too)? Gianfranco Zola and his amazing ability? Cantona and Hasselbaink? Solskjaer and Flo? Other names from the past like Kanchelskis, Poyet, or so many others? I actually always remember Phil Neville scoring the winner in 1998. Really. Strange, I know.

Billed as the biggest game of the season, the title-decider, the table-topping extravaganza, the clash of the titans, Red vs Blue certainly lived up to the hype. As a United fan, here's some analysis, which will try to stay as objective as possible.

Firstly, the lineups for both teams were very positive, which was to be expected given United were playing at home - even the FA Cup tie against Arsenal saw an "attacking" starting XI, despite what many will argue - and they had rested most of the squad in midweek. Chelsea, of course, needed a win to move to the summit and hold their destiny in their hands.

Instead, it seemed that less than a minute in, Chelsea were intent on wrecking the destiny that they had worked so hard to salvage the past few weeks. Given time and room to turn and look for a forward pass in midfield, the a vintage Ryan Giggs picked out the floppy-haired Park Ji-Sung, who in turn found the Mexican Magician to make it 1-0 before most had settled. Chelsea certainly hadn't.

The rest of the first half saw United dominate, extending their lead and in truth, it could have and perhaps should have been at least three goals for the team in red by the break.

Much had been made of Howard Webb's appointment as match official (his record at Old Trafford is suspicious, at best), but his decision(s) to allow Ivanovic to remain on the pitch and disregard a blatant Lampard handball were quite astonishing. One might think he was trying his damnedest to remove the tag of United-lackey that many have (justifiably) labelled him with. That Lampard scored in the second half to threaten a Roman revolution in itself suggested that a certain Scotsman would have been apoplectic come the final whistle had Chelsea pulled level.

And yet, the Chelsea goal almost triggered a repeat of what happened in the Champions League; United nearly restoring their two-goal advantage to take the tie beyond the visitors.

Many had predicted (and hoped?) before the game that Fernando Torres would start on the bench, though certain members of the Liverpool fan-base were sure he'd score, given his record against United and a certain Nemanja Vidic (who did score). His appearance late in the second half produced one misplaced shot and a weak penalty appeal, though even that was more than what some of the other Chelsea players conjured up during the entire 90 minutes.

The aforementioned Nemaja Vidic was a rock at the heart of the United defence, shackling the Ivorian threat of Didier Drogba, and Fabio on the right side of defence showed why so many had pipped him as a better player than his twin brother Rafael. How Ferguson will fit both of them with the missing Patrice Evra will be interesting to watch in the coming years, given the form of Valencia and Park.

Speaking of missing players, United scored this decisive victory over the current champions and their closest rivals without the league's top scorer and the one who should have been crowned Player of the Season (ahead of the scarred Judas Carlos Tevez). While this might suggest a staggering strength in depth that United might boast, one feels that it only demonstrates that nearly every side in the Premier League this season is much weaker than they ought to be.

There are voices in the Chelsea camp (and in the United camp) calling for a mass overhaul in the playing squad, with the players the wrong side of 30 being offloaded. I'm not sure how effective that mentality would be, but an Alex-David Luiz partnership is probably the Blues' best defensive pairing even today. A returning Daniel Sturridge would also make a strong argument for a starting place, giving Ancelotti (if he's still there) more selection problems upfront.

And upfront is where Chelsea will surely improve next season. Wayne Rooney took nearly a year to come close to his snarling best, pre-ankle injury. Torres played a long time for Spain and Liverpool nowhere close to full fitness, and the Spaniard will most likely find his form of old after a good pre-season. Speaking of poor displays, Ashley Cole looked absolutely ragged against Antonio Valencia, didn't he?

On to United.

I've long been a detractor of Michael Carrick. He's neither the visionary maestro that Paul Scholes is nor the inspirational bruiser that the former No. 16 Roy Keane was (is?). I tend to remember his mistakes (Man City) more than his quiet contributions, but the partnership with the ageless Giggs seems to be a fantastic pairing. Will they cope with Barcelona in a few weeks? I highly doubt it, but you never know. I'm a fan of Anderson, truth be told, and Fletcher will surely get into the side. I've already spoken about Fabio, while Evans and Smalling in particular looked more than tidy at the back when they came on, though Evans might have done more for Lampard's goal.

At the final whistle, the United fans, players and staff celebrated as if the trophy presentation was to follow. Post-match, journalists asked Fergie how happy he was to knock Liverpool off their perch. That perch was the subject of an entertaining banner that cameras focussed on during the game as well. Now, while a sole point from two games - Ewood Park and Blackpool at home - should be a formality, disastrous collapses have happened before. No one would be happier than I (with Kopper friends, family and co-workers) when United to secure that 19th title, but let's hold off the champagne to when we finally do win, eh?

All in all, it was a good game, unless you are a Chelsea fan. But even they would have to admit that the better side won, on the day. Next season will be intriguing, with a revitalized Liverpool and an ever-improving Man City thrown into the works.

Thor: Spoiler-Free Review

2011-05-02T23:32:00.002+08:00

So, I caught Part III of the build up to The Avengers over the weekend, going in with less-than-stellar expectations. Here's what I thought.

I'm a fan of Natalie Portman. While I thought Black Swan was quite good yet overrated, I loved Star Wars and V, even if she wasn't the main draw by far. Her role in Thor wasn't an entirely crucial one as far as the grand scheme of things go (she's supposed to be a nurse, anyway). Still, she's funny enough when it mattered, and like I said, I'm a fan.

Side note: Natalie Portman's co-star in V will be in Captain America, if you didn't already know. Elrond, Smith, Megatron, V, Red Skull. Wow.

Moving on, you can't look past Chris Hemsworth (or his abs, if you're of the fairer sex, probably) as the title character. For a long time, there were rumors flying about that Triple H from the WWE was slated to play the Norse God - after impressing in Blade: Trinity - and many had mixed opinions on that. I've only seen/remembered Hemsworth from the opening scenes of Star Trek, but I have to say, he's really good in and as Thor. "I need a horse!" is the definite line of the show.

Before I go further though, I must make on small admission. I knew very little about Thor before X-Men Legends 2 (which is very fantastic).

That being said, I felt the film does a good job introducing the character and revealing enough of his history and paying enough attention to his development to make a lasting impression on casual viewers. I can't speak for hardcore Thor fans, but as a Marvel fan, I'm quite happy with it.

A lot of emphasis on the movie is, like I've previously alluded to, the build up to the fangasm that is The Avengers. One has to say that Thor helps with that in many ways, but it also suggests that when the four of them do get together with the eyepatched one in 2012, it's going to be a very long movie. I like.

The music is pretty good, setting the tone especially in the beginning of the film. Foo Fighters accompanies anyone staying through the credits. And anyone who doesn't is an idiot. Yep.

The action is alright too, though it lacks the "wow" factor that was in, say, X-Men 2. One thing that's bothered me since Mjollnir was revealed in Iron Man 2 (remember what I said about staying after credits?) was how boring it looks. I know the hammer has been depicted as such in the comics, but it's also been jazzed up to be super cool. Like in the animated version of the Avengers. There are some sweet fight scenes though, but I think Thor suffers from the same syndrome that has haunted all Marvel films other than Spiderman 2; a poor final fight.

All in all, Thor is definitely a great movie. Casual viewers and comic buffs should both enjoy it, and it will leave you wanting more, in a good way. As many of us are seeing lightning in one form or another these past few days, I'd highly recommend an outing to watch this movie.

Poll Bearers

2011-05-02T23:09:00.003+08:00

So election fever is running high in just about every corner of our little red dot, with cab drivers, housewives, businessmen, students and media personalities all contributing their own opinions on which three-letter acronym one should mark an X by.

I for one, am quite aghast at what has been going on.

On the day many around the world rejoice at the death of one sect leader, others here seem to have focussed all their energies on besmirching their rivals, with little-to-no apparent constructive comment-making on any agenda.

Now, I'm far from proactive when it comes to politics - local or otherwise - but I make no exaggeration when I say that all I know about the "opposition" parties is what is splashed across Facebook, Twitter and other social media outlets. And nearly all of that is the same.

"LOL PAP SUX"

It's a black mark against the people who are keen on going against the men in white, and quite honestly, a major turn off for myself - and other less-excited people as well, I'm sure.

When it seems like your motivation, your unique selling point, your main and only focus is to highlight that someone or somebody else is less-than-adequate, you're most likely to do nothing but paint yourself in a similar light. You might be able to rile up enough anger amongst "The People" to garner a few rage-votes, but in my eyes, that's very short sighted. From every angle.

Really, my vote will not be gained by groups and parties that are doing naught but saying everyone else sucks.

Don't get me wrong, diversity is good (racial harmony too!) and I won't be surprised if more than one new voice is heard within parliament very soon, but this whole thing has left a very sour taste.

And it's mainly because of the people who are supporting these other people.

The people who attempt to sit on their moral high-chairs when they point at conveniently-timed bank deposits, the same people who bemoan the lack of funds for the hammer-wielders or Star Trek-inspired democrats. You could do something about it, but I'm sure the cash will go to things like an iPad 2 or a nice trip to Marina Bay Sands.

The people who scoff at the "astronomical" salaries of diplomats and politicians, and fail to understand that perhaps such figures might be the reason why corruption is at nominal levels among highly-paid officials in local government as well as modern-day professional sport.

The people who coin terms like "white noise" and "sack the maid" and other quasi-clever analogies, and for all intents and purposes, appear to be little more than bitter citizens jumping on to the anarchists' bandwagon.

All in all, I'm not a huge fan of those already here, but the ones knocking on the door don't seem to be anything more than jealous and loud-mouthed neighbors. You won't see me (post-VS) clad in all-white, but the newcomers have not done nearly enough to persuade me.

Divine

2011-03-21T22:00:00.002+08:00

So a friend of mine states quite confidently that the earthquake in Japan is God's way of telling the world He exists. I find that quite ridiculous, to be fair.

Most people who have studied or read up on philosophy are quickly able to point out how outrageous this is within the context of a loving and caring patron Deity. Last I heard on the radio, the death/missing toll in Japan was over 20,000 and rising fast. That's a hell lot of people. Not to mention the long-term consequences of nuclear fallout (wow) that haven't even begun manifesting themselves.

My initial (flabbergasted) reaction was to point out that if God wanted to prove His existence, ruining the lives of thousands of people wasn't the best way of doing things (unless He wants to try His hand at a good Torak impersonation). Why "announce" Your presence by devastating numbers unfathomable? I haven't even mentioned New Zealand, China, Haiti yet.

I am then told that even a few "wicked" individuals may bring wrath and ruin upon a pious community.

Well, that sucks, doesn't it?

Why then, should anyone be "pious" if a single sacrilegious blasphemer can bring about such earth-shaking consequences? What's the point of prostrating oneself towards Someone who seems to toy with the lives of so many, many of whom are (were?) surely essentially good and fine people? It makes very little sense, if at all.

It's matters like these which made me question such faith and belief so long ago. If one day I hear or read about a child molester or serial killer being stuck by lightning on a cloudless day, I might change my opinion on these things. However, I don't see that happening, surely not as long as apparently "religious" people can point to the deaths of thousands of innocent people as "just another message from God".

A message I'd prefer not to listen to.

Be Cool

2011-03-01T00:22:00.000+08:00

Today, someone was told by one of their parents that dating a Muslim guy was a bad idea, because he was allowed to have four wives. That he could, at any time, scoot on over to Malaysia to find a second wife. Presumably, the third would come from Indonesia and perhaps the fourth from China - a nation with more Muslims than Singapore and Malaysia put together.

As preposterous as this sounds in this day and age, this isn't even the first time I've heard something like this. It makes just as much sense as a cock-flavored lollipop - borrowing from the ever-awesome Dodgeball - and it makes me sick. Granted, I'm far from the devout Muslim, but to persecute someone you hardly (or don't even) know with that kind of logic is stone-age thinking at best. It's a good thing not everyone subscribes to such neolithic beliefs.

That being said, it's been a great day and a generally amazing 2011 for me, everything's functioning splendidly.

Oh, The King's Speech is awesome. You should watch it.

Not a Single Thing

2011-01-25T09:41:00.000+08:00

It's almost the end of January, which means that the first chunk of the year is gone. Funny how time seems to either fly by really quickly or take forever to move along. This year seems to be the former rather than the latter.

I take it as a good sign, of course. As I do with the recent meetings of particular people, and the surprising developments that have taken place.

It's good.

Mine

2011-01-21T09:29:00.002+08:00

Punctuated

2011-01-15T18:42:00.000+08:00

I haven't used a smiley/emoticon since July or August of last year. To me, it seemed a farcical thing, suggesting a (usually happy) facial expression to someone else over a largely-text based medium. Even more so when a genuine smile was so hard to come by.

Yeah, people who have paid attention might have picked up on the vibe that this writer was less than satisfied with his lot, during the latter part of 2010, but you know what?

:)

A Time-Bending Function

2011-01-10T00:44:00.001+08:00

Holy crap, the first week of January has come and gone quickly. Recently came to realize a few surprising things as well. Pleasantly surprising.

I guess it's twelve months late, but my other New Year's Resolution from last time round seems fulfilled now.

2011-01-08T00:30:00.000+08:00

Another Time

2011-01-04T17:28:00.003+08:00

A long time ago, one of my favorite people showed this to me. I still love it.

For us like any other fugitive,
Like the numberless flowers that cannot number
And all the beasts that need not remember,
It is today in which we live.

So many try to say Not Now,
So many have forgotten how
To say I Am, and would be
Lost, if they could, in history.

Bowing, for instance, with such old-world grace
To a proper flag in a proper place,
Muttering like ancients as they stump upstairs
Of Mine and His or Ours and Theirs.

Just as if time were what they used to will
When it was gifted with possession still,
Just as if they were wrong
In no more wishing to belong.

No wonder then so many die of grief,
So many are so lonely as they die;
No one has yet believed or liked a lie,
Another time has other lives to live.

- W. H. Auden

Best Of

2011-01-01T09:12:00.002+08:00

The Devil Eats Prata

2010-12-31T05:06:00.000+08:00

I tend to have a way of associating certain things to certain events with certain people. But then I think that's normal, right? Good or bad, it's the way it is.

It is nice to realize that you've got new and happier (for lack of a better term) memories to hang on to when they do happen though.

Good way to start the end to an eventful year.

It Flies

2010-12-22T18:35:00.000+08:00

As I was sending my heavily-mascara'd sister to the airport for her flight to the land of the Vuvuzela, I realized that the airport is a place that holds special significance in my life. I've shared some of my fondest and saddest memories with the people dearest to me there, and it will probably be a place I'll always look at with more than a hint of sentiment.

But the other thing that flies, as do airplanes in the night sky, is time.

2010 has flashed by, almost too fast for most of us to catch. It still amazes me that it's a few days till Christmas, when I can vividly remember what I was doing in the first quarter of the year. Logically speaking, there are only two possible explanations, of course. Either time appears to be going by faster as we get older because the elapsed time grows proportionally smaller when compared to what we've already experienced, of, the far more likely scenario, I actually have special time-bending powers. Yatta!

It's been a mixed year, at best. Silver linings and small victories in despair, and muted celebrations scattered through the calendar. Got out of school, but miss it. Got a good job, but sacrificed a large chunk of the social life, found and lost good friends and important people, as well as those less favored.

Most of you who either take the time to ask about me and/or to read this space would know all that already, perhaps in depth. Admittedly, some people know more than others, or at least more of certain things than others, either due to choice or circumstance.

Has it been a good year? I'm not sure. Has it been a bad one? I really can't say either way. I do know though, that I made two resolutions last year, and I've kept one of them very well, and failed miserably in the other.

Perhaps that sums up my 2010.

In No Order

2010-12-17T01:08:00.001+08:00

Was speaking to a dear friend of mine about our favorite movies of all time. Here are mine, with the trailers linked - not all the official trailers. I'm sure I've missed a few.

Meet Joe Black
The Land Before Time
Bicentennial Man
300
The Lord of the Rings trilogy
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
Terminator 2
At First Sight
Hook
V for Vendetta
Cruel Intentions
Predator
The Silence of the Lambs
American Beauty
Inception
Jurassic Park
The Truman Show
Desperado
Avatar
The Transformers: The Movie
Atonement
The Matrix
The Lion King
Sin City
A.I.
Armageddon

Note

2010-12-15T00:16:00.000+08:00

At dinner today I saw something that's been staring at me for a long time. Haven't paid too much attention to it since forever, and really not too sure why it's affecting me today.

Was a strange dinner, with good people but maybe it was my fault, being or feeling strangely disconnected.

Christmas is coming, and I'm supposed to go Christmas shopping in a couple of days. Hrm.

Lies

2010-12-13T21:04:00.002+08:00

I don't like being dishonest, but I realize I've been lying to quite a few people recently, and for a long time. Easier that way, maybe. The truth seems to upset others, so.

Faithfully

2010-12-09T00:01:00.000+08:00

It's weird how a question can lead to so much uncertainty, when a question is supposed to bring an end to whatever doubts exist in the first place. That's what I came across recently. Two questions, really. Double trouble.

The first stared at me for a long time, and really, I didn't have any reason, obligation or compulsion to answer it. Well, maybe saying I had no compulsion is stretching the truth a little - there are some people I can't help but reach for.

So I did, and some observers went so far as to assume it meant something more than what it was, a simple answer to a simple question.

The other was stranger, and really, it seemed like it came from a stranger as well. Unexpected, seeing as the last exchange we had was my being told that meeting for dinner wouldn't be possible due to work commitments, but then upon a quick return home, the ever-reliable Facebook revealed otherwise.

Two questions, very different, yet very similar as well.

Met two old friends earlier today. Well, yesterday, now. Nice to do that sometimes. One of them went so far as to mention how he'd like to swap places with me, a sentiment I can hardly agree with.

Still, as cheesy as it sounds, it's a great feeling to be around the people you know you can count on.

River

2010-12-07T00:51:00.002+08:00

Music

2010-12-05T23:38:00.000+08:00

This is music. One of the few acts I would pay to see.

Dawn

2010-12-05T23:02:00.000+08:00

I've always liked the sky. Never made a secret of the fact that I can be a geek at times, and things like the stars, planets, and space in general tends to fascinate me to no end. Am in the midst of reading something by Stephen Hawking about the history of the universe as well, though that's more quantum physics than astronomy. Not to mention mindblowingly-complex.

Something I've always wanted is to watch a sunrise, to share the break of dawn with someone. (Too?) Many people gush about how romantic a sunset is, and while I've experienced a couple of very sentimental ones, the inverse still eludes me.

Strange, seeing as how work sometimes brings me to situations where catching that sunrise is as simple as looking skywards, but somehow it just seems wrong to do it like that.

Hrm.

Blast

2010-12-02T23:28:00.001+08:00

Huh.

I thought I did all that.

Maybe you (and your friends) were right all along!

xkcd

2010-12-02T23:23:00.002+08:00

If It Makes You Happy

2010-11-27T12:07:00.000+08:00

Someone asked me recently, if I remembered the last time I was truly happy. Really happy.

I do. Doesn't make me bitter or anything, not anymore. We should all cherish the fact that we managed to live, be alive in those moments, rather than bemoan how they've passed.

What's yours? Do you remember?

Just A Simple Word

2010-11-25T01:57:00.000+08:00

Test

2010-11-24T20:16:00.001+08:00

This isn't my first rant on the topic, so if that puts you off, let me know. I'll unfollow you on Twitter or remove you from Facebook or any other social media if you have ever come close to preaching about your faith, but choose to minimize my opinion.

It seems, for some reason or another, that the three-letter word is popping up more and more and more online these days. I might go so far to say that I haven't even been in an environment quite like how it is right now, regarding the sheer frequency of the G-word. And I used to talk to lots of bible thumpers. Went to St Gabriel's Primary School, even. The devotion is nigh on palpable.

What irks me though, is how some people can so blindly attribute all that is good to an external locus of control, and yet label any misfortune as a "test".

I don't even know where to start, really.

If you're facing difficulties, looking at it as a test can be a good thing, I admit. It's almost always beneficial to all involved when things are framed in a positive light. No point despairing, right? But you see, there is a difference in changing your point of view on things and believing that it's merely a part of a big cosmic plan.

Let's say you're a Good Person. I think most of us are. Good People. Sure, everyone has their faults, their moments of weakness, their little things. But I don't think most of the people I know are Bad People. I'm sure this applies to the people you know too.

Extend that, and eventually you'll come across more than a few Good People who seem to have been screwed over by the Big Cosmic Plan. A test? Can you really say that with any conviction to the innocent young boy who's lost his family in a hurricane (an act of God), or to the poor honest woman whose children are born with birth defects, or to her beleaguered husband who loses his job to someone sleeping his or her way to the top?

Yeah that last dude wasn't screwed by the Big Man, you say. It was another person that screwed him (well, everyone but him, maybe...).

So what about that Bad Person then? Does the plan not apply to him or her? Aren't they tested? If the Power(s) the Be are testing you to see if you're "worthy", why not "test" these Bad People? Because they're already condemned? Then why do they still get the material wealth? Why are some Bad People born with a silver spoon in their little infantile mouths, and live out a life of comfort and luxury?

But they will be punished in the afterlife, you say.

How do you know that? Because some book that exists in several versions says so? The same book that also decrees that certain cultures and demographics are less than human? I'm not even going to get into that. Yet.

If the "afterlife" excuse is all you have, it's a piss-poor one really. You're trying to tell me that we, creatures of this mortal plane of existence, are supposed to work and strive towards an intangible, unproven, unconfirmable, otherworldly reward? That's faith?

No. I think faith is internal. You believe that things will work out if you actually do something about it. Getting onto your knees won't help (in most cases...), but it might let you focus or calm down to get things done to then make things better. It isn't some Divine Being that's helping you along, it's you finally coming to terms with what you have to do.

Again, some people will object to that, saying that their Deity is their focal point. And that's what I agree with. Everyone should have their own focal point, their own way to meditate - for lack of a better term - over things and to find the solution, or what is perceived to be the best path towards the solution. Again, that brings me back to my earlier point, in that I believe everyone has the ability to make things better for themselves. Perhaps (and probably) not to the extent of which they might ideally want to, but it's more than what an unproven Lord and Creator might bestow upon you.

Here's where someone interjects with an anecdotal story about how someone they know had their life changed for the better because of divine intervention. How they prayed for assistance, and something came out of nowhere to make things brighter and easier. One problem though. If you pray, and that solution appears out of the blue, there isn't really any way for you to say with any certainty that it would not have happened without the prayers. Right?

And what about the millions of people who do pray for help and receive none? Be it your Grilled Cheesus or other religious artifacts, can you really believe that somebody up there helped you get a B+ on that history test when children are starving all over the world?

Do you really believe that that's their test?

Today

2010-11-18T22:39:00.000+08:00

It's not really a finale if it isn't the last part though, eh?

Shoot

2010-11-14T23:08:00.002+08:00

Disclaimer: For the most part, I was not thinking of actual people I know (or maybe already shot...) when I was making up the list. Just bored and in a heightened state of irritation.

1. People who are narrow-minded.

2. People who abuse animals and children.

3. People who see alcohol as an excuse, or take advantage of those who are intoxicated.

4. People who don't reply to messages.
5. People who fucking swear too fucking much.
6. People who stop at the end of escalators.
7. People who ask questions in movies.
8. People who only listen to 80's music because of Glee.
9. PEOPLE WHO TALK IN CAPS.
10. People who don't keep promises.
11. ppl hu tlk in txt spk
12. People who Tweet about being drunk.
13. People who take advantage of others who drive.
14. People who seem to laugh hard at stupid movies.
15. People who are bad at making lewd jokes, but do it anyway.
16. People who preach about religion to those who don't care.
17. People who offer their expert opinion when it is neither expert nor asked for.
18. People who act cute.
19. People who speak in another language when not everyone present can understand it.
20. People who became Michael Jackson fans only after his death.
21. People who try and explain jokes. Badly.
22. People who complain about situations of their own choosing and making.
23. People who waste food and paper.
24. People who turn on their friends.
25. People who are hypocrites or two-faced.
26. People who assume vampire fiction is related to Twilight.
27. People who think being a clerk in NS is easy.
28. People (guys) who have no sleeves.
29. People who assume they have a Divine Right to sit, even after they've obviously been shopping all day.
30. People who bring uncontrollable and misbehaving children to public places.
31. People who talk in cinemas.
32. People who retell and try to revive unfunny gimmicks. Old Spice, Chuck Norris, etc.
33. People who try to use social media to earn money FROM their "friends".
34. People who listen to Justin Bieber.
35. People who are too caught up with getting good grades or making a lot of money.
36. People who waste money.
37. People who troll when they can simply avoid what they don't want to see.
38. People who try to use big words when easier ones will do.
39. People Who Type Like This For Some Reason Which I Never Understood.
40. People... who... use... too many... dots...
41. People who put pictures of cars or other inanimate objects as their Facebook display picture.
42. People who put stupid names as their Facebook names.
43. People who steal.
44. People who love to laugh at others, but cannot laugh at themselves.
45. People who are always late.
46. People who freeload. Food, cigarettes, anything.
47. People who say they need to diet when they don't.
48. People who assume owning a camera equates to being a photographer.
49. People who act as if the world revolves around them.
50. People who can't make up their minds.

Hungry

2010-11-14T19:24:00.000+08:00

Been going to Serangoon way too often recently. Am craving for... cookies, prata, ice cream, salmon sushi/sashimi, pizza, garlic bread, and some good fried rice. In no particular order.

Ice cream after everything, of course.

2010-11-11T01:34:00.002+08:00

Uses & Gratifications Theory. It said something like how you choose the media you frequent because it gives you what you want. What do YOU want when you look at this space?

But I Did Not Send

2010-11-08T16:46:00.001+08:00

Hi there,

I wonder how you're doing. Finally started (seriously) looking for a job yet? Hope the family is good.

Saw that thing the other day, good for you. Wouldn't say it caught me unawares, but then you did also say you'd never do it. Of course, that seemed like ages ago now. People change, things change, of course. Hopefully it works out better than the last time, eh? You know what I think about it, so let's leave it at that.

Got me the iPhone, as I told you I would so long ago. Getting used to it, really the first non-Nokia one I've had in almost a decade. I like it so far, but I'm still amused that some people are going crazy over Facetime and the gadget in general. Just a phone, to me. A good and cool one, of course, but a phone nonetheless.

Caught Sea Rex. Remember that? We saw the trailer for it in April or something and were so stoked (I don't think I've ever used that word before) until we found out it only opened here in November. So it's November, but of course I figured you'd not be watching it with me, if at all. I kinda liked it, though it was slow at times and focussed more on the fossils than the actual animals.

Timbre was good, I take it. Have to say it's been a while since I was uninvited from something, but then it was to be expected really.

And was it you I saw at Kembangan MRT a few weeks ago? If it wasn't, you have a doppleganger walking about. Jeans, nice hair, jacket, pink glasses. Turned away and pretended to be on the phone just as I wanted to call out though, so.

Anyway, I hope you're doing well, even if you never read this.

Naz

Off My Chest

2010-11-06T00:40:00.000+08:00

It was me. But it obviously didn't work out the way I wanted.

Dream

2010-11-04T15:23:00.000+08:00

I drive to the area I know so well, the place I seem to gravitate towards even now, with little reason to. I do have a reason now though, and pass through the familiar roads and lanes slowly, reliving past smiles. The reason disappears suddenly, and I am left somewhat stranded, and frustrated. A walk will do, one thinks.

Glass doors and soft lights to my left, I move along, and suddenly I find myself at a place known very well, though never been. At the portal, at the threshold I stand, and a voice drifts from the small stage of the place, and I find myself amazed and quite confounded to see a certain short and non-singing friend performing (or attempting to perform) some manner of song. Chuckling, I start to move into the cafe, but suddenly I notice a group of people sitting comfortably on the armchairs and sofas of Central Perk, oblivious to my semi-entrance. Prudently, I step back out, and ponder over my next move. I decide to leave, for lingering would be of little use other than to aggravate a situation already lost.

Dropping down into the driver's seat, I reach for the ignition, and as I turn the key, the passenger door opens and another figure lowers herself into the seat comfortably. For a fleeting instant, my hopes soar, and then I realize who it is. Someone else.

"Why didn't you come in?"

"I didn't think the rest of them, or at least one of them, would want me to."

"Why?"

"That's what happened the last time. I was told not to come for dinner on Friday."

"But who said that? And wh - "

And the phone rang and I woke up.

I hate dreams sometimes.

2010-10-31T16:19:00.000+08:00

Cleaning Up

2010-10-27T21:39:00.000+08:00

Earlier today, I received a text uninviting me to something that I didn't expect to get invited to. The messenger was kind enough to try and sugar coat her words, though it was unnecessary, in all honesty. Didn't really feel disappointed considering I didn't expect to go with or without the ask.

Got me thinking (and yes, I have been regularly accused of overthinking) about how far things have fallen, and how much things have changed. It seemed like only yesterday that everything seemed to fall into place, to click and to work.

Not to say that nothing's good now. Far from it. Aside from the (rather serious) accident, work is actually really good. Getting into a good rhythm, and been gelling well with people there. I'd go so far to say my boss likes me. Weekly podcasts are fun too, and I take requests. So far the only one is to say "CRAP" more.

But today's events got me a-thinking, as I mentioned, and not for the first time I realize how easy it is to remember something you've tried so hard for so long to forget.

Just about done with mopping up my room, and clearing away things that should have been kept away before.

Refreshing.

Looking Back

2010-10-18T12:25:00.000+08:00

Rather than wallow in what might have been, it's ultimately and infinitely better to appreciate and cherish what you did have.

I guess I'm beginning to get that now.

Echo

2010-10-16T00:30:00.000+08:00

"There's a time and place for everything."

And the skies lit up.

An echo of a memory long gone but not forgot, letting the night grow quiet as it grew brighter.

Ten Things to Ten People

2010-10-14T19:26:00.003+08:00

1. People think otherwise, and they might not believe me, but I know you're better than that. Have fun in Buffalo, I think that's where you'll be for a while.

2. You don't need to use big words to sound smart.

3. I wish you were still around, instead of being so far. When I heard you were leaving (again) it felt like running into a brick wall.

4. I'm surprised you still make the effort really. It's more than others have done. And I appreciate it. I'll do my best to make it dinner. Even though I hate yogurt.

5. TALKING IN CAPS is very annoying. Ironic that you keep talking about annoying things.

6. The whole perverted and sex-obsessed thing is getting really old really quickly.

7. You told me a long time ago that for the longest time, you couldn't listen to Class 95 at nights, but then got better. I know how you feel now.

8. You seem like someone making their own problems time and time again. And sometimes it feels like the only time you talk to me is in between those problems.

9. I kept my promise not to forget you after graduation. Will you keep yours to be at mine next year? I don't think so, and I'm not sure how I feel about that. Or how I feel about not seeing you the other day when I was told you might be there.

10. I don't think I'm being fair to you.

Hope It Will Come True

2010-10-12T00:08:00.000+08:00

Relic

2010-10-11T23:26:00.000+08:00

The past few days, all I was really thinking of was potentially bumping into someone today. It didn't happen. Somebody asked how I felt about that.

I'll tell you when I know.

New Rule

2010-10-10T20:40:00.000+08:00

It's nice when you see those important to you, when you realize who they are and how important you are to them. At the same time though, it can be difficult if you're unfortunate enough to understand that you're not as important to others as you thought or hoped.

Just have to think about it, and ask yourself if you want to be that person's important person.

Sometimes the answers surprise you, and you can think up new rules for the way things work.

The Other Side

2010-10-08T23:27:00.000+08:00

Everyone is gushing over the passing of a certain wife of a certain Singaporean. I don't know how it feels like to lose a spouse, but I'm sure it's beyond heart-wrenching. I'm sure that the widower is doing his best to get by, along with the rest of the family.

What really irks and annoys me though, is the reaction from the general public.

Not a few weeks ago, the "old man gonna die already" jokes were flying about thick and fast. Hell, teachers and lecturers used to crack them at least once a week in school it seemed. And now suddenly people are clicking "Like" on the deceased's Facebook page (which wasn't set up by her, I would assume) as if they've been supportive all along?

So why do people only bother, or seem to bother or maybe just want to appear to bother after someone has passed on? The old adage of "you don't know what you have til it's gone" would be a popular answer to that, but really, it's bullshit. Same goes for the multitude of Michael Jackson fans who only signed up after he kicked the bucket. How many of them saw Moonwalker?

I'm not saying we shouldn't pay our respects. Death is never a nice thing. But seriously, if you've been saying all this while about how "he should hurry up and die", you have very little excuse for acting nice and altruistic now. The "oh I hope he will be OK" Tweets and Facebook statuses and the like are plain ridiculous.

How many other people passed away on that day? Are they any less special than that one lady? I'm sure she was - and probably still is - the world to her husband and family. I accept, expect and respect that. But was she to the rest of you? Now take a moment to think about how "sorry" or "sad" you feel when you hear about other deaths. The obituaries are there everyday. Do you take the time to look and wonder about how each of them might also deserve the same amount of attention?

A Nice Message

2010-10-06T19:33:00.001+08:00

Timeless

2010-10-05T10:47:00.001+08:00

Cheers

2010-10-02T02:35:00.000+08:00

Woke up suddenly realizing I needed a hair cut. Started to wonder why I was keeping it long in the first place. Had it cut.

Moving on.

Hey

2010-09-30T21:25:00.002+08:00

Don't know if you'll read this, but it's more than 140 characters, and so one obvious avenue for communication (if it can be called that) is out. E-Mails don't work anymore either, I guess.

I have no idea what it is that's eating at you, and honestly, as much as I do want to know, there's a part of me that doesn't as well, and I definitely don't want to guess anyway. All I see and hear and read is about how you're angry and sad and bothered.

Everyday, every hour, I get reminded of things I've been trying to forget. That dinosaur movie we've been waiting for is showing now, and the concert is next week, but the likelihood I'll catch either is about as good as landing a starring spot on Glee. Pity though, for more reasons than the obvious.

A lot of other people will read this though. Well, not a lot. This space isn't that popular, other than seeming to attract bots (I'm looking at you, ChatBox). But a number of people will read this, though not all will understand half of it. To you folks, I'm sorry.

And I'm sorry to you too, the one this is for. Sorry for many things.

Not everything, though.

Not for sneaking up on unsuspecting siblings at the airport, or watching the planes fly in the night sky (sans wishing they were shooting stars). Not for being called "Chocolate" or for watching you freak out when you thought someone had caught on. Not for long rides home with others pretending not to see the flower laying there, and not for that one being just one of many I'm not sure you even have any more. Not for still keeping the bottle of water you only half-finished when we went to the zoo and not for stealing that first hug when that other person was in the theatre bathroom. Not for the little smiley faces that used to litter your MSN window, the crazy smiley faces you'd make when driving in the car. Or the one night you showed up, out of the blue, and made me believe that I wasn't so crazy after all.

A long time ago, you made me promise not to forget you, and I intend to keep that promise.

I just hope that you haven't forgotten that I'm always be and I've always been here if you need or want anything.

Doubt this will change anything though, but I had to say it somehow.

There It Is

2010-09-28T17:31:00.002+08:00

First time in weeks. Not that it changes anything. Think I'm getting sick too, and that's always very bad.

Shit.

Clubbed to Death

2010-09-27T10:46:00.000+08:00

I like the instrumental track by Rob D, especially the mix that was used in The Matrix. The video is a little weird, but the song is still kick-ass. But this isn't about piano keys and bass, this is about clubbing. At least my take on it.

Many people have their own views on clubbing. Some are all for it, and some abhore the habit. Or addiction. I've been to clubs before, and I think that - OK, I've been to a club before, and I think it's alright I guess, if you're into that kind of thing.

I'm not.

Some choose to walk through the smoky doors of a dimly-lit, wall-thumping club to have fun. Well, I guess you could say everyone goes there to have fun, but the catch is that definitions of fun differ greatly from person to person. I'd think watching Tremors and laughing at cheesy movie effects is fun, but others might only classify the F-word as being drunk out of your mind in a room full of equally-drunk people. The exception, of course, would be the designated drivers who would be body-shakin while maintaining a soberly outlook on life. At least that's what most of us hope.

Many of my close friends enjoy clubbing. I don't. As I've mentioned so eloquently before, crowds aren't my cup of tea. I hate tea anyway. I don't frown on people who do indulge themselves, though. It's just...

Sometimes it's difficult to not look around the Web for any seemingly innocent material before you are assaulted with a multitude of gyrating torsos promising fun and funk at any random club VIP room. And I go "Wait a minute..."

Now, this isn't me saying I don't, can't or won't trust someone who likes to club particularly often (to my liking, at least), but it's just the other people I don't trust. It's just the other drunk people I don't trust. You could meet the first Singapore Idol or some supposed TV-star there, but it still doesn't change the fact that things do happen at clubs. And not all of it is fun.

Simply put, many people club looking to have a good time. Now, there are good times and there are good times. Forgetting that you have a significant other and making out with a stranger isn't my idea of a good time, but it happens as most of you very well know. I'm lucky enough to not have had to deal with that (to a certain degree...), but listening to stories from various sources is indeed very disconcerting.

(Overheard from random fella, translated for your benefit)

"Oh man, you know I was Zouk yesterday and there was this HOT chick. I don't know who she is, never found out her name, but she was high man, HIGH. We were dancing and before I knew it, her tongue was in my mouth!"

Of course, the source of this monologue would be a rather obnoxious fellow that, if anything, smells. Over the pungent aroma of too many vodkas and cigs.

But the fact of the matter is that such things do happen, and sometimes I worry. Maybe it's me being paranoid. I was reassured all the time by the other girls that they'll "take care" of the others. Now, I don't mean to be rude, but you don't exactly put up a brilliant picture of confidence when you're staggering to the ladies (in a group, of course) to puke.

But I'd still not stand in the way of anyone going to a club, of course. Especially since most invite me to tag along anyway so I can see first-hand the grinding of people trying to look cool and fit in.

Well, I guess that's the end of my tirade. Not much else to say, really. Like I said at the start, nothing against clubbers, and no offence to anyone who might have been implicated here. Go! Club! Drink! Enjoy!

2010-09-27T10:41:00.002+08:00

I Miss Your Purple Hair

2010-09-22T07:18:00.001+08:00

2010-09-20T00:32:00.001+08:00

Only Just A Dream

2010-09-19T19:59:00.000+08:00

Another work-night saw another drive alone. Wrong turn took me to the same place again. Good music though, so that was a plus.

Sleepless in Serangoon

2010-09-18T20:50:00.002+08:00

Had a good day (so far) today, I think. Did a lot of that, thinking, with certain questions from certain people not helping matters. Then made my way to work, after cleaning up.

Found myself somewhere else instead of the office.

Good thing I decided to leave early.

Something from the Past

2010-09-17T23:43:00.001+08:00

2010-09-14T23:45:00.001+08:00

Hari Raya

2010-09-09T21:33:00.000+08:00

It's here again. Customary for those who celebrate it to ask for forgiveness from those around them for wrongdoings and the like, and so I'll take this opportunity to do so, though I'm not exactly sorry for everything that's happened over the past year.

If I've wronged you, perhaps I'm sorry then.

Perhaps not.

Throwback to Simpler Times

2010-09-06T22:31:00.001+08:00

Sleep

2010-09-06T20:11:00.000+08:00

Lately I've been having trouble getting to sleep, which is ironic seeing as how half the time I'm so bored I could doze off doing anything. But right after I log off and switch off (my, how we are slaves to the internet these days), I find myself staring at nothing, thinking about everything.

Not even any one thing, just everything. Mind whirling like a car rolling down a cliffside in an action flick. Minus cheesy over-the-top explosion.

Any suggestions?

iPhony

2010-09-04T00:54:00.000+08:00

So there I was with my family, hungry and awaiting the "authentic" Thai food that was to be served at a familiar orange-toned restaurant. That the waiter came to take our orders without a pen or pencil or quill didn't help matters of course, and neither did the scowling visage of one particular sibling as she looked longingly at the popcorn chicken procured from the nearby KFC outlet. As the minutes ticked by ever so slowly (I'll get into the reasons for fasting another day, perhaps), I sat back and closed my eyes for a moment. I do deserve a rest, after all, seeing as how I've worked hard and honest everyday for almost two weeks. Who am I kidding, I was up late watching Mythbusters and CSI and Built For the Kill.

Anyway.

As we sat there, I noticed that the table had gone quiet. Now, my family has never been a very talkative one (at least among ourselves; my sister once said of her lack of smiling at gatherings: "It's because I hate being here.") but this was rather eerie. It was as if I had gone deaf, or that some beings had come and stolen everyone's voices, like that awesome episode on Buffy (called Hush, highly recommend). Looking up, I then saw the reason for the all-conquering silence.

Someone explain to me why I bothered to have dinner with my family when every single one of them seemed more intent on being transfixed to their little phones (Apple or other fruits) instead of those around them. Please.

Lots of people going crazy over a small black gadget that promises endless entertainment, unlimited convenience and everything from driving directions to the answer to life, the universe and everything. I, for one, am not amused.

I'm not even going to talk about the mass of people spamming things like FACETIME and the like on the various social media platforms that we're all slaves to, or how the general populace have been so efficiently ensnared and enthralled by the promises and promotions of the various TelCom companies. Rather, it was that single poignant incident a few hours ago that finally drove me over the edge, as it were.

Not the first time this kind of incident has pissed me off, and each time it does it reminds me of how someone I know once suggested leaving the phones in the car or somewhere else when spending time together. I still think that's one of the best ideas I've heard in a while.

Of course, I'm in line to get me one of these little demon-trinkets as well, though I'd like to believe I won't be guilty of such behavior. Have to ask yourself, though, why bother trying to maintain things face-to-face when everyone is more interested in face-to-screen. I would think that I, because of past history, might be better positioned to speak of the merits of computer (or at least technology-) mediated communication, but this is really taking it too far.

After several minutes, mother dearest noticed my vexation at the situation, and smiled. She then proceeded to go back to her phone. It's a bad apple we have in our midst, ladies and gentlemen, though one that isn't going to get sifted out anytime soon I'm sure.

I'll Be There For You

2010-09-03T09:42:00.001+08:00

So The Rembrandts repeated every time before we started watching the best half-hour sitcom ever made. But what does it mean to be a friend? The implications and obligations, complications and connotations, the measure and meaning of friendship itself?

Before I start, and perhaps you've already thought to yourself by now, what do I know about being a friend? I can name a fair number of people who would probably think I'm a poor example, but then I could probably say the same about them.

One often expects the most from those considered a "friend", and perhaps that's justified. Of everyone you would have any expectations for, the ones you hold in the highest regard should by default be expected of highly as well. And if you don't look at your friends that way, why call them such?

But then isn't it also true that you shouldn't expect anything from a bond or relationship such as that? One borne of trust, respect and - for lack of a better word - love? You shouldn't expect something given in return, a transactional model, but one is content in knowing that your friends have your interests and happiness at heart.

Of course, it all sounds sickeningly idealistic, and in most cases that's hardly the case.

I know people who have been accused of "collecting friends", who makes little effort to get to know any one of their so-called friends after seeming to establish that they are, beyond any doubt, friends. Strange and contradictory, yes, but the antics of most girls usually are. I know of those that would give heartfelt and tear-streaked promises, whispered in the ears of those supposedly dear, and appear to forget the oaths when out of sight. Out of mind, perhaps. People who would undercut or simply cheat other "friends" out of their money. Some who might take full use of any relationship with anyone simply for the sake of convenience, treating others as one might a hired (and poorly-paid) chauffeur.

But then I also know those who would go out of their way to make sure that a friend is happy or stays happy. People who might quietly and stoically give up something they want to improve the situation of someone they care about. Those who expect nothing in return and in truth, sometimes get nothing in return. Friends who would expend much even if they don't spend much, those who make it seem like making the effort is effortless.

But it's hardly effortless.

A friendship, or any kind of relationship is something that takes time and energy to grow and maintain. Nothing new there, of course. But what many don't realize is that the way one quantifies or qualifies the resources put into that relationship lacks any universal measure.

Am I a good friend because I twice cancelled on seeing a girl I was seeing (dating?) because a friend was upset and needed to talk? Am I a good friend for picking someone up and driving them home, both out of my way, because they were sick? Am I a good friend for dropping my own work to help someone else write a Psychology paper, seeing as how I was more versed in the subject matter? What about the times I have simply not bothered with people who have bothered? Or when I have ditched a friend for a date? Or the number of times I have pretended to be "Busy" or "Away" online to avoid talking to people who would call themselves my "friends"?

But then there are different "friends" to different people, and the concept of friendship itself is vague, at best, perhaps. There are those I have barely seen in a year, and yet who I'd do almost anything for. Those I spend more time with than most but who I don't care much for. And all of this changes. This flux often throws people into disarray, and many don't understand it. I know I don't.

Two different people recently spoke of how they feel a wedge between them and either an individual or a group of friends. I have to say, I know how they feel. Not a lot of advice I can give them, for how can anyone outside and uninvolved ever hope to understand the complexities and intricacies of any friendship? You could spend years looking at two people, two friends, and still be surprised when they eventually and suddenly fall apart from each other. Or is that so surprising?

I've had to reconsider and reevaluate who means what to me. Not an easy or pleasant experience. I wrote earlier of a transactional model, and of expectations, likening a friendship to a business, almost. While that's a harsh and unfeeling analogy, and one I disagree with, there are aspects of it that ring true.All in all, I guess, sometimes you have to cut your losses. You know or you'll know if someone is a friend, and if you want to be a friend to someone. No point being a "friend" of, or to someone if they're not a friend to you.

2010-09-01T16:32:00.001+08:00

Can't remember the last time you talked to me, I hope I do soon.

Along the Wire

2010-08-29T16:02:00.001+08:00

Hey.

You used to call them surprise E-Mails from a crazy Malay boy. Not really "surprise", since they were regular happenings, and not really Malay. The rest is accurate, more or less. Haven't sent one in a bit, and three lines into this, I realize I won't exactly send this, either. Not even sure if you'll read this one way or another.

Long time ago, we talked about bumping into each other suddenly, out of nowhere, and how glad we were to realize that it didn't have to be a rarity. Soon enough, you got me skipping classes to watch the clouds pass and the waves roll, and pretty quickly that became something just the two of us did together. Evening walks and watching the lights shimmer across the water on the pool, our little secret.

You said you couldn't promise anything, but that was alright. You know I never demanded anything at all, and I don't now. But you did promise so, so much. Just by letting me in, sharing and giving so much of yourself. Racking up two-hundred dollar phone-bills, naturally having me elect not to spend birthdays (including my own) with family and other friends, that one glorious night where you came over, taking me totally by surprise, and we took another slow walk to nowhere.

A walk to nowhere, that's what it is now, you know? Maybe that's what it always was to you, but I was too blind to see it. I hope it wasn't , because to me you were the biggest and best part of me.

Was.

I keep telling myself that the tense is right, that I shouldn't be beating myself up over something that I obviously can't change or affect, and some of the little things I've done recently have helped somewhat. Now your name doesn't jump out at me automatically the minute I come online. Yet I still scroll to see if you're there. And wonder. You were the one whose name dominated my in- and outbox for the longest time. The one who called spending hours on the phone every night "SOP". The one with all the flowers. The one'd slip notes into my bag or wallet, or cleverly disguise real-life conversations relayed on your blog. The thing that almost kept me from accepting my job, fearing I couldn't spend enough time with you. The one I grew out my hair for, the one I quit swearing and speeding for.

So what now, or does that not even matter? We promised each other a long time ago that no matter what happened, things would be alright. You made me promise not to forget you, and I haven't and probably never will, though I can't remember the last time we had a decent conversation now.

Did I do something, say something wrong? You said you gave me that chance, the chance I begged for, yet that's something I can't believe. You said there was a time you looked at us and seriously thought about it, and while I do believe that, I'm not sure how long you looked, how seriously you took me. Big part of me hates that I waited, that I stuck with certain principles, wondering what might have been. Perhaps it wouldn't have changed anything, but now I'll never know.

I'll always remember, like I said. That pile of tickets speak of last-minute and overpriced adventures, rainy days with birds nibbling jeans, deja vu animal trips, electric skies on a little island, mind-blowing movies, awesome geek-fests, and more. I remember you sneakily getting a friend to ask me what was up, waiting the hours while you had to attend to your family, driving back with you and others, hoping they'd not ask the obvious, bumping into mutual friends, when you freaked and thought he found out, discovering that we might have known each other all our lives since a shared holiday when we were kids. And for a time, it felt like we did. Still there were the days and nights we'd go to such lengths to gaze at the stars (and Mars), singing stupidly in the car, hunting and ambushing oblivious siblings, exchanging surprise birthday books, watching kites fly, and that time I held you in my arms, when you seemed to happy, sitting on top of that dusty dam.

I don't regret all that. I was happier then than I've been in a long, long time. I only hope I made you happy too.

And wonder what happened to that.

Naz

Huh.

2010-08-28T16:11:00.000+08:00

Been having more than the usual number of these shortish blog entries lately, I guess. Microblogging, is that what it's called? No idea. I don't like it. Just not a lot to say sometimes, even when you want or need to say something. Or not a lot that could or should be said.

Small steps are the way to go. Sometimes things make it easier and more difficult all at the same time.

Live in My Memory

2010-08-23T01:03:00.000+08:00

Got a new wallet some time ago, and haven't actually used it yet. Went through the stuff in my old (current) one today, and saw something from a while back that made me stop and look at things that have come to pass.

Gutsy.

Fast

2010-08-21T02:29:00.000+08:00

My, how a year changes things. And how much has happened in the year since.

Not looking forward to the traditional day of celebration that's due in a few weeks.

I hate questions.

Expendables: Spoiler-Free Review

2010-08-19T23:49:00.002+08:00

A few years ago, if you'd have told anyone that a movie would star Sylvester Stallone, Jason Statham, Jet Li, Dolf Lundgren, Mickey Rourke, Bruce Willis and Arnold Schwarzenegger alongside UFC legend Randy Couture and WWF/E icon Steve Austin, you'd have their laughter echoing till today. That's a very long sentence.

You don't get long sentences in The Expendables, though, just all those names and more.

I'll get it out of the way early: I really, really liked the movie. It's not Terminator 2 or Iron Man or Avatar, but it doesn't suffer from the stupid plots, poor acting or cheesy effects that seem to haunt more recent films (Last Airbender and Twilight, I'm looking at you, from what I hear). Story follows a group of mercenaries (The Expendables) as they go about their daily business, as you may. Nothing ground-breaking, and somewhat predictable.

But I'd much rather predictable than stupid, and the movie's predictability is somewhat offset by the sheer awesomeness of the cast. It reeks of awesomeness. I haven't even mentioned Charisma Carpenter (Buffy!) and Eric Roberts, brother of slightly more famous Julia. Fans of Heroes would recognize him straight away, Mister Villain, you.

Lots of blood and bullets, with a body count that I'm sure exceeds a couple of hundred. A few of the sequences are reminiscent of something out of Time Crisis, but I for one feel that it's done well. No chaingun from Predator or T2 though.

Arnie and Bruce Willis don't stay on screen too long, but the scene that they do share (with Stallone) is brilliant. Won't spoil it for you, but one line in particular drew a fantastic reaction from the whole theatre. Jason Statham seems to have perfected his character from The Transporter so much that he now carries it with him wherever he goes, and while that might usually be a crutch, it fits really well here. Just substitute the car for a bike. Jet Li, for me though, was really fantastic. I actually had a discussion with friends about how I liked Jet Li more than other Asian actors because he was serious and stylish, but here he made me laugh harder than Jackie Chan ever has. Randy Couture's performance is also commendable, though playing an ex-wrestler tough guy isn't too far from the truth. Steve Austin plays a big bad enforcer type of fellow, and again, it's a role he's played more than once and so does it well. And you just know that the two of them have to get it on. And Mickey Rourke still has his highlights from Iron Man 2, it looks like.

Ensemble casts don't always work though (Manchester City will testify), but it does here. Mainly because they stick to a simple formula and don't try to sell the whole package as anything it isn't. The Expendables isn't trying to touch you or move you emotionally, unless it's invoking a nostalgic, ironic smile, but it delivers magnificently as a movie about a group of good guys going after a bunch of bad guys. Nothing too complicated, and with more than enough bits that make you go "Oooh".

Probably wouldn't watch it again, but more than happy I did watch it at all.

Probably...

I'd say it was better than Predators, which I liked, but not nearly as good as Inception, which was brilliant. Hard to give a number to it, but I'd recommend The Expendables to anyone who's ever enjoyed an action movie.

What The Fish

2010-08-19T02:07:00.000+08:00

Somewhat mixed day, to say the least. Started out relaxed, and then rushed, and an unforeseen emergency - are there any other kinds? - before a long series of drives. 28 Days Later and Hook have always and perhaps will always be favorites for separate reasons, and the company was nice to a large degree.

On the drive back from Bukit Panjang, with Heart for company, I was quite excited to have a batch of tuna sandwiches for a late meal.Came home, though, looking forward to that one thing and one thing only, only to have it dashed.

No more tuna. Not the kind I wanted, at least.

Yeah, not exactly the worst news I received today, nor was it earth-shattering in any shape or form.

So I thought to myself, OK, there are other kinds of tuna spread things. They'd do, right?

I sat there, munching on what I had to settle for, and even an unseen episode of Mythbusters wasn't enough to curb the dissatisfaction.

Hate to settle, though some say when you're not left with anything else, that's all you can do.

But then why do it, why do anything at all, when you won't even be happy with the outcome?

So here I am, exhausted yet unable to get to sleep, annoyed with myself more than anything, if only because I can't have what I want the most, and settling for anything else seems even worse than not getting anything at all.

Hooked

2010-08-19T00:15:00.001+08:00

Walk Away

2010-08-14T14:49:00.002+08:00

Movie lines still echo
True even today
Watching, waiting, hoping so
Things will go my way

Sometimes each day

I catch myself still

Thinking of ways

To change how she feels

A blazing sky
And hopping birds
Never a lie
Within the words

Cloudy defeat
And rainy walks
Used to just meet
And stare and talk

Across the water
Hair in my face
And still I hear her
Another time and place

Surprised one night
A phone call that came
Her eyes so bright
Walking down the lane

Beaches and parks
And five-hour talks
Darwin and sharks
Colored stalks

Humbling, she whispered
That she didn't expect
And why, I wonder
What we want we don't get

Walk away if she asked
The promise I made
But only at last
Were those words said

Though if ever there were
A memory I'll keep
The visions of her
That still haunt my sleep

2010-08-14T01:05:00.002+08:00

2010-08-11T21:06:00.002+08:00

2010-08-09T01:44:00.001+08:00

I bothered. Did you?

Man Utd: Pre-Season Perspectives

2010-08-08T00:41:00.002+08:00

With the Community (Charity, dammit) Shield less than 24 hours away, the English football season is looking to be another tight affair. I talked about what I thought about 2009/10 already, so let's take a look at what's in store, especially for Man Utd.

The biggest thing that everyone looks at, more often than not, is the impact of transfers in and out of a club. The Red Devils haven't made quite the same impact as they have in years gone by, and have largely been overshadowed by the other Manchester team (again) in this department this season. I've always been a fan of David Silva, and to see him in Eastlands rather than wearing the ugly United kit irritates me. Same thing with Torres till this day, both of whom United were supposedly coveting for so long. Other names to have been strongly linked include Mesut Ozil, Stefan Defour and Wesley Sneijder, all of whom would have been killer acquisitions in my opinion. They're all staying put though, apparently. Still, we bagged Chris Smalling and Javier Hernandez, who had a very impressive World Cup and has scored three goals (I think) since returning from the land of the vuvuzela.

I like Hernandez, and watched him very closely while playing for Mexico. His pace and movement is top notch, though one of his goals did come against an admittedly piss-poor France side just asking to be slaughtered. His lobbed goal against the MLS All-Star side also displays his composure and technique, and with Ferguson suggesting a partnership with Rooney, prospects look good. Of course, I said the same for the Rooney-Berbatov partnership (which I still believe in, if only Ferguson would use the Bulgarian better), so we'll see. I could be wrong, as I've been in the past! I wonder what this means for Michael Owen and (more importantly) Federico Macheda though. As it stands, I'm thinking that Rooney is the obvious first choice, with Berbatov and Hernandez vying for a starting place (if there is room at all for a second striker), with Macheda being next in line. Lost Ben Foster, who I think was just nervy and unlucky, but Van Der Sar at 40 is still miles ahead of him anyway.

The rest of the team looks solid, back to front. If Ferdinand stays fit, Rio and United are looking at a backline that includes the ever-imposing Vidic (who will get sent off against Liverpool), the underrated O'Shea, new kid Smalling, veteran Gary Neville and one of the world's best left backs, Patrice Evra. Ashley Cole and a few others might contend that, but I still stand by Evra, French fiasco aside. I'm also a huge fan of the Da Silva twins, and hope that they both get more time this season, even as wingers perhaps. Not big on Wes Brown though. Scholes and Giggs will be used sparingly again, but last season has shown that they've still got the touch, if not the legs to change a game. Park Ji-Sung, Fletcher and Valencia always impress, and Nani is still an enigma to me, choosing to be Cristiano Ronaldo one week and Luke Chadwick another. Wonder about Possebon's chances. Gibson will get more time as well, though Carrick's future looks bleak to me. Hopefully Anderson will stay out of car wrecks and Hargreaves eventually gets off the doctor's table.

Here's what I'm looking at for the 25-man League Squad, off the top of my head:
Van Der Sar, Kuszczak, Neville, O'Shea, Brown, Evra, Ferdinand, Vidic, Scholes, Giggs, Fletcher, Nani, Park, Valencia, Gibson, Carrick, Anderson, Rooney, Berbatov, Hernandez, Owen, Hargreaves (22)

U21 players include: Rafael, Fabio, Obertan, Smalling, Macheda, Welbeck, De Laet, Possebon

What about the rest? Liverpool got Joe Cole, which is fantastic news for them, even if Ferguson said no one available "excited him". I've always been a huge fan of him, and I think him, Jovanonic and Hodgon will give the Kop a much better season than the last, though that's admittedly easy. Fabregas staying at Arsenal and the addition of Chamakh is also fantastic news for the Gunners though they're still threadbare at the back with less-than-inspiring goalkeepers. Why not move for Akinfeev or something? Man City will collapse, I hope, Milner or no. I like Villa, Everton and Spurs so I'm hoping they all have great seasons, and they look like they have the personnel to do it. Young, Agbonlahor, Kranjcar, Modric, Sandro, Cahill, Arteta, Pienaar and Rodwell are all fantastic players, all of whom I'd love to see playing for United. Chelsea are of course the probably favorites again, but losing Ballack, Deco, Cole and Belletti for Benayoun and maybe Ramires is tough, though the four of them aren't nearly as important as, say, a returning Michael Essien.

I'm optimistic for the future in terms of what it has in store for United, though. I'm picking Chelsea to lift the Shield at Wembley, but hoping that United finish top of the league, with the Blues nowhere close. In a perfect world, Villa, Spurs and Everton would complete the top four, but I see the "order" restored one way or another, though one of the three have a decent chance of pipping Arsenal or Liverpool (if they implode). And there's Man City. I'm personally happy to see Newcastle back, but here's to hoping an opening day defeat!

Community Shield prediction: Chelsea 2-1 Man Utd

E-Mail

2010-08-06T23:16:00.002+08:00

Friend of a friend asked about school. As I wrote the reply, I realized it was even more awesome than I remember.

Hi there,

Fang Xun mentioned you'd contact me, heh.

Going to New York is actually rather common, and an avenue taken by many who can afford it. Any student of UB-SIM (or SIM-UB, depending on who you're asking) is eligible to go to the New York campus after fulfilling a few simple criteria, almost always in August for the Fall Semester.

Here's where I should explain the semester system.

Spring Semester: January - April

Summer Semester: May - August

Fall Semester: September - December

So you can see, school holidays are almost non-existent; typically the longest "break" period is in late December (exams are sometimes during the first week of December) to early or mid January.

Back to going to New York proper, as I said, a lot of people do that, and almost everyone enjoys it immensely. Most go for two semesters (Fall and Spring) or just one, though under most circumstances, SIM students studying abroad (in New York) are a rarity since the "Summer Semester" is usually vacation time for the yanks.

I was supposed to go in January 2010, for the Spring Semester, but because of the, uh, tense political climate now, my being a male Muslim with military training played against me and I was denied entry to the States. People are fuming about it to this day.

The single degree program is nine semesters long (three years) for most students. If you fail or drop anything (or are a Business major taking up specific concentrations/courses) it might be a little longer. A double major or double degree (they're different) program might take longer than that - up to a year perhaps. That being said, you can finish a double major course in three years or less as well.

A Level students are eligible to certain waivers in terms of course and subject obligations, and most of them are pretty straightforward. Any A-Level graduate who has passed any of Biology, Chemistry, Literature, C Maths or has scored at least a B for Economics will be waived at least a few modules, and that saves you a pretty nice amount of money since the billing is calculated per-credit.

I've actually graduated already, at more or less the same time as Fang Xun, and if this E-Mail sounds like I'm selling the institution, know that it's with good reason. I've said before, and will gladly say again, that "screwing up my A levels and ending up in UB is the best thing that's happened to me." It's made me into the person I am today, more than anything else has, and I am sincerely glad I made that choice.

The thing you'll hear most is how the "American system" affords everyone a rich and different atmosphere compared to the more "traditional" institutes, and I firmly believe and am thankful for that. Especially in the Communications degree program, everyone is allowed and encouraged to be vocal, develop interpersonal skills, develop a responsible work ethic and work in groups. The teachers rarely - if ever - spoon-feed you information; rather everyone is expected to be proactive and take the initiative. This is actually a big change for almost everyone, and more often than not a culture shock. But I feel it adds a lot to your character and the way you're able to function singly or in a team.

Lesson structure is diverse, depending entirely on the instructor (many of whom are from UB itself, or an associated institution). Some are rather straightforward Quiz-Paper-Exam kinds of subjects, but there are some modules with no exams at all, and your grade is assessed entirely on a bunch of presentations or even class participation. In almost every case, the exam(s) isn't worth more than 30% of the final grade anyway, and I've taken a class where the exam was worth only 7% of the final score. Yep, seven. Everyone is also supposed to take courses in writing, history, music, psychology, sociology, philosophy, and science. Most of them are highly enjoyable.

Of course, it isn't an easy ride all the way. As Fang Xun (I sometimes call her Sally) will attest to, some of the modules and/or instructors are frustratingly difficult.

The biggest worry (other than cost) that most people will have is the fact that "a degree from SIM won't be recognized". From my personal experience, that's kind of rubbish. I can easily name a heckload of UB graduates who are now working in very reputable companies in the fields of media, journalism, advertising, PR, events, and just about everything else. Besides, the degree doesn't even say SIM!

The people you meet in UB (if you do decide to enroll) will come from all walks of life. I've taken classes and done projects with fresh O Level students (like Fang Xun), NUS degree holders, working mothers, part-time bartenders, Singapore Idol contestants, models, athletes, dancers, writers, artists, locals, foreigners from Malaysia, Indonesia, Russia, Austria, and everything in between. Of course, you'll also run into drama-queens, back-stabbers, freeloaders and general buffoons, but then you find them everywhere.

Many who have graduated from UB have wonderful things to say about their time there, and often with good reason. "I miss UB" is something I hear a lot nowadays.

If you're seriously considering doing a degree there, I'd say you're on the verge of making a great decision.

Regards,

Naz

2010-08-04T22:08:00.001+08:00

Dice rolled, ball passed. Your move.

Not gonna let me let myself down anymore.

Walk in the Park

2010-08-02T00:39:00.000+08:00

Am still sore and aching from close to no rest since football on Friday. Now hungry too. Keep losing track of thoughts and things, it annoys me. Need my hours filled, but need some time to just slow down too. A paradox, and an irritating one.

But I'm irritable.

Different People

2010-07-28T20:13:00.000+08:00

"But I'm a million different people from one day to the next..."

I love that song. Lately, I've been talking to some people I either hadn't talked to in a long time, or at all before. The frequency of talking to some others who I have been talking to regularly have also lessened, and for that I am really sad about.

A long time ago, a young and lonely kid called a girl on her birthday, telling her how he felt for her. Truth be told, the words he uttered were probably a little melodramatic, but they grew into truth eventually. They saw the world evolve around them, and each other grow into different people. The problem was that they remained in love with what they were before and not who they became and continued to become.

It's a common situation, listening to some people talk, even if it sounds basic. But why?

We all have our ideals, of course. That's a given. But what I guess many don't see is that we also often form our own idealized perceptions of certain people. I'm guilty of that. Especially so. While perspective is important, it's also at least equally important to be able to recognize that things aren't what you want them to be, but what they are. People change.

Not totally, though.

More than one person has told (warned?) me about how they're apparently different people as friends and as partners or significant others. Really? Why?

If your partner is your friend - even your best friend - then why is this so?

To me, if that happens you got to look at the situation you're in. If you're different people with different people, perhaps you should ask yourself which person you prefer. We're all in control of our destinies, even if that locus of control sometimes seems to be in the hands of other parties like our folks, employers or the like. You can choose who you want to be, can't you? What's the point in making any decisions if you can't?

When the kid was with the girl he grew up with, he started growing up himself. After some time, he realized that there was more to life than being a quiet boy that played chess and Fifa 99 all day over a crappy dial up modem. He could meet friends who weren't the girl's, and that he actually wanted to be someone else. The girl was, and still is, a fantastic person. They were happy, truly. But he wasn't him.

It's hard being who you're not, tiring and trying.

Eventually, things got out of hand, and the weariness and other things combined to break them apart. Good choice? Right now it seems that way, though the memories are still very much treasured.

So now the kid is a little older, hopefully somewhat wiser. He's become someone else, as have we all. Right now that kid and the girl have become people they never thought they'd become, I'm sure. Having seen, said and done things that neither expected even a few years ago, one wonders what the future holds.

I'm All Write

2010-07-27T21:12:00.000+08:00

When I'm upset, bored, pensive, lost, I write. I like to write. I'd like to think I do it pretty well, though I won't fool myself (or anyone else) by saying I'm damn good at it, and am better than most.

Still, I find it helps. Sometimes by putting things down in words it's very cathartic, and sometimes it just distracts you from whatever's on your mind.

I know it's weird to say that, since for so many (that I know, at least), writing involves thinking. Sometimes it does, of course, but often times my stuff involves very little brain work.

Hence the rambling, error-rich and nonsensical nature of the majority of my posts.

It's hard when you can't write everything though.

A Journey

2010-07-27T01:58:00.001+08:00

Drove a long, long way today. Restless hearts sleep alone tonight.

Good day, I think. Maybe. Not sure. Hold on to that feeling.

OMG

2010-07-22T12:38:00.001+08:00

"You won't save him?"
"It's ok, God will save him."

This entry probably won't sit too well with some who frequent this space, but then I'm not exactly known for bending over for others. Not gonna mention names, but read on at your peril.

As a stupid, younger, chubbier, less hairy version of myself, I used to go to a religious school/class after "normal" school, twice a week. This was a run-down building, moss-covered and with carpets smelling like old people and old people smelling like carpets. Didn't help that the said old people were the ones running the joint, and they sought to impart their glorious wisdom onto the younger and open-minded generation. Which included my sister and I.

First thing? It was all in Malay. Big obstacle and turn off right there. I kid you not when I say that half the time I had no clue what was going on, and to say that I was going through the motions is being more accurate than the actual phrase suggests. What, God can't understand English? That's bullshit

Didn't help, of course, that most of the students there, looking back, were just shorter and squeakier versions of the tapered-jeans floater-cap mats that you see prowling around, looking for corners to commandeer. Didn't really fit in. They knew it, I knew it, and it was painfully obvious to this chubby Chinese-looking boy that the other very Melayu boys weren't gonna actively invite him to play football with them.

But what of the lessons, the teachings from the sacred texts that have guided our lives thus far? The experience through the years at Muhammadiyah, "private" mengaji lessons at home with neighbors, and even somewhat enforced group sessions with my extended family or former significant other only reinforced the idea incepted (I had to, sorry) so long ago.

Organized religion is a farce, at best, and Islam might be the joke of the lot.

Advocates of the Islamic way will point at the "advancements" that the culture has brought to the world in terms of technology, mathematics, architecture, music, art and other aspects of life, and I for one cannot and will not dispute or refute that. Certainly. But then almost every culture or religion has brought good and bad to the table we sit at now. I'm not even going to start on the whole terrorist angle, because that's really over-hyped in the media already, and I could go on and on and on about the atrocities committed in the name of any religion even without saying what I wanted to originally.

In this day and age, one of the biggest facets of Islam that disturb me the most is the way women are treated. We've all seen and made jokes about ninjas when seeing Muslim women dressing up like tents, and to be honest, I laugh almost every time even though I'm (technically) Muslim as well. Why? Because it's ridiculous to treat them like that, and they - man and woman alike - are jokes. The fact that France have banned the burka (or burqa?) and other countries are seriously looking to do the same might enrage the clerics and zealots that wish to see the flowing ninja robes of the women, but honestly, in the sweltering heat of summer (or the eternal summer of Singapore), would you actually want to don such a get up? I can't even wear a songkok for an hour without wanting to rip it off and burn it while doing a merry jig. Muslim women are treated as subordinates, at best, and are otherwise seen as lesser beings. That's bullshit.

Then there's the thing that got me thinking about it all in the first place. I can't even remember who told me this, but since then I've been told that it's more common across other religions than I previously thought as well; that anyone who is not a Muslim will burn in hell for all eternity, and those who are, whoever they may be, will transcend to heaven eventually. For the sake of functionality, one can substitute "Muslim" with something like "Christian" or whatever for the same effect, but you get my picture. You've heard it before. So my aged ustazah is trying to tell me that right now at this very moment in time, people like Mother Theresa and Princess Diana are being slow-roasted while rapists, pillagers and plunderers are enjoying their time up there because they glanced at the Arabic version of the Bible? That's bullshit.

See that's the other thing that got me thinking. Yes, I over-think. The three Abrahamic religions are too similar for any of them to be the "true" one, in my mind. Of course, one can argue that one is the real thing and the other two are cheap knock-offs, but it's just as, if not more likely that they're just three strikingly similar interpretations of the same hand-written and Man-written book originally penned as a way to control the masses with stories of doom and a higher power. Adam and Eve? Check. Noah and the flood? Check. Crucifixion? Check. Angels and demons? Check, even before Dan Brown. Even the names are the same. Adam, Nuh, Jibril, Mikhail correspond to Adam (duh), Noah, Gabriel and Michael exactly. And that's just off the top of my unlearned head. That's bullshit.

Everyone has the divine right (ironically) to live their lives the way they should. I get that, accept that, advocate and encourage that. It's just that when religion enters the picture, or is shoved down your throat by overzealous preachers (some priests shove other things down your throats, right?) and bigots, more often than not that freedom of will is forfeit. You're not letting those women be free. You're not letting congregates accept people with differing views as actual people, you're not even trying to be that different when ostracizing the rest of the world. That's bullshit.

Epiphany

2010-07-20T01:33:00.000+08:00

Lately I've been doing nothing I've promised to do, and doing exactly the opposite. To some of those I've hurt or wronged, I'm sorry. Very much so.

I'll make it up to you.

Of course, if you don't get anything after thinking this is to you, you're probably not some of those people. Tough.

Regrets

2010-07-19T23:39:00.005+08:00

Wrote this a while back, but never finished it until tonight.

Done a lot of things in the past year or so. Good things, bad things, big things, stupid things.
I don't regret all the bad or stupid things I've done, seeing as how "bad" and "stupid" are all relative anyway. Some might argue differently, but then everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
I don't regret not telling certain people certain things. Even if they knew already.
I don't regret telling certain people certain things. They deserved to know. Even if they knew already.
I don't regret taking the time and effort to be a productive part of the school. Many thought it a waste, but I didn't.
I don't regret not being able to go to New York. Things worked out better this way.
I don't regret walking away from some people. Had to be done, and it should have been done sooner in some instances.
I don't regret cutting people off. After everything that's been said and done.
I don't regret spending a ridiculous amount of time on football and writing non-academic material. Looks like it got me a sweet ESPN gig.
I don't regret studying in an institution classed outside the "Top Three" in Singapore. I'd do it again in a heartbeat.
I don't regret getting involved with a few people. Except one.
I don't regret the friends I've made and kept.
I don't regret going down a road that promised only disappointment, because it gave more than that.
I don't regret being who I am, even if I sometimes wish that person was good enough for others.
I don't regret being "gutsy" and honest and even sneaky, with weirdly colored letters.
I don't regret the tough decisions.
I don't regret being slapped in public.
I don't regret spending obscene amounts of time and money on certain people.
I don't regret any of what I've written or drawn, even if some think otherwise.

"What if you could wake up tomorrow morning and not like her that much anymore?"

"Not be in love with her anymore? A huge part of me wants that, wishes it could be true. But I don't think I want to."

"Why? It's making you so sad now"

"Because I don't regret falling for her, as pointless and painful as it's been. She's made me happier than I can remember, and I'll never regret that."

-------------------------------------------------------------------

"I hope you understand what that means."

"I do, but I'm sorry, I can't be who you want me to be."

"I know. I want you to be you, but mine. You can't be both. That's one thing I do regret."

Mood

2010-07-19T22:52:00.002+08:00

Not good. And not helping. Screw it all.
Said something a couple of nights ago I regret, though it feels true again.
Someone mentioned how I seem to have so many secrets, or at least know so many. Perhaps they're both true. Maybe I should let some out. Maybe some are more obvious than you might think, too.