The grand scheme of things

It didn't feel right writing anything else without mentioning the late Dean Richards, I'm in no position to write an obituary or anything, so I'm speaking only as a football fan and the effect it had on me...




Logging onto the BBC website on Saturday, the words 'Ex-defender Richards dies aged 36', struck an immediate cord. Hardly an uncommon surname but, immediately I knew it would be ex-Tottenham, Wolves and Southampton defender Dean Richards, such were the troubles he had at the close of his career. 

Richards' death hits home hard because, although he never played a starring role at White Hart Lane, it is the first loss of a team that I grew up watching. 

Now and again, days come along when one of football's old boys passes away and it's sad but you know they had a great career. 

I'm approaching my 30s and, sad as it is to say, I have always dreaded the day that Gazza became the first big tragedy from my Spurs-supporting life. 

The fact that it's Dean Richards severely upsets any natural order and, all of a sudden, the fact that he was so young and the cause was ultimately undiagnosed, makes a generation of everyday football fans feel all that more vulnerable.

Over time, you learn to deal with certain hardships as a football fan. Inititally, as a youngster, seeing your favourite player leave your football team leaves you in tears, convinced for a short while that life can never be the same.

Then there's that dented pride as players younger than you get called up for England and you realise that the dream of scoring the winner in the World Cup final has once and for all passed you by.

News of Richards' passing takes these hardships to a new level and caused a lump in my throat. 

I never knew the man himself, so could never do justice to him with a tribute, but on a personal level it's a reminder that life's moved on from the days when seeing the ball hit the back of the net was the only thing that mattered. It's another rung of the long ladder of growing up and it's a reminder to make the most of what you have while you have it.

From what I've read in the past few days, Richards certainly made the most of what he had and never gave up his involvement in something that he loved dearly. For that, he, his family and anyone who knew him should be very proud.

Canning the winter-break worm

Alex Ferguson reopened the can of worms that is the 'winter break' last weekend and Sunderland gaffer Steve Bruce yesterday stuck his waders on and paddled into the argument in support his one-time mentor.

The proposed break has been a subject of debate for years and, whilst it would be no doubt be nice for players to get some time off and recharge the batteries, I just cannot see how it would work.

This isn't one of those "they get paid a lot, they can work for it" rants. I'm aware of the problem as much as anyone else, but I'm not sure how the Premier League are meant to just magic time up out of nowhere without help from external factors.

Sir Alex suggested we do "like the German league" and have a three-week break over Christmas, reconvening with the FA Cup in January. I'm sorry Alex, but where exactly is your working? In the two weeks over Christmas, most teams play four or five games, so how are these lost games going to fit back into an already-crowded spring fixture list?

What you would end up with is a sort of phantom rest period as players return refreshed only to run themselves into the ground over the following weeks. Players would have to keep training properly to remain match-fit and retain form, so why not play matches rather than waste the time?

What Sir Alex seems to be missing is that in Germany, as in Spain (where they have a two-week break), there is only have one domestic cup competition running throughout the whole season. We shoehorn two cups into our calendar, one of which doesn't start until the New Year.

The evidence suggests that, for a winter break to be a success, something has to give. The most obvious option, don't bite my head off, is to lose the League Cup.

It had become an ideal way for the big clubs to bleed young talent, and give teams like Middlesbrough (2004) and Blackburn (2002) the chance to snatch some silverware. But more and more these days, as the big clubs progress in the competition, they smell silverware and the big names reappear on the team sheet, making it a pointless and predictable exercise bringing a handful of teams' seasons to a false summit.

Without the League Cup, maybe the FA Cup could be restructured to start in October/November to spread it over the season and still give time for replays, which I believe are a vital ingredient in keeping the lower league clubs interested in the competition. Just to please supporters of both competitions, maybe it could be sold as merging the two! The Football League FA Cup!

Ultimately, a winter break is suggested so that players are not burned out when entering major tournaments. It's not just England who suffer from exhausted players, the whole of the South Africa 2010 World Cup was plagued by defensive football and underperforming superstars (Messi, Rooney, Torres, Kaka, Ronaldo), so it is in FIFA and UEFA's interests to lend a hand in sorting the situation.

The Champions League is clearly where the money is, so shortening it is never likely to be an option. But Manchester City have played 10 games in the UEFA cup already, are in the latter stages and are still having to play home and away games against sides like Aris, who finished fourth in the Greek Superleague last season.

I'm not trying to undermine City in any way, but they don't need to be playing these sides at this stage of the season - the Europa League needs stripping back. Not only would it ease the stress on teams' schedules but it may even raise the competition's profile in the process (but that's another story).

Interestingly enough, Spurs went out of the League and FA Cups early on and, as a result, they have only three games in the whole month of March, and that includes a 10 day break after facing West Ham on March 9 and a further 12-day break until Wigan on April 2.

Obviously, teams want to challenge for as many trophies as possible but they have to accept that in doing so, their players will tire out and, until the governing bodies wake up and make big changes to help everyone, then it's just a case of clubs deciding what competitions matter most and picking their fights wisely. Then, by default, they'll get their mid-season break.

Does 'Arry really need a bit more front?

Many football fans will have been disappointed that Harry Redknapp didn't engineer another smash'n'grab, last-minute swag deal on transfer deadline day. 

If reports are to be believed, the window slammed shut on our gaffer's fingers as he was failing to negotiate deals for forwards Sergio Aguero, Giuseppe Rossi, Diego Forlan and others. Since then, there has been a flurry of debate over whether our current striking options have enough in their tank to see us step up a level.

While Liverpool and Chelsea made huge signings, there seems to be a bit of fear among Spurs fans that we missed our chance and we could get left behind.

On BBC's 606, Kentspur says: "Suarez or Carroll would have been good… As has been said for a long time, we need a marquee striker purchase. Sad that 'Pool made two in the window."

Of our current crop, Jermain Defoe is struggling to find his form this season, Peter Crouch blows hot and cold and Roman Pavlyuchenko can't hold down a first team spot long enough to run on to a through ball. The goals are still coming, just from other areas of the pitch as Aaron Lennon, Rafa Van Der Vaart and lately Niko Kranjcar have provided the goods.

Everyone knows the dangers in bringing a big name in to a settled side but Spurs fans seem to be in agreement that we need something extra up front.

Also on BBC 606, Macdonaldo says: "It definitely needs freshening up. It's the difference between scrapping for 4th and challenging for titles."

But would adding a lethal finisher up front upset the balance of the team? The old adage says "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." If we continue to field a team with such quality all over the pitch then why do the goals need to come from strikers? 

If other players are finding themselves in goalscoring positions more and more often, then that must be testament to our style of play and proof of just how good and varied our movement is. I would hate for a "goal machine" to come in and grab 20 goals a season only for our style of play to change and our passing to focus towards him. That's how teams end up relying too much on one player. In the past few weeks we have coped brilliantly with big players injured because our goals can literally come from anywhere.

My main gripe is with the chances that go begging game in, game out due to either a lack of accuracy or composure and I never feel confident that any of our strikers can score a one-on-one or a penalty. So I'm all for a change but it's a delicate situation so as not to disrupt the harmony we have and the success we are enjoying. 

On Planetspurs.com, Bracknellyid says: "I think the majority of us Spurs want a big-name striker brought in. The fact we threw stupid money around Spain 48 hours before the January window shut tells me the manager and board also feel that way."

Harry and Daniel Levy do seem to be very much in the market for a striker and the summer could be very interesting. It would have to someone without a big ego and who can slot in to our style of play, not to mention having to meet our wage structure and then still provide the goals. 

It's a strict criteria and a decision that needs not to be taken lightly. Personally, I'm happy that the transfer window came and went and that the decision won't now be rushed. It's not like we're doing too badly as it is and I now have much more faith that we'll end up with the right man.