Man City and Hughes have a long way to go to win the sceptics over

WITH money and power always comes a certain degree of scepticism.

You only have to take a look at the way Chelsea have arguably overtaken Manchester United as the most hated club in the country amongst neutrals since Roman Ambramovich took over with his millions to see that. So the nouveau riche of Manchester City should tred carefully if they want to win people over – but they’ve not made the best of starts.

Sure there’s a lot to be admired about the way owner Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed has kept faith with a young British manager when others might have sacked Mark Hughes to bring in a ‘big name’ foreign manager and if City were to come out of the shadow of rivals United and break the Big Four monopoly that would be no bad thing. However, in the last few weeks, City and Hughes haven’t exactly covered themselves in glory.

First of all there was the pursuit of Joleon Lescott, which certainly rubbed Everton boss David Moyes up the wrong way. Even Chelsea, rather hypocritically, had groans about the way City tried to sign England captain John Terry.

Then there was Emmanuel Adebayor’s behaviour in the 4-2 win over Arsenal when he seemed intent on booting the boot in (quite literally) on his old club and caused a riot in the crowd and an innocent steward to get injured by celebrating his goal in front of the Gunners fans.

Then in the Manchester derby, Craig Bellamy decided to wander over to a fan who got on the pitch and give him a slap even though the stewards had the situation well under control.

Perhaps worse is the way Hughes has stood by Adebayor over his stamp on Robin Van Persie and even went as far as to suggest Bellamy could be labelled a ‘national hero’ for his actions. Of course, he didn’t take such a laissez faire approach when Man United scored the winner deep in stoppage time and a massive outburst on the officials followed.

Personally I can’t believe quite how much fuss has been made over the late goal this week, while the behaviour of Bellamy and Gary Neville, who celebrated the winner in front of the City fans, has been more or less brushed under the carpet.

Firstly, it’s not hard to see where all the stoppage time came from when you consider there were four goal celebrations in the second half before Bellamy’s equaliser which added at least another 45 seconds, and three substitutes in the 90 plus Michael Carrick’s introduction in stoppage time, all adding another 30 seconds each.

But more to the point, Hughes’ main concern should have been why a striker of Michael Owen’s goalscoring calibre was given so much time and space to score the winner.

It is also worth remembering that it was 11v11 and in all that added on time Man City had just as much chance of scoring the winner as United did.

United have been branded lucky over the years for the amount of late goals they have scored but that’s why they have been so successful. They always play to win until the final whistle – something Hughes and City might want to make a note of if they are serious about redressing the balance of power.

Gerrard and Lampard thrive for Fab's 'new England'

THE Gerrard-Lampard debate now seems to be a thing of the past.

Fabio Capello has succeeded where previous England managers have failed by getting the best out of the two midfielders, not to mention Wayne Rooney, who has scored nine goals in eight qualifying matches.

I was one of Steven Gerrard’s critics when he was so inspirational for Liverpool yet distinctly average for England but Capello seems to have found a role for him where he has flourished. The left of midfield might not be Gerrard’s preferred position but with a license to roam inside, he’s flourished and his link-up play with Rooney and the fluidity with which they often change positions has been a particularly pleasing feature of the ‘new England’.

Lampard’s international career also seems to be resurrected under Capello. He seemed to be in decline after the 2006 World Cup but ever since the 4-1 victory in Croatia last year he’s back to his best and was as good as anyone on the pitch in the 5-1 victory over Croatia at Wembley that sealed England’s spot at the World Cup. Two goals apiece and stand-out performances from Gerrard and Lampard was the confirmation, if it was needed, that both can play a big role in the same England team.

The transformation under Capello is nothing short of incredible. From the team that looked hopeless less than two years ago in the 3-2 defeat against Croatia that ended our Euro 2008 hopes, England now go to the World Cup with possibly the best chance of winning it since 1966.
Of course, we shouldn’t get too carried away. Without expecting England to win it, I think we will be competitive and once you get past the group stages, it’s a knockout competition where anything can happen. Spain and Brazil are the favourites and look like the two sides to beat and the perfectionist Capello knows there is still work to do. Doubts still remain over the goalkeeper position, the defence has looked shaky at times and our fortunes at major tournaments are unlikely to change until we master how to score from the penalty spot.

Disjointed batting line-up for England's one-day zeroes

FROM Ashes heroes to one-day zeroes. England have been brought down to earth in the current series against Australia.

While the Test side seems to be heading in the right direction, the one-day side is another kettle of fish altogether and look a long way off being able to compete with the best in the world.

The bowling unit looks decent but the batting line-up looks like it’s been chucked together without any real thought. Once you get past captain Andrew Strauss at the top of the innings, the rest of the order is questionable, bordering on the bizarre. Joe Denly partnered him and made 11 on Saturday, and although he needs to be given time, I’m not sure he’s the right man for the job.

Then you come to the shambolic middle order. Ravi Bopara struggled as an opener in the first three games and doesn’t look particularly comfortable at three either. Number three is a key role and currently a problem position for England in both one-day and Test cricket. Somehow we managed to win the Ashes series with Bopara batting there in four out of the five Tests, while Ian Bell has also always looked better down the order.

For me, Kevin Pietersen has to take on the role in all forms when he gets back to full fitness. He might have had doubts about playing there in the past, but the extra responsibility might be exactly what he needs to get the best out of himself and achieve his ambition of becoming the best batsman in the world – something he is far from being at the moment.

Matt Prior started his ODI career as an opening batsman and obviously the England selectors didn’t think it worked so moved him all the way down to number three and now four. If not considered good enough to open, surely Prior would be better off down the order at six or seven?

England have also severely under-estimated the role of the finisher in the one-day side. The great Australian sides over the past 10 or 15 years have had Michael Bevan and more recently Michael Hussey. Owais Shah seemed to be flourishing when he took on that role for England so what happened? He was promoted up the order where he has made little impact ever since.

Luke Wright has only showed occasional glimpses to justify comparisons to Andrew Flintoff as an all-rounder and overall England seem have too many bits and pieces players.

There is also the strange omissions of Jonathan Trott, a player in fine form after scoring a century in his first Test to help bring back the little urn, and Dimitri Mascarenhas, an effective bowler and destructive lower order batsman who strikes the ball as powerfully as anyone in the world.

Murray must overcome problem at Grand Slams

SO ANOTHER Grand Slam has passed Andy Murray by.

There is no doubt about the Scot’s supreme talent, he is still young and has plenty of time to win a Grand Slam so perhaps a panic is unwarranted. However, it is slightly concerning that Murray, now ranked number two in the world, has failed to live up to expectations in any of the majors this year. On his favourite hard court surface he has been knocked out in the last 16 at the Australian and now US Open. Going out at the quarter-finals on the clay at the French – his worst surface - was respectable and that was quickly followed by his semi-final defeat at Wimbledon - his best Grand Slam performance of the year, but one where he was hotly tipped to meet Roger Federer in the final.

Somehow, I feared for Murray at the US Open as soon as he put in such an impressive display against Taylor Dent before his defeat to Marin Cilic. It was similar at Wimbledon. After he destroyed Juan Carlos Ferrero in the quarter-finals, expectation rose so high it was almost considered a formality for him to beat Andy Roddick and reach the final. At the moment Murray is unable to string the wins together needed to win a Slam and often a very good performance is followed by an average one.

It may be a psychological problem, or as John McEnroe has suggested, it could be physical as a result of overtraining between games. Either way, it is a problem that Murray will have to overcome if he wants to go on and win his first Grand Slam next year.