Less Great Sportspeople
I've mentioned a fair few sporting folk who very nearly made the list, who might have made the list, who probably deserved to make the list. There are plenty more of those - names like Martin Peters, Roger Hunt, Alan Ball, Matt Dawson, Gerald Davies, Mervyn Davies, Ian Rush, Alan Hansen, Jack Charlton, Andy Irvine, Finlay Calder, Brian Statham, Brian Clough and Bobby Robson, players of mainstream sports who could easily have come into consideration.
However, now is a time I'd like to mention a very few sportspeople I pointedly do not think have achieved greatness. A bit harsh perhaps, but it's nothing personal, particularly with the first one, who is
Lee Westwood.
There's no one I'd like to be a great sportsperson more. There's no one I'm hoping will win a Major golf championship more. But he won't. Somehow or other, it appears to be in its nature, and, for all its faults, that's a great thing about golf - there really is a separation, a filtering of those that do and those that don't, which speaks strongly of the nature of these people.
Perhaps Westwood's repeated failure to win Majors from a good position speaks well of his character. He seems nice, smart and rounded. He doesn't seem to mind coming third or fourth in major after major much. It's not like he hideously collapses. It's just the winner always plays better, makes those putts which Westwood no longer makes. He displays solid excellence, he just never wins things which would make him a great.
Just like another in the same sport
Colin Montgomerie
The story is roughly the same, though it was a lot more painful for Montgomerie. He really cared a lot. He did win things. He won the European Order of Merit 7 times, he won a lot of Ryder Cups and played tremendously in doing so, but he failed, and he'll know it.
Not winning - that's what I'm talking about.
So I mention
Stephen Gerrard, England's current captain marvel, beloved of Liverpool fans and the footballing public as a whole. I like Gerrard, but something began to bother me.
To see he's won nothing is, of course, untrue. There's a Champions League, within which he was inspirational, and a fair few Cups, likewise. He is Mr Liverpool. But that's the problem. In this era of failure for that club, he's the problem not the solution. You know that, statistically, they do better when he's not playing?
I have my own theory on this. Gerrard would be one of the best footballers going if football was a one-man game. He can do everything, and he tries to do everything. Not that he's selfish, but he just goes into other people's space, and sucks their qualities out of them. And if you're going to be a one man team, you need to do better. A one-man team needs to be like Ronaldo, score 50 goals a season. But Gerrard tends to be a 10 a season kind of guy. The one season he was utterly magnificent (2008-09), along with Torres and Alonso, Liverpool very nearly did win the title, and deserved to. Too often, bearing in mind the way he plays, he has not done enough.
The same applies for England. How can England play a fluid, sharp game when your captain and star midfielder is always trying to spray 60 yard passes? Gerrard needs to be brilliant to be a positive for his team, and he's brilliant a fair bit, but not enough.
Talking of Captain Marvel
Bryan Robson, England's captain when I was growing up. Those that played with him and coached him speak so highly, but I'd really like to burst this bubble. All those years at Man Utd when he was the main player and no league titles, it was only when he was marginalised, a peripheral figure, that the Man Utd train got rolling. And, as for England, well those were good England teams in 86 and 90, as close as England have got to World Cup greatness since 66, but Robson was injured throughout the tournaments. He played in the useless Euro 88 campaign, mind. And, you know what, the other thing is I remember watching Bryan Robson and I thought he was, you know, ok. David Platt standard, but more defined by failure. Not a great for me, no way.
It's a pretty obvious point I'm making - you've got to get the wins. If you don't get the wins (like, say athletes Darren Campbell and Kathy Cook) then it's got to be not your fault, you can't be tied up in a culture of not getting the wins.
A few more while I think about it, for slightly different reasons
David Haye -a fabulously talented boxer who has just scuppered his legacy by talking too much, taking fights for money, not taking the right fights, not taking enough fights. He treats boxing like a business, which is fine, but that has prevented him being held in the same esteem as the likes of Froch.
Graeme Gooch - ha, perhaps this is where I let it get personal. Well, let me say that though he is still England's record run scorer, Gooch has a lower test batting average than the likes of Gower, Boycott, Thorpe etc. But I appreciate his average doesn't tell the full story of how good he was in the second half of his career. He was excellent.
But he cost England cricket with his pig-eyed attitude, I think, set it back a decade, made it an unsafe place for talented outsiders, seemed to make it a personal vendetta to destroy David Gower's career. He was, like Gerrard in football, not brilliant enough to dominate so much to the exclusion of others. Nasser Hussain wasn't half the batsman, but he did far more good for England cricket.
Let's get on to the winners ...
However, now is a time I'd like to mention a very few sportspeople I pointedly do not think have achieved greatness. A bit harsh perhaps, but it's nothing personal, particularly with the first one, who is
Lee Westwood.
There's no one I'd like to be a great sportsperson more. There's no one I'm hoping will win a Major golf championship more. But he won't. Somehow or other, it appears to be in its nature, and, for all its faults, that's a great thing about golf - there really is a separation, a filtering of those that do and those that don't, which speaks strongly of the nature of these people.
Perhaps Westwood's repeated failure to win Majors from a good position speaks well of his character. He seems nice, smart and rounded. He doesn't seem to mind coming third or fourth in major after major much. It's not like he hideously collapses. It's just the winner always plays better, makes those putts which Westwood no longer makes. He displays solid excellence, he just never wins things which would make him a great.
Just like another in the same sport
Colin Montgomerie
The story is roughly the same, though it was a lot more painful for Montgomerie. He really cared a lot. He did win things. He won the European Order of Merit 7 times, he won a lot of Ryder Cups and played tremendously in doing so, but he failed, and he'll know it.
Not winning - that's what I'm talking about.
So I mention
Stephen Gerrard, England's current captain marvel, beloved of Liverpool fans and the footballing public as a whole. I like Gerrard, but something began to bother me.
To see he's won nothing is, of course, untrue. There's a Champions League, within which he was inspirational, and a fair few Cups, likewise. He is Mr Liverpool. But that's the problem. In this era of failure for that club, he's the problem not the solution. You know that, statistically, they do better when he's not playing?
I have my own theory on this. Gerrard would be one of the best footballers going if football was a one-man game. He can do everything, and he tries to do everything. Not that he's selfish, but he just goes into other people's space, and sucks their qualities out of them. And if you're going to be a one man team, you need to do better. A one-man team needs to be like Ronaldo, score 50 goals a season. But Gerrard tends to be a 10 a season kind of guy. The one season he was utterly magnificent (2008-09), along with Torres and Alonso, Liverpool very nearly did win the title, and deserved to. Too often, bearing in mind the way he plays, he has not done enough.
The same applies for England. How can England play a fluid, sharp game when your captain and star midfielder is always trying to spray 60 yard passes? Gerrard needs to be brilliant to be a positive for his team, and he's brilliant a fair bit, but not enough.
Talking of Captain Marvel
Bryan Robson, England's captain when I was growing up. Those that played with him and coached him speak so highly, but I'd really like to burst this bubble. All those years at Man Utd when he was the main player and no league titles, it was only when he was marginalised, a peripheral figure, that the Man Utd train got rolling. And, as for England, well those were good England teams in 86 and 90, as close as England have got to World Cup greatness since 66, but Robson was injured throughout the tournaments. He played in the useless Euro 88 campaign, mind. And, you know what, the other thing is I remember watching Bryan Robson and I thought he was, you know, ok. David Platt standard, but more defined by failure. Not a great for me, no way.
It's a pretty obvious point I'm making - you've got to get the wins. If you don't get the wins (like, say athletes Darren Campbell and Kathy Cook) then it's got to be not your fault, you can't be tied up in a culture of not getting the wins.
A few more while I think about it, for slightly different reasons
David Haye -a fabulously talented boxer who has just scuppered his legacy by talking too much, taking fights for money, not taking the right fights, not taking enough fights. He treats boxing like a business, which is fine, but that has prevented him being held in the same esteem as the likes of Froch.
Graeme Gooch - ha, perhaps this is where I let it get personal. Well, let me say that though he is still England's record run scorer, Gooch has a lower test batting average than the likes of Gower, Boycott, Thorpe etc. But I appreciate his average doesn't tell the full story of how good he was in the second half of his career. He was excellent.
But he cost England cricket with his pig-eyed attitude, I think, set it back a decade, made it an unsafe place for talented outsiders, seemed to make it a personal vendetta to destroy David Gower's career. He was, like Gerrard in football, not brilliant enough to dominate so much to the exclusion of others. Nasser Hussain wasn't half the batsman, but he did far more good for England cricket.
Let's get on to the winners ...
Comments
Post a Comment