 |
The trouble with doing an immediate match recap is that one inevitably cannibalises any subsequent tactical bullshittery or specific discussion of player or theme. "One," one says, "one has rather talked for a few short paragraphs there--in some nascent form, obviously, but nonetheless--about the subject one would likely go into in more depth if one had only taken the time to digest various goings on and pick out precisely what it was that interested one most. But now? Well, one would look a right git rehashing that paragraph or two only with it all longer and more laboured."
Of course, sometimes it works out anyhow, and shortly after putting up yesterday's match review the topic of Jamie Carragher's passing in the match--and comparing it to his passing against Wigan--seemed an entirely acceptable row to hoe in a future post. So, safe in the knowledge that the next post was itself half sorted in various squishy synapses, all further thought on the matter was quite thoroughly dropped.
Picking it up again, it turns out the Guardian chalkboards are only for league matches. Which of course was an annoyance previously known. Just sometimes one does forget the things one previously knew. Until the forgetting of said knowledge comes back to remind one that they're not always the brightest bulb in the shed and would have been quite thoroughly screwed one way or the other...
* After Ed talked about the high court ruling yesterday that meant Hicks &co. wouldn't be able to sue for damages in the United States, there's a bit more news on the whole epic swindle sue-stravaganza continuing fallout from the semi-enforced club sale out from under the noses of but in what was probably an entirely legal manner the former owners front. Namely that Martin Broughton is also now free to join in the fun of suing somebody, and he's chosen to make that somebody he sues Tom Hicks. And probably also George Gillett. But really, who's given a damn about him since he went broke and his whole role in owning LFC defaulted to a holding company in the week leading up to the sale?
Anyhow, might as well let Broughton speak for himself, since there are quotes: "I am suing to have my name cleared, not for any money.
"They made accusations of fraud and conspiracy which were wholly unfounded. I am not losing any sleep. I know I acted properly.''
Well, there you go. Don't go shouting epic swindle and grand conspiracy when the people involved probably aren't epic swindling or grand conspiratoring, because somebody might sue you over it. Especially in the UK, where libel and defamation suits are notoriously easy to win.
* Meanwhile on the player front, Fabio Aurelio has an abductor strain and Dalglish went and said some nice things about Joe Cole because he's the manager and it wouldn't look good if he had a moan about the club paying £90k a week to a guy who's been injured for the past three years and is now on his fourth manager in a row whose actions suggest he doesn't especially rate him, as even when the permanently injured Cole is momentarily not injured he still apparently gets to sit on the bench until the also permanently injured Fabio Aurelio--being played out of position in midfield--himself gets re-injured. But Dalglish still had good things to say about him:
Joe's a valuable asset for us but obviously he's not going to pick up his form immediately. We're not going to expect him to be the Joe Cole who came here in the summer straight away.
Form's temporary and class is permanent: that's where we stand with Joe Cole. We'll give him a bit of time to get himself up to speed and then we can see him produce something for us.
Well, Joe Cole certainly is costing an awful lot of money, so perhaps by some measures he would be a quite valuable asset regardless of performance on the pitch. As to when in the last decade he's shown that so called permanent class, well, it would have been more amusing to ask "When in the last decade has he shown his permanent class?" two months ago. But still.
Hopefully it's not just a manager saying the right thing and Joe Cole really does still have that class and a bright future with Liverpool Football Club.
* Elsewhere, the graffiti artist who put up the stencil painting of Dalglish--seen at the top of this post--outside the club's Melwood training facility to honour the return of Kenny Dalglish was indeed the graffiti artist who put up the stencil painting of Dalglish outside of the club's Melwood training facility. And also apparently there's a kerfuffle because some people immediately think any stencil graffiti art must be Banksy at work and/or play, even if it's clearly a straight tribute lacking in the sociopolitical undertones that have coloured every bit of work Banksy has ever done. But it makes it a bigger story. Or something. And lets people ask the guy if his bit of graffiti art that appears to have no connection with Banksy or anything Banksy's graffiti art has ever been intended to do or stand for is an attempt to be the next Banksy. Or something. Banksy. It's edgy because he's a graffiti artist but overweight diabetic devout Christian homemakers in Alabama know who he is. Banksy.
Seriously, though, it is a really cool bit of stencil art. But also: Banksy!
In the meantime, while one considers that every possible way to refer to oneself in a blog post sounds either pompously overdone, royally stupid, or hopelessly naive and conversational...