We can all make hay when the sun is shining; it's when the chips are down that you REALLY discover the talent and bottle of your so-called best players. Where's Modric been when we've been in the brick? He goes missing. No point ignoring that fact, just because he was wonderful earlier on in the season - so were the rest of um!
If he's such an established player; one supposedly coveted enough to be "worth ?ú40m+" then he's gotta be the sort of player who, when times are tough, digs deeper and pulls the team up by its bootstraps. Otherwise, he's just as run-of-the-mill as any other Premierleague midfielder. Seriously great footballers are game-changers and form-changers; Modric isn't in that bracket. Modric's form is one which is highly confidence based; confidence of those around him. I'm sorry, but the big players - the really BIG players - don't need to rely on what those around them are doing in order to establish themselves in games.
I'd sell him for ?ú40m in a heart beat; if someone wants to buy average for ?ú40m - then sign me up, because that's one hell of a rip-off - talk about winning the lottery. How much do you think Modric is 'worth' in the transfer market this summer, taking as a benchmark the fact Chelsea bid ?ú40m for him last summer? Without any shadow of a doubt, it's going to be less - much, much less.
PS: My expressions are used to convey impact. I could very easily tinkle about using less direct phrasing, but it doesn't have the impact I think it deserves. I do think he's been dogbrick, I do think he's done sweet fudge all and I do think his form has been dire - just like the rest of them. But, he's an established player in our team, and the responsibility lies with him to rise above the collective lack of form and to influence games on his own metal. He doesn't do it; he can't do it = average.
Shocking again. Even if I accepted that he is just a fair weather player, something I don't, his abilities when we play well puts him well above any average PL midfielder.
Almost all players in the world have poor runs. This false dichotomy that a player is either some super hero-player who manages to pull a team up by it's bootstraps even at the worst of times or he is run-of-the-mill makes no sense. There has to be a sliding scale between the two. There are very few players that on their own turn around the fortunes of a team that is struggling, especially when there seems to be managerial problems as well. I think this glorified image of a single hero pulling his team mates out of the mud is disconnected from reality.
A quick look at some of the most lauded leaders and players in the PL.
Terry - What did he do when Chelsea struggled under AVB? Never mind AVB, how about the many other managers Chelsea have struggled under? Same for Lampard.
Gerrard - What has he done to pull Liverpool out of the mud, first under Benitez, then under Hodgson, now under Daglish. Consistently failing to change their fortunes.
Rooney - Does well for United, but had a poor run that extended about the length of a season not that long ago. And why isn't he able to pull England out of the mud? (Same argument for the previous players) "to be "worth ?ú40m+" then he's gotta be the sort of player who, when times are tough, digs deeper and pulls the team up by its bootstraps"
Silva - Although not a leader, by many ranked as one of the very best players in the league and the best player at City earlier this season. Where was he when their poor run set in? What bootstraps did he pull? Is he now just a run-of-the-mill player?
Teams pull themselves out of the mud, teams get back on their feet, teams pull themselves up by their bootstraps. That includes the manager, the players and the coaching staff. Look at the teams that do consistently well and generally without extended poor runs. None of them do it because of one player. They do it because they have a team, with a solid system, with a manager that leads them, with a squad where no single player is expected to change it all, where they have many very good players.
That's what we need, more good players. Or if we can get them, more excellent players like Modric. So that when our team doesn't function we have more legs to stand on, more able shoulders to lean on, more quality footballers. We also need leaders of course, if we can find them, but not at the expense of our best players unless we're absolutely forced to. To look at a poor run and say that the players that were the best before the run are automatically to blame so we should replace them makes no sense at all.
PS: I don't mind direct phrasing, but surely you should then expect direct phrasing in return.
