Over the years we have grown used to some stereotypical truths in the Premier League. We know Arsene Wenger won’t ‘see’ every controversial decision, Fergie will get on the referee’s back when the chips are down, Chelsea and Roman Abramovich have a lower managerial patience threshold than most and Stoke are that rugby team with the long throw as their potent weapon. In just this short list, we are all accustomed to their attribution in the game and we understand these reputations run deep and aren’t likely to change anytime soon. The thing with stereotypes is that they are difficult to shake and once manufactured into the fabric of the game, with mutterings down the pub or punditry panels circling round a topic like a ravaging group of piranha fish, their impact gets greater with more scepticism overriding as the end result.
But what should football clubs do with their reputations, if anything at all? We have seen the Stoke City fans in particularly embrace their ‘over physical’ tag with chants of ‘swing low, sweet chariot’ radiating from the Britannia terraces to flauntingly poke fun at managers such as Wenger who are yet to find an answer to their combative game plan. On the contrary, foreign ran clubs such as Chelsea are coming under increasing scrutiny for their ‘hire and fire’ cultures, tearing managerial reputations into tiny pieces and being ever so ruthless in search of success. In comparison to Stoke and their embracement of their reputation, Roman Abramovich remains adamant that Chelsea are capable of playing a more exciting brand of football, buying more technically gifted players such as Juan Mata and Marko Marin, whilst refraining from publically giving his backing to Roberto Di Matteo for the job full-time, despite an impressive run as interim boss.
Perhaps at the root of the problem is money and expectation. Stoke City are currently enjoying their fourth consecutive season in the top flight and manager Tony Pulis maintains the Potters have improved this term playing in their maiden Europa League campaign whilst maintaining their battling game plan which currently leaves them comfortably 13th in mid-table. For many Potters fans, simply playing Premier League football is enough for their loyal band of followers and bringing signings in of the calibre of Peter Crouch and Wilson Palacios in the summer only served to represent how far the club has come since the days in the second tier. Therefore, being one of the more unfashionable sides in the country doesn’t seem to matter as much for Stoke who have no speculation amounting over their manager’s head, no real threat of relegation and a tremendous home record whereby only Newcastle in the top six have left the city of Stoke-on-Trent with more than a point.
For Potters fans, the Premier League journey is still one big ride, and upsetting a few purists along the way such as Wenger is all part of the jaunt whereby they will seek to use any winning formula to their advantage; hence Rory Delap and Ryan Shotton’s Stretch Armstrong-like abilities in launching throws into the opposing teams penalty area. It is sometimes harsh on Stoke to lament their play solely physical with Matthew Etherington and Peter Crouch capable of more technically-gifted skill on their day. However, you can’t help feel that in this case, the embracement of their rugby-like reputation has only served to build their growing Premier League status. Most managers now are verbal in their expectation of a ‘tough’ game at the Britannia and many teams still struggle to match Pulis’ side aerially. Stoke have now built an identity as a tough side to break down and are clear evidence that the infighting culture of turning a reputation into a positive and not bowing down to scepticism in the mainstream press can pay off in the long run.
Chelsea on the other hand are caught in a dilemma. Their tactical, less fluid and sometimes brutal style as characterised through battering rams such as Drogba has yielded success, most notably during the Mourinho period but owner Roman Abramovich has always kept one eye on the Real Madrid and Arsenal-like models where simply winning is not enough. Winning in style is something Abramovich ultimately strives for and the summer capture of Andre Villas-Boas, Juan Mata and more recently Marko Marin serves as clear evidence that the owner wants a more technically gifted outfit, who are more easy on the eye and can win over more sceptics who claim Chelsea are pedestrian. This is the asset-rich Russian’s ultimate goal and therefore unlike Stoke, there is a tendency to reject the reputation and throw big bucks at changing the situation. Because money solves everything right? In this case, it must be comprehended Chelsea’s ambitions are on a different level to Stoke but what differs is that Chelsea and their owner are more affected by criticisms.
We all applauded the marvel of Chelsea’s outstanding Champions League triumph over Barcelona but the reputation amongst football purists worldwide is that in a bittersweet fashion they conducted the victory with plenty of substance over style; or were the so-called beast amongst the beauty of Barcelona. Foreign owners are very flashy and impressionable but Abramovich shouldn’t forget what made Chelsea tick in recent years gone by. Many Chelsea fans are indeed excited by the arrival of Marin and the potential for more flair-laden stars but there is an overriding notion that Chelsea are always on the defensive, trying to reject the stereotype that they are boring, yet successful. The moral of the story, is that reputations run deep and you can’t try and pretend to be something you’re not. With the current personnel, Chelsea’s strengths lie in tactical play. Abramovich isn’t going to get his dream team overnight and an embracement of their very own reputation could be said to heighten their togetherness and unity as a particular type of outfit.
Are you a Stoke or Chelsea fan? Are you pleased with the way your sides play? Let me know your opinions @ http://twitter.com/Taylor_Will1989
[divider]
[ad_pod id=’unruly-2′ align=’left’]