Crunch Time

There are basically two types of crunch times. The first one, which happens quite regularly, is when Theo is involved in any sort of tackle. You can just hear it. Crunch crunch, snap snap, twist twist. Ouch, ouch. This time, after his shoulder, shoulder, back, it's his knee. Medial ligaments.

According to Le Boss, he'll now be out 3-4 weeks. This is how I usually read 3-4 weeks in Theo's world. In 3-4 weeks, he'll start training. A week later, with a ball. Then, he may have a slight niggle, so take another week. Then, back to training. One more week later, it's the reserves. One more later, he gets to sit on the bench, and two after that, it's a starting place. Now, taking 3-4 weeks to actually mean 4, that brings us to...10 weeks before we see him starting again. Which is actually what? Christmas? Crunch time!

The second (or maybe third) crunch time has to do with dealing with a less than full team. That's when your title credentials are really tested. And we may soon be nearing that crunch time. Bent Nick's still out. Eduardo's out as usual. Denilson's crocked. I won't be surprised if RVP will need a rest pretty soon. He's had quite a hectic period by his standards, so he's due a break. But with Bent Nick and Ed out, what the hell are we going to do? Carlos Vela? Still jet lagged.

Or maybe...we get Djourou back, and stick TV up front. Ooops. Sorry. Djourou's crocked as well. Oh well. Senderos then. Hey! On that score, Senderos could play up front too, the Swiss goal machine!

So looking forward to Alkmaar on Tuesday then. And the squad looks awful thin. For some reason, poor Philippe ain't there either! It's Silvestre instead. Crunch time, I say again.

Okay, enough of this depressing injurious talk. Let's talk about balls instead. Yes, beach balls. Big red Liverpool beach balls. If being a Pool fan ain't depressing enough as is, they now have to deal with the legal implications of being a round object. There's all sort of talk now about how the (poor) ref cocked up by allowing the goal. There are some, and there's proably nothing worse than an ex-ref TV pundit, who claim that:

''Talk about an outside influence - the ball went in off the beach ball and completely deceived the Liverpool goalkeeper. I am absolutely amazed that for a referee at that level of football, that between him, his assistant, the fourth official, they didn't see what had happened and give the correct decision.''

You see, outside influences have to be removed, play stopped, etc etc etc.

Mr ex-ref goes on:

''An outside influence is any outside influence. It is anything other than the 22 maximum players on the field and the referee. If it hits the referee and goes in, he's part of the game. If a spectator comes on the pitch and kicks the ball, the game must be stopped."

''It's a basic law of the game - one that fortunately doesn't come into practice too much - but it's a basic law of the game that a referee would learn on his initial refereeing cause, not when you're an established Premier League referee."

Yes, Mr Smartypants. But how about balloons? Wasn't there something along those lines last season? Huh? So if it hits balloons, the goal's allowed. Beach balls, on the other hand, are a different matter altogether.

Going by Mr Smartypants' standards, anything is anything. So, here's a new trick for you goalkeepers to consider. Stick a little marble in your socks or gloves. Anytime you let a goal in, let it fall out onto the pitch. Then, you can claim either of the following, depending on the situation: (a) the ball deflected off the outside influence, or (b) you slipped on the outside influence. Either case, any outside influence is an outside influence, and it shouldn't have been on the pitch.

Bollocks I say. The goal was good. Balloon, beach ball, what? The ref is supposed to consult a lawyer in that 2 seconds before awarding the goal? Not sure if it's the internet, but we seem to be getting more and more hints of footballing stupidity these days. Can't see why Bozo Reina didn't just get rid of it in the first place. Probably thought it was...just...a...ballooooon. Or maybe he tried stamping on it, and failed, and couldn't figure out what to do next.

The argument basically goes that the outside influence being there, the game should've been stopped. But the thing is: would this still be the case if there was NO deflection? Would there be any ref out there who would have disallowed the goal if there was no deflection? The fact is, it should've been removed BEFORE the goal was scored. Once it wasn't, and once the goal was scored, the deed was done. Deflection or otherwise.

The sad reality, however, is that Mr Ref with the ball has been sent off to footballing Siberia. Poor chap. Got screwed over, basically by a mad tabloid media. Seeing what happened with Eduardo and Divegate, I can sympathise. If it were Tamworth v Salisbury City (no offence!) with the ball cannoning off a dead crow in the Conference, nobody would've given a flying crap.

Actually, I have a question. What was that Liverpool beach ball doing in Sunderland. If it was Anfield, I could understand it. Probably got it at the shop in the stadium. But...did someone bring a goddamn beach ball all the way from Liverpool to Sunderland only to use it to unwittingly screw up his team's title chances? Hmm. Perhaps.

Finally then. Let's talk a little about Birmingham. Le Boss is royally pissed about the chants made out by them fans at the game, about there being only one Martin Taylor. Really, such losers that they are, who really cares. May you rot in Championship hell for the rest of your sad lives. Carson Yeung or otherwise. I think the best thing their new owner can hope to do for such a loser-ish club is to put some nice dim sum on their executive lunch menus. Otherwise, they're stuck in loserdom. I suppose when you've got a crap team to support, the little joys in life would include chanting about a player who had his leg badly broken, and more importantly, had never done a thing to offend.

Of course, fans can be losers, but you'd hope that managers aren't. Of course, Alex McLeish claims he heard nothing - just like managers claim temporary blindness when it comes to protecting their players. But let's just say this: it's probably one thing to protect your players, all 20-something of them, but to claim deafness and protect a couple thousand (or hundred) losers, well, that's their prerogative. Pfff.