SHOULD we be calling substitutes “finishers”, like Mikel Arteta is now campaigning for at Arsenal?
We’re at a stage in football now — and it’s not just Gunners boss Arteta — where managers are trying to invent new terms when what we have is just fine.
You’re not a sub, you’re a finisher. What?
Is it to make it more palatable or soften the blow for players who are not getting a look-in?
There’s no other word for it: Childish.
The problem I have with it is with players who aren’t one of the three, four or five “finishers” brought on.
What are you calling them? An unused player will be thinking: “He says I’m a finisher, but I’m not being used as one.”
That would leave me feeling confused and p***** off.
I was talking to a manager recently. I asked what his biggest issue was, and I was expecting something like: “We just can’t keep clean sheets.”
Instead, he says: “Our problem is we are struggling to go from phase one to phase two.”
I replied: “What are you on about?
“You mean you’re giving the ball away and worried about the counter attack? Just say that!”
Too many managers are too focused on sounding intelligent and reinventing the wheel — but football is football.
Let’s just stop churning out this coaching-course nonsense.
Read the full article here