Someone once said (and it may have been me) that if you were to look up the definition of the word ‘boring’ in the dictionary, there would simply be a picture of Roy Hodgson.

Is that a little harsh? Possibly yes.

But there are times – many, many times – when it almost seems as if great uncle Roy deliberately wants to give the impression that excitement and adrenalin scare the carpet slippers off him.

Last week the football world was trying to decide who had been the best footballer on the planet in 2014. National team managers, national team captains and journalists from every corner of the globe were invited to vote for the winner of Fifa’s Ballon d’Or.

The clear favourites for this year’s award were, for obvious reasons, Lionel Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo – two players who are the epitome of skilful, creative, artistic football genius.

So which of these two mega stars got Hodgson’s number one vote? Neither.

Nope, in a clear display of which values he holds dear, Hodgson voted for Javier Mascherano, Philipp Lahm and Manuel Neuer. A defensive midfielder, a defender and a goalkeeper. Safe, safer and safest.

To be fair, I will let him off with the Neuer vote because I would have gone for him myself. If, after his amazing performances for Bayern and Germany last year he didn’t win the award, then I think all goalkeepers should give up hope of ever winning it.

However, Mascherano and Lahm? Really?

Even if you leave aside the fact that he didn’t vote for the two best players on the planet – which is worrying in itself – surely he could have found room in his top three for at least one player who is actually exciting to watch.

I am not suggesting Mascherano and Lahm are not good players because they are. Great ones, in fact. They are the solid, reliable workhorses that make it possible for the likes of Messi and Ronaldo to do their clever stuff.

But while you can teach players to be workhorses, you can’t teach players to be skilful geniuses, which is why awards like the Ballon d’Or tend to go to players who create, excite and get the adrenalin flowing.

Hodgson’s selection says a lot about the man and his tactics – even his three-a-side team, picked from the crème-de-la-crème of the entire football world, is set up to avoid defeat.

Of course, Ronaldo ultimately came out on top in the vote, winning the competition for the second year running. And I think, considering the 12 months he had, it is more than justified that he should edge out Messi.

But as a Three Lions fan, it’s pretty darned sobering to realise that if either, or both, of those players had been born in somewhere like Hartlepool or Colchester, there is actually a chance they wouldn’t get in Hodgson’s team.

God forbid we have any of that showboating malarkey in an England shirt, eh Roy?

So far, so the same

Q: What’s the difference between David Moyes’ Manchester United and Louis van Gaal’s Manchester United?

A: Nothing.

Despite spending £150 million on new players, after 21 games of the season United have exactly the same number of points they did last time round.

More worrying from a United fan’s perspective (and hilarious from everyone else’s) is the fact that they now have arguably one of the best attacking line-ups in world football but still couldn’t muster a single shot on target against Southampton last weekend. That’s cleverly disguised progress for you.

This time last year, the unrest with Moyes was growing, and knives were being sharpened all over Old Trafford. The consensus was that the Scot was out of his depth and didn’t know how to manage at the top level, so he had to go.

Van Gaal is a luckier man, however, because his indifferent start to his Old Trafford career has been conveniently masked by the mediocre performances of teams like Liverpool and Arsenal.

Last year at this stage, United were languishing in seventh on 37 points and losing touch with the top four. This year, the same number of points sees them in fourth, and the minimum requirement of a Champions League place is still within reach.

As I’ve said before, I have nothing against Van Gaal in the slightest and understand the magnitude of the job he took on. I just feel Moyes was very poorly treated, and the current situation more than vindicates that opinion.

The Dutchman will come good at United, given time. But the question that will never be answered is how good might Moyes have been if he had been given time and the same sort of spending power afforded to his successor?

The anti-social media man

Peterborough United owner Darragh MacAnthony faced a lot of criticism last week for a social media outburst in the wake of his team’s latest defeat.

In a series of 11 tweets, the self-made millionaire blasted just about everyone involved with the club, from the players to the fans.

God forbid we have any of that showboating malarkey in an England shirt, eh Roy?

Each tweet started off with “I’m p****d off that...” before going on to tear into those he feels are responsible for them losing eight of their last 11 matches.

The general consensus among football observers has been that this is not the right way for a football club owner to behave. They should, apparently, be more refined and dignified.

Well, I disagree entirely.

I think it is absolutely brilliant that there are owners in the game who are not afraid to vent their anger. The fans are more than happy to give the owners grief, so why shouldn’t the owner be allowed to do the same when his patience runs out?

MacAnthony’s tweets show he is not just some rich guy who sees Peterborough as a frivolous hobby, but a man who is passionate about the club he runs and wants it to be in a better place.

I would suggest English football needs more owners like him – hands-on and fully involved – and less of those who sit in some foreign country occasionally remembering to check the result of that team they bought a while back.

Signing of the season

As we slip quietly past the halfway point of the Premier League campaign there are numerous contenders for signing of the season.

West Ham United’s Siafra Sakho and Chelsea’s Cesc Fabregas are undoubtedly among the favourites, while Alexis Sanchez of Arsenal would probably win if a vote were held today.

But for me, in terms of value for money and net contribution to the team, there needs to be another name on that list: Frank Lampard.

When the former England international signed for Manchester City on loan from his American parent club, we all felt it was little more than a gimmick. However, unless you define ‘being instrumental in sustaining a title challenge’ as a gimmick, we were very wrong.

Lampard doesn’t play every game these days, and those he does play often involve making an appearance from the bench. But so effective have his contributions been, he has been persuaded to delay his move to New York City until the end of the English season.

On New Year’s Day, to pick an example, Lampard popped up to head home the winning goal against Sunderland just minutes after coming on the pitch.

That makes it seven or eight points Lampard has directly contributed to City’s campaign so far.

Without those points, Chelsea would pretty much have the title sown up already.

Loan signings are not always the most exciting. When they involve 36-year-olds who have been discarded by their club and gone into semi-retirement in America, they are even less likely to get the blood racing.

But bringing in Lampard is starting to look like a brilliant bit of business by City. Not the biggest or most dramatic move this season but, so far at least, one of the most inspired.

sportscolumnist@timesofmalta.com
Twitter: @maltablade