Fatalities highlight pressing need for reform

What we should have been talking about after the 2012 Grand National was the wonderful performance by winner Neptune Collonges, who rallied under a stirring ride from jockey Daryl Jacob to pip leader Sunnyhillboy on the line in one of the most exciting finishes in Aintree history. Instead, the death of two horses during the race, including Synchronised, the highly recognisable and hugely popular winner of the Cheltenham Gold Cup just a month previously, have dominated the post-race discussion and cast a dark shadow over the most famous race in the world. Four fatalities in the past two runnings of the increasingly controversial national have given fresh ammunition to those anti-horseracing campaigners to whom the race is barbaric, and the British Horseracing Authority (BHA) can expect to come under intense pressure and scrutiny in the coming weeks as they launch their investigation into yesterday’s events. Some emotionally-charged condemnation from many quarters followed the race, including the worldwide trending of ‘banhorseracing’ on Twitter, a roll off the tongue statement that ignores the unique nature of the national and the comparatively tiny ratio of horses that die in flat racing. However, the criticisms, reasoned or ridiculous, have highlighted the need for reform of the Grand National, and horseracing cannot take a lone stance against this turning tide of public opinion.

Making a handful of fences slightly smaller will not do this time; for the BHA, there needs to be a bold move in the direction of making the race much safer to minimise the risk of fatalities. If they do nothing, and next year’s national passes without incident, they will breathe a sigh of relief, thus prolonging the inevitable outcry when another horse perishes in the race. If they do nothing and more scenes such as those witnessed yesterday take place in future nationals, protests and boycotts could be mobilised, and horseracing will risk losing the support of the public, which of course sustains the Grand National. Therefore, action must be taken, and it must be decisive. For me, a maximum of 30 runners, a uniformly smaller height and less severe drop on all fences, and a stricter qualification process for horses are all measures that are realistic and could make the race a significantly safer one. While this may be relinquishing some fine Grand National tradition, it is vital that the BHA take a conciliatory approach to reform rather than a defensive one, which could isolate the racing community and alienate the British public. Society is moving on, with health and safety concerns taking on ever-increasing importance in modern sport, and racing needs to do likewise, both for the safety of the horses and to retain the support of a disenchanted public. 

Race row reignited by act of petulance

Despite some vintage Premier League entertainment today which included 29 goals, the events have been overshadowed by the pathetic actions of Luis Suarez, which have served to prolong the engulfment of English football under an increasingly dark cloud. Suarez had an opportunity to defuse the tensions surrounding the race row with a simple handshake at the beginning of the game, and a humble attitude on the pitch during it. Instead, the Uruguayan has voluntarily reignited an issue that could, and in the view of most football fans should have been put to bed.

Suarez knew the eyes of the world would be upon him when he refused to proffer his hand in response to Evra, and knew that the implications would be significant; no amount of cultural naivety can conceal that.  The explanation for refusing to shake Evra’s hand probably lies in a resentment of the Frenchman for harming his image by accusing Suarez of something he evidently believes he is not guilty of. But when your personal beliefs could have such damaging repercussions for a brand and an employer like Liverpool football club, it is better to keep those beliefs to yourself, rather than to take a provocative stance in the eyes of the world. Suarez’s actions have therefore dragged Liverpool’s proud reputation through the dirt, and this is why Sir Alex Ferguson’s comments that Suarez should never play for Liverpool again are entirely fair. The club must act to preserve their image. Their support for Suarez is becoming increasingly difficult to justify, and any continuation of this stance could land them in even hotter water. Despite his remorseless conduct, not many of the footballing fraternity believe Suarez is a racist; this is not the main issue. The point is that Liverpool’s staunch defence of the South American portray the club as representative of views that English football thought had been left firmly behind, chiefly that racism is an acceptable form of behaviour on the football pitch.

At the centre of this frankly shameful attitude has been Kenny Dalglish. The Liverpool manager’s evasive and defensive comments in the post-match interview compounded further the significance of today’s events for Liverpool, and contrasted with those of Ferguson, who even had the sensibility to deplore Evra’s excessive celebrations at the final whistle of Manchester United’s 2-1 victory over Dalglish and Suarez’s beleaguered Liverpool. Dalglish’s infuriating post-match interviews have been a recurring theme this season, and his intransigence over the Suarez affair has served to discredit his regime. Only Liverpool fans blinded by loyalty would say that Dalgish has handled the situation well. He and Liverpool’s conduct, from the infamous shirts sported before the match against Wigan Athletic to the badly worded statement in defence of Suarez, have been shocking throughout. In this way, the events of the past few months have transformed one of the most universally popular football clubs in English history to, at present, the most hated.

It remains to be seen how this sorry episode will conclude. It surely represents the darkest chapter in Premier League history. The book could have been closed on it today, but instead the issue has been reignited by an act of both selfishness and petulance. Liverpool’s next move is crucial, and will be thoroughly scrutinised by the footballing world and the media. Instead of digging themselves a deeper hole by persistently defending the undefendable, the club can make a stance by transfer listing Luis Suarez, thereby halting their growing isolation from the footballing community. Some issues are bigger than football, and this is one of them. Liverpool must strive to restore their reputation and put this sorry tale firmly behind them with a symbolic act, to show that their institution is not representative of attitudes of a bygone era.

Whip Rules debate

The controversial new whip rules implemented by the British Horseracing Authority (BHA) on October 10th have divided the sport, alienated its key actors, the jockeys, and are threatening to bring down horseracing altogether as the debate rages on.  The BHA thought last week that amendments made to the use of the final furlong whip would stave off the threat of jockey strike action, but this naïve counterpunch has only made the jockeys more determined to reverse the changes.

A furore over the grim scenes in April at the Grand National convinced the BHA that it was time for change with regard to the use of the whip, which was so crucial to the victory of Ballabriggs in that race under the ride of Jason Maguire. But this furore was made from watchers from the outside; the cries for change were seldom heard from the jockeys, trainers or owners who are the people actually involved with racing and to whom the horses mean the most to. The whip rules were made to appease a wavering public, but in turn have affected worst of all the people actually involved in the sport. In doing this, the BHA have made an act of self-implosion.

As well as the decision itself, the timing of implementing the changes on October 10^th was bizarre. On the cusp of the jumps season, the new regulations have hit jump jockeys significantly having been only allowed one more use of the whip than flat jockeys during races. This is despite the fact that jumps races are longer and more difficult to navigate, thus giving increased importance to the whip for steering and encouraging the horses. Jump racing’s two most decorated riders, Tony McCoy and Ruby Walsh, have both declared their opposition to the rules, throwing the jumps season under a cloud before it has even begun.

Walsh incurred a ban of five days after using his whip once more than the allowed number of eight times on Edgardo Sol, whom he narrowly guided to a nose lengths victory at Aintree on Saturday. With horseracing finishes often being so tight, the new regulations present a dilemma: ride out and go for the win with all the means at your disposal, or accept defeat because you’re not sure whether you’ve exceeded the limit. The new rules are farcical, with jockeys so focused on the winning post to gain prize money and pride for them and their connections they don’t have time to consider how many times they’ve whipped the horse.

Perhaps the most controversial issue within the new regulations is the fines and suspensions handed out to jockeys. While Walsh’s ban got all the publicity, lesser known jockey Patrick Mathers got a seven-day ban for using his whip more than the allowance at Redcar this week which hammers a crucial point home. Most jockeys aren’t superstars, and despite the gruelling working hours, are not financially secure. Only a handful of McCoy’s and Walsh’s exist and become millionaires. For the others, it is a regular paying job, so fines and bans being handed out left, right and centre as the BHA are doing presently is going to hit some jockeys severely and force them to relinquish their licences.

The BHA’s whip rules have only succeeded in alienating the people most crucial to their sport, the jockeys. Strike action was narrowly averted at Aintree but is surely not far round the corner. If the BHA’s main employees unite and turn against it, it will have no choice but to amend the changes for the good of the sport, or risk sending horseracing into terminal decline.

Dalglish: a short term fix or the long term solution?

There is no doubt that Liverpool have come a long way since last January, when the club parted company with Roy Hodgson, but their indifferent start to this season has served as a sharp reminder that Kenny Dalglish’s charges are still very much a work in progress. But is Dalglish the man to guide them through this transition period and reassert their place in the Champions League among Europe’s elite?

After a ten year absence from football management, Dalglish was the popular choice to succeed Hodgson, who presided over the worst period in recent history for Liverpool. Dalglish’s promotion coincided with a takeover from Fenway Sports Group and a £50 million bid from Chelsea for prized asset Fernando Torres. This immediately gave the Scot the chance to breathe life into his beleaguered squad, signing Ajax’s Luis Suarez for £22.8 million and Newcastle’s Andy Carroll for a staggering £35 million, while offloading the want-away Torres.

Morale improved in the Liverpool camp, along with results, and Dalglish steered them to a respectable sixth placed finish with Suarez irrepressible. Another spending spree followed in the summer months, as Dalglish looked to sign young talent and clear out some of the ‘dead wood’ remaining from the Benitez and Hodgson regimes. Sunderland starlet Jordan Henderson was signed for £20 million, along with Aston Villa winger Stuart Downing (£15 million) and Scottish creative midfielder Charlie Adam (£7 million), who had both impressed in the previous Premier League season. The signing of Jose Enrique from Newcastle filled the problem left back position, while promising Uruguayan defender Sebastian Coates was also added to the squad having won Best Young Player at the Copa America over the summer.

An imbued sense of optimism led many fans to predict a passage straight back into the Champions League, in the face of a declining Arsenal following the departures of Cesc Fabreagas and Samir Nasri, and a stagnating Tottenham Hotspur with the future of Luka Modric under a cloud. But after wins against Arsenal and Bolton, Liverpool suffered a reality check at Stoke with a 1-0 defeat, before an ill-disciplined 4-0 mauling at White Hart Lane demonstrated how far they still have to improve to mount a serious challenge for fourth. Already Dalglish has shown signs of pressure by hinting towards a refereeing conspiracy against his team; such wild accusations will do his new-look Liverpool no favours in their bid to challenge again for trophies.

There has been scepticism among many about the size of transfer fees paid out to land their primary targets. The most glaringly obvious example of this is the £35 million paid to Newcastle to make Carroll, unproven at the highest level, the most expensive English footballer in history. Some have voiced their concerns over Carroll’s performances, maintaining that he looks sluggish and off the pace, and has been detrimental to Dalglish’s encouragement of a new, fluid passing style. £20 million for Henderson also seemed excessive. A hard-working, honest player, Henderson was mightily impressive at the beginning of his last season and was duly rewarded with an England call-up, but his form tailed off dramatically in the middle part of the season, and he is another player who still has plenty to prove. However, Dalglish maintains that these were buys with the future of the club in mind.

The sales of Christian Poulsen, Joe Cole, Paul Konchesky, Alberto Aquilani and Sotiris Kyriagkos were largely approved by fans, but the most surprising sale was that of Raul Merieles to Chelsea on deadline day, a player who was voted the PFA fans Player of the Year for his exploits the previous season. This may have been a symbolic move to dismantle the last remnant of the Hodgson regime, but murky details surrounded the transfer, with both parties (Merieles and Liverpool) arguing that it was the other that forced the deal to go through. To some extent this has relieved some of the congestion in the Liverpool midfield, but the squad looked a much stronger one with Merieles a part of it, as demonstrated by his match-winning performance coming off the bench against Arsenal. I don’t think there would be many clubs that would pick Adam and Lucas Leiva ahead of a player of Meireles’ calibre and versatility.

However, while a couple of Dalglish’s decisions have come under scrutiny, he retains full backing from supporters. A club icon as player and manager, when compared with the Liverpool of last season, Dalglish’s work in rebuilding the team and restoring confidence has to be admired. But after such a long exodus, can Dalglish still deal with the pressure of day-to-day management? When the pressure at Anfield got too much for Dalglish in 1991, he resigned. 20 years on, football is an even tougher environment. It is when Liverpool endure a bad run of results, perhaps brought on by an injury crisis or a tough run of fixtures, that we will see whether Dalglish still has the hunger and the tactical awareness to turn things round, or whether a new man will be required to lead Liverpool back into the big time.

At 60, this will probably represent Dalglish’s last shot at management and the football community wishes him well. But it’s an unforgiving business; the honeymoon period was the back end of last season. Now, his signings must gel, and the team as a whole must become more difficult to beat. But judge Dalglish and his team at the end of the season. It is then that we’ll see how much progress has been made, and whether Carroll, Henderson and company will look like sound investments. 

The Championship promises to reach new heights

‘I was playing in Serie A last year and I don’t think the Championship is a step down. There are big clubs and the crowds are fantastic’. These were the words of talented Switzerland international Gelson Fernandes, who this week became big-spending Leicester City’s latest marquee signing. As the standard of football improves in the Championship year after year, it is becoming difficult to argue with the view of Fernandes, who becomes the latest of a number of high profile players such as Craig Bellamy, and more recently Kevin Nolan who have chosen to ply their trade in England’s second tier. Certainly in terms of excitement, competitiveness, and quality of football there are few leagues that can compare. We have constantly seen that anyone can beat anyone, and thrilling games have been aplenty in the last few seasons. 2011/2012 promises to be the best yet.

The Championship is an unforgiving league, and one that’s notoriously difficult to predict, and there are certainly a number of key players in the hunt for promotion to the Premier League this campaign. Coming down from the top flight are West Ham United, Blackpool and Birmingham City. West Ham will view themselves as big fish in a small pond, and, now under the tutelage of respected boss ‘Big’ Sam Allardyce, who has bolstered his squad with players such as Nolan and John Carew, will expect to bounce back at the first time of asking. For Birmingham, the task would appear much tougher, amid a cloud of financial uncertainty and an owner behind bars, but they retain a strong squad and have a hungry new manager in Chris Hughton, determined to prove a point. Blackpool have lost their talismanic captain Charlie Adam, but with a newfound respect and an admirable playing style, they can expect to be there or there abouts come the season’s finale.

Leicester City, under Sven Goran Eriksson, have been the most active club in the transfer window, bringing in quality players such as Fernandes, Kasper Schmeichael, Matt Mills and David Nugent, making them the bookies’ favourites to end the season as champions. Cardiff City finally lost patience with Dave Jones after another faltering campaign ended in play-off disappointment, and have brought in bright young manager Malky Mackay as his replacement. Mackay is renowned for encouraging slick, passing football, while his signing of Kenny Miller looks an astute piece of business. Fellow play-off semi-finalists Nottingham Forest opted to do the same, sacking the outspoken Billy Davies and replacing him with Steve McClaren, who will be confident he can achieve promotion after a spell abroad. However, losing play-off finalists Reading are unlikely to eclipse last season’s achievements, particularly with the departure of Mills and potentially Shane Long.

From League One arrive sleeping giants Southampton, who have a core of talented footballers spearheaded by the skilful Adam Lallana, and will be buoyed by their opening day 3-1 win against Leeds United, in which all three goals oozed class. Brighton will also expect to make an impression on the Championship under the guidance of livewire Gus Poyet, having dominated League One from first to last in 2010/2011. Hull City, Burnley and Middlesbrough will be looking to consolidate solid finishes last season, while Ipswich Town could be the surprise package under Paul Jewell, having spent wisely over the summer. At the other end of the scale, Barnsley, Watford, Doncaster Rovers and Bristol City are all expected to struggle, and could be facing a long season in which survival is the priority.

 But expect a season of twists and turns and of unpredictability, with six-goal thrillers, late comebacks, drama, slumps in form and promotion and relegation battles that go right down to the wire. Last season Cardiff, Middlesbrough and Burnley began the season as favourites to win the league but none of them got close. As Serie A declines in terms of footballing quality and competitiveness, look no further than the Championship to provide football at its entertaining best, the perfect supplement to the Barclays Premier League.

West Ham United - where did it all go wrong?

This time two years ago, West Ham United had just cemented their place in the top half of the Premier League, finishing in a respectable ninth. They had done so under the tutelage of a bright young manager in Gianfranco Zola, who had got a good crop of youngsters playing some expansive, flowing football. Surely the future looked bright for West Ham. With relegation to the Championship confirmed last weekend after a 3-2 defeat to Wigan, the Hammers fans must be asking themselves; where did it all go wrong?

As with most things in football these days, money appears to be at the centre of it. Financial problems under their Icelandic owners created uncertainty which seemed to filter onto the pitch in the 2009/10 season, and while livelong fans David Gold and David Sullivan came to the Hammers’ rescue to buy the club and restore stability, their tenure at the top seems to have had the opposite effect. A wage bill too large, a defence too weak, a flop too many; a number of factors have interacted in the demise of West Ham United.

Let us start at the beginning of the 2009/2010 season. Having kept their spine of influential English players, those being Robert Green, Matthew Upson, Scott Parker and Carlton Cole, there was a sense of imbued optimism around Upton Park that the team would continue in the same vein with which they ended the last campaign. British youngsters such as Mark Noble, Jack Collison and Junior Stanislas had come to the fore and would surely kick on and sustain West Ham’s glowing reputation of bringing players from their academy into the first team. However, funds were not made available to strengthen the squad, whose limits were laid bare in a run that saw them win just one game from eleven, leaving Zola’s men planted in the relegation zone. A mid-season takeover by former Birmingham City owners David Gold and David Sullivan injected some much needed funds into a club in disarray, but the instability remained and performances remained below-par. Zola saved West Ham from relegation but this would not be enough to save his job.

I was a big fan of Zola, and admired the job he was doing in difficult circumstances. His attempt to maintain an attacking philosophy, trying to coax the best out of his players while blooding young talent was admirable, as was his gentlemanly conduct in interviews and press conferences when pressed with difficult questions. However, he lacked the knowhow for a relegation battle in the English Premier League, and it was ultimately because Portsmouth, Hull City and Burnley were even worse that the Hammers were able to survive.

 Zola also had an Achilles heel, which is unsurprising given his inexperience in top level club management; the transfer market. The Italian was not given much to spend during his tenure (by modern standards anyway), but of the players he did bring in, not many could be described as sound investments. The most glaring black mark here would be the signing of Savio Nsereko, a little known German youngster from Brescia, believed to be in the region £9 million, a club record fee. The forward failed to score in any of his ten appearances and can now be found plying his trade in the Bulgarian league.  £6 million for Alessandro Diamanti proved excessive, while the January 2010 signing of an unfit and past his best Benni McCarthy was nothing less than catastrophic, the South African leaving the club last month having cost a reported total of £6.7 million in transfer fee, wages and compensation payment.

Despite Zola’s flaws, the circumstances he was working in were less than ideal. Even if West Ham would have (dare I say it) suffered the ignominy of relegation that season, I think Zola would have been as well placed as anyone to bring them straight back up. He encouraged a stylish brand of football and enjoyed the support of his players, demonstrated by Scott Parker’s celebration with his manager after a crucial late goal against Wigan. After initially giving Zola their backing, Gold and Sullivan did anything but support their man in the second half of the season. A bid was apparently made for West Brom midfielder Graham Dorrans without Zola’s consent, while their comments to the media were ill-judged. Scathing criticism of performances, talk about the necessity of wholesale pay cuts and the claim that every player except Scott Parker was on the transfer list, did nothing to restore fragile morale in the West Ham camp.

The poor season aside, the new owners had decided that Zola’s face didn’t fit their new regime, and dispensed with his services at the end of the campaign. However, more surprising for me than the sacking was the choice of replacement. In fairness the pallet was limited, but the decision to appoint Avram Grant as their next manager on a four and a half year deal was to me a very peculiar one. A man who came to within a penalty of becoming a Champions League winning manager (after inheriting Mourinho’s Chelsea) still had the taste of relegation fresh in his mouth with Portsmouth when he put pen to paper. So when Gold and Sullivan needed an established manager with a record of survival in the Premier League, they turned to a man who appeared bereft of inspiration in his attempt to halt a debt ridden Portsmouth sliding out of the top flight. Now, does that sound familiar? For Grant looked equally helpless throughout his tenure at the financially troubled Hammers.

He tampered with his team too often, rarely sticking with the same eleven, and seemed to lack tactical astuteness in the key matches. In addition, the players he brought in, aside from January acquisition Demba Ba, did little to aid his team’s plight. However, it was Grant’s motivational aspect of management which most concerned me. The air with which he conducted himself in post-match interviews was defeatist and negative; not the sort of response that players want to hear. Too often he berated referees for his team’s failings, including the outrageous riposte that refereeing decisions had cost his team ‘ten points’ this season. If this air of pessimism had its imprint in his conduct to the players in the dressing room, then how on earth could the Israeli motivate his players for a relegation fight?

Interesting reflections were made by squad members. On leaving the club, Benni McCarthy claimed he couldn’t remember the last time Grant spoke to him, which doesn’t say much for Grant’s man management ability. Then, after West Ham came back from trailing 3-0 at half time to snatch a draw against West Brom, Carlton Cole praised Scott Parker’s half time team talk as ‘inspirational’. Where was Grant during all this? Isn’t the manager supposed to inspire the players with their team talk? There is no doubting Parker’s influence as a captain; perhaps it outweighed Grant’s as a manager. I am not alone in thinking that West Ham would have been relegated a great deal sooner had it not been for the contributions of the Football Writer’s Player of the Season.

Then there is the issue of almost unparalleled defensive frailties. These were the areas that needed strengthening in the last four transfer windows, but West Ham instead opted for attacking full-backs, midfielders, wingers or strikers and not solid defenders. When Matthew Upson’s form took a nosedive, so did that of the defence around him. The young James Tomkins has potential but looked out of his depth, while foreign import Manuel de Costa, the ageing Lars Jacobsen and World Cup representative (for New Zealand) Winston Reid did little to stop the rot. Unfortunately, defensive organisation again doesn’t appear to be one of Grant’s strong points. West Ham shipped three goals or more thirteen times this season in what amounts to a woeful defensive record.

Thus, down went a club with internationals galore and a wage bill comparable to Tottenham Hotspur’s. The interaction of the factors mentioned above left survival a forlorn hope in the unforgivingly competitive climate of the Premier League, and the owners have to shelf some of the blame. They tried and failed to appoint Martin O’Neill as successor to Grant in January, but then backtracked on their decision to dispense with their manager after West Ham put a little run together to move off the foot of the table. At least with relegation confirmed they have now acted; but what they do next is the key.

West Ham are resigned to losing stars such as Parker and Upson, but if they appoint a manager with pedigree and self-assurance to shelve out the ‘dead wood’, convince a core of promising and committed players that its worth staying, and act sensibly and decisively in the transfer market, then they will have a good chance of bouncing back. Steve McClaren has already ruled himself out of the running, but Gus Poyet, Slaven Bilić and Chris Hughton are all viable candidates. With a new 60,000 seater stadium in the offing, whoever is given the job must get the Hammers back into top flight football at the first time of asking, and break a worrying tradition by acting wisely and rationally in the transfer market to rebuild a shell-shocked squad.

Sport: you've got to be mental

When most people think about sport and its elite performers, they consider the talent of the individual or team, and their tremendous skill level derived from hours of practice. However, in just as important a category as these attributes is mental strength. This is often what separates the good sportsmen or women from the very best; those who can go out and produce on the biggest stage, often in the face of adversity.

The importance of mental strength was illustrated in the cruellest possible way in the Masters golf on Sunday. Rory McIlroy, having led the tournament for three rounds, crumbled in dramatic fashion as his game unravelled resulting in an eight-over-par round of 80. It became painful to watch as the BBC replayed slow footage of the young Brit falling to pieces by missing a series of short putts and hooking into the trees, leaving an enduring image of him burying his head into his arm, seemingly stifling back tears and wishing that the ground would swallow him up. The 21-year-old had played superbly up until the final round, but his inexperience and mental immaturity proved telling as he faded while his competitors produced some fantastic golf in a thrilling finale.

I think age is important here; mental strength is built up with experience, and McIlroy, having learnt the harshest of lessons, should be stronger for this ordeal. At the tender age of 21, I have no doubts that the Northern Irishman will fulfil his potential and can secure a major in the next few years. McIlroy’s plight also has its parallels; Greg Norman collapsed in similarly spectacular fashion to gift victory to Nick Faldo in the 1995 Masters, while Jean Van de Velde’s capitulation at the final hole of the 1999 Open Championship was equally memorable.  The mental aspect has particular resonance in golf such is the judgement needed to make the best shot, but you cannot discount the importance of mental toughness in any other sport either.

Top performers such as Roger Federer, Tony McCoy and Phil Taylor would not have been as supremely dominant in their respective sports if they didn’t have a mental edge to match their immense ability, while Manchester United have shown time and time again that mental strength is vital to the long haul of winning the Premier League. Athletics also demonstrates the importance of mental toughness; a lack of it can be seen in those who make a false start in the 100m sprint, those who foul in the long jump or who lose their rhythm in the hurdles. These unfortunate athletes more often than not have prepared impeccably, but have lacked mental composition to perform to the best of their ability on the big stage.

Where does mental strength come from, then? I think a key element of it has to be natural; some are born fighters, but those who can maintain concentration alongside fierce competitiveness are usually the ones who succeed. In cricket, batsmen facing an aggressive bowling attack need concentration and mental stamina to maintain their wicket, not just hours of practice in the nets. Coaches, managers and parents can also have a significant impact on a sportsperson’s mental strength; those who have been instilled with a tough mentality in training sessions and practice situations are more likely to reproduce on the big day.

However, for me, experience is the most vital component of the mental toughness needed to succeed in sport at the highest level. The more experiences of crucial matches and tournaments that go right down to the wire, the more prepared a performer will be to produce his or her ‘A-game’ next time around, as McIlroy will learn. An athlete can practice all they want; whether on the training ground, in the nets or on the track, but nothing is comparable to situational experience at the top level. It is this which can help instil mental strength, which separates the elite from the also-rans throughout the world of sport.