From the Editor's Quill: Examining the Curtin(s).

Hello, It's been some time since we have had a chat, or more realistically, since I have written many words at you. The mechanics are unimportant , as is the reason for the interval. The important part is that I have returned, and we can resume the monologues that we call chats.

So what is prancing through my mind that could be called Union related? Two things really, the first is Jim Curtin and surprisingly enough, has nothing to do with his wardrobe, which is difficult for a man with my inherent perchant for gentlemanly flair and innate fashion sense to ignore, but ignore I will after just saying this. Hackworth for all his Leave it to Beaver charms at least dressed like Edddie Haskel at the 8th grade dance, like a gentleman. Curtin is a completely different animal of haberdashery, but no matter, let's not get embroiled in matters raimentary.

I was thinking more along the lines of style, and not the sort of style about which I just mentioned. I mean the formation and shape of a team on the field. Not just the graphic that comes up on the screen before the match or the jumble of numbers that the soccer Illuminati love to toss around, but the actual way a team moves and parries and recovers and pushes forward. I am referring to the way a match ebbs and flows, the reason we come early and dare not leave early except in the most extreme cases.

I am nothing if not a unwavering advocate of the beauty of the game. Pragmatism be damned, I need my team to play in a way that is pleasing to the eye first and foremost, regardless of the consequences. As a result of my undying devotion to that verve, I worry more about the style of the team than its current standing. I have seen Mr. Curtin's team play enough time to unequivocally say that, I have not been able to pick a style from the displays on offer. I have, however been able to identify a few trends that I will now share with you. They are nothing earth shattering and I do not profess to have any special insight. These are simple things that I noticed and wanted to use to renew our dialogue, before I plunge into more incendiary matters with my second point.

1. He prefers not to play the ball in the center of the field

It's not quite route 1, but perhaps its business route 1 football. If one keeps an eye on the center circle the Union no longer look to possess the ball there in any real way.

2. He prefers to play individuals in the best (not preferred) positions

as evidenced by Mo Edu doing his fair share at center back.

3. He can't figure out that LeToux is a striker and not a winger no matter how much he runs.

Seba is better and more productive playing as a striker but his natural hustle makes EVERY coach play him on the wings, please stop that once and for all.

4. He still thinks Danny Cruz has something to offer

And he very well may, Danny has had a very decent season, but most of the civilized people in my circle thought they had seen the last of him when Hackworth was shown the door.

5. and thinks that Hoppenot does not

"un petite plonguer" has most likely played his last match for the Union, which is a pity because he's a local lad who I would have liked to see done well, but apparently Cruz is the only one allowed to fall randomly anymore.

I could go on and mention the resurgence of  Michael Lahoud or the fact the Ethan White has made the field, but that would be a distraction from the fact that the empty bucket has already been deployed. A tactic I would imagine would have been George Custer's go to formation, if he were given the chance to coach a bunch of naturalized Americans against a better drilled opponent in a hostile environment....oh wait.....never mind.

This brings me to the second thing Union related that has been on my mind.....which will have to wait until the next installment later this week.

Until next time my lovelies..... be well.