Everything is at stake! Actually, only my pride is on the line but once I make these predictions my much-vaunted reputation will be in the balance. Here is how I think the Premier League table will look after all the fixtures are completed. I do not like the way it looks, except for where QPR find themselves.
1. Manchester City
2. Chelsea
3. Liverpool
4. Arsenal
5. Manchester United
6. Tottenham Hotspur
7. Everton
8. Newcastle United
9. Stoke City
10. Southampton
11. Hull City
12. Sunderland
13. West Ham United
14. Aston Villa
15. Swansea City
16. West Bromwich Albion
17. Burnley
18. Q.P.R.
19. Crystal Palace
20. Leicester City
Manchester City successfully defend title
Even without a formidable defence, the Sky Blues have enough attacking options to deliver goals aplenty. Sergio Aguero's fitness is crucial, so too is Yaya Toure. As long as the club's stakeholders do not become too obsessed with European success, their domestic season should run smoothly.
Chelsea have too many superstars for my liking, with the signing of Diego Costa and Cesc Fabregas looking uncomfortably like the rather disappointing appearances of Michael Ballack and Andriy Shevchenko in 2006. Great individuals do not necessarily make for a better team.
Messy bottom half
Once again, the Premier League's bottom 12 placings are much more difficult to predict. Connor Wickham's goals will see Sunderland in a strong position whilst Burnley's hard work and endeavour will keep their heads just above the drop zone. The amount of time the Clarets have Sam Vokes and Danny Ings on the Turf Moor pitch together will be the deciding factor in their season.
Swansea are dark horses for relegation. Last season they occasionally played decent football but Gary Monk remains a dubious appointment as team manager. However, Wilfried Bony and Gylfi Sigurdsson should be enough to keep them safe.
On the other hand, Crystal Palace and Leicester are the most likely candidates for a plummet into the lower divisions. Without Tony Pulis the Eagles are a flimsy rag-tag side. Despite a comfortable ascent to the Championship title last year, nothing about Leicester suggests they have a squad to compete at a higher level. No doubt Nigel Pearson has other ideas though.
Once again elite British basketball is penniless. Along with water polo and synchronised swimming, all funding from UK Sport has been axed from the national basketball programme. The uncompromising decision was made on the back of Team GB’s lack of medal prospects at future Olympic Games.
But sport is about more than winning and losing, with the removal of funding sure to affect all levels of basketball in Britain, for spectators and participants alike. Without the annual £7 million cash injection, it will become increasingly difficult to cultivate professional, semi-professional and amateur players as well as provide the infrastructure in which they can beat the odds and achieve their dreams – even if it is just to have fun every Friday evening.
For me, the British women’s team’s efforts at the 2012 London Olympic games were one of the highlights of that summer. It was a story of pluck and spirit, the kind of thing normally confined to cheesy American family films. The team automatically qualified for their first Olympic appearance because they represented the home nation.
Expectations were so low that some nervous commentators worried about a potentially miserable streak of humiliations pushed on the team. But although they lost every match in their group, the British ladies’ performances showed a determination which defied their lowly ranking and would have given any witnessing Briton a surfeit of pride.
Only three points after overtime separated Great Britain from the hotly-tipped France, who eventually took the silver medal. It was one of those unmistakable occasions when defeat is nothing more than the etchings in a history book; what really mattered was the inspiring performance. The most gutsy runner, Natalie Stafford, had a great game whilst sporting a black eye.
Speaking of the David vs Goliath match, former NBA star John Amaechi (himself a prefect case of basketball’s worthwhile contribution to British society) said “The efforts of this team have been enormous. Much has been said of the men's team taking opponents to the brink, but nothing they've done compares to this team's performance against France.”
"There can be no doubt from anybody who played in this tournament that GB deserved to play in this tournament."
Sadly for everyone involved, this year’s funding cut could mean that Team GB never plays at another Olympic games, based purely on how tough it is to qualify. All that British fans of the sport can do is ask the same critical question of the money-wielder’s current strategy: where is the legacy of 2012? The whole point of the London Olympics was to inspire young and old folks into sports just like basketball, but now the rug is being pulled from under their feet. The issue is particularly pressing in the case of female participation, whereby basketball offered a more athletic and, let’s face it, a more enjoyable alternative to netball at junior level.
Worst of all, the news spreads an unhealthy message that something is not worth doing unless you do it well. The morale of all the passionate people involved in this country’s basketball infrastructure must be at its lowest ebb, knowing that their hard work and enthusiasm is still going unappreciated. So what if their endeavours do not lead to trophies? Isn’t the opening of opportunities for passionate individuals justification enough?
Indeed, participation in schools has dramatically increased in recent years. More children are opting for hoops instead of goalposts and embracing the American game with their peers. Commenting to newspapers, British Basketball chairman Roger Moreland said “The basketball community at home and abroad will be aghast that this can happen again. It seems every barrier to progress for basketball originates in Britain; the very country that should be embracing the progress its basketball teams have achieved.”
“How can a system abandon a sport where 70 per cent of the participants are under the age of 25 and where around 50 per cent of those that play come from BME communities?"
York University boasts both men and women’s basketball teams. Neither are a stranger to the lack of insight from governing bodies when it comes to their sport. The current female Basketball President, Sophie Bennett, believes that neglect from the relevant authorities lies behind the move: “It is true that England have gone the wrong way about dealing with basketball, because the GB team didn't cross the t's or dot the i's, the whole of England has now begun to suffer. How do they expect a generation to get better if they won't help it?”
“Overall, the cut came as no surprise because England have always been so centralized around football that they can't begin to comprehend the rules behind another sport. But given England's display at the World Cup this year - do you think football will get a cut in funding? I'll bite my tongue at the thought of that.”
Basketball is being kicked into a corner at the moment when it looked set for a period of rude health in this country. Without the appropriate support and funding, there will not only be very little chance of Team GB improving its international standing in future tournaments but also creates another obstacle to laying the foundations for the development of the sport across the country.
