Sir Alex Ferguson has won more trophies than any other manager in English football, and if anybody doubted whether he still has the spark, they need only refer to last season’s major trophies. However, in the next round of the Champions’ League his team has been drawn against Inter Milan, managed by none other than “The Special One”.
José Mourinho needs no introduction to football fans, although few of those fans appear to be interested in who the man really is. He has reached the peak of the game at a speed that none have matched and yet he still seems to have to justify his every word and deed.
His detractors would argue that he only has himself to blame for the criticism, and they use his nickname as an example. On arriving at Chelsea he announced to the delighted press
"Please don't call me arrogant, but I'm European champion and I think I'm a special one".
Of course the gentlemen of the press were over the moon that somebody as newsworthy as Mourinho had finally arrived in England, but they have done just as much as anybody to destroy his reputation.
So if we cut through all the negative press this coach has received, is it possible to judge how special he is?
AN IMPRESSIVE CV
On a personal level, Mourinho has a diploma in sports science and has obviously achieved all the necessary coaching badges to take him to the highest level of the game. He also speaks a number of languages, including Portuguese, English, Spanish, Italian and French.
In terms of football, his palmarés is even more impressive. He has only been a professional manager since 2000, and although he has not even been managing all that time (around seven years in total) he has found time to win four domestic leagues, three major domestic cups, the UEFA Cup and the Champions’ League.
Statistically (according to the IFFHS) he was considered the best manager in the world for two consecutive years. He has only ever lost one league game at home with any team and his teams are on a run of over one hundred home games without defeat. And he is only the second manager ever to win the UEFA Cup and Champions’ League/European Cup in consecutive years.
IT’S ALL RELATIVE
As with everything in life, a person’s achievements are relative. Nobody’s should be belittled simply because there is someone “better”, of course, so if one person speaks five languages why should they care if someone else speaks six? However, if we compare Mourinho’s achievements to those of people around him, do they still withstand scrutiny?
I am not suggesting for one moment that this was Mourinho’s intention, but seeing as he made the comment about being “special” on arriving in England, I would like to use the achievements of the people who inhabit the world of English football as a yardstick.
· COACHES
First, the coaches. Only Bob Paisley has won the UEFA and European Cups in consecutive seasons, nobody else. No other English manager comes near Mourinho. (Sit down, Johnny English, Sir Alex is Scottish – Scotland is a different country. So is every other place your government and army have annexed.) Indeed, English managers are unfortunately often people like Mike Newell or Sam Allardyce, misogynist or (allegedly) dishonest.
· FANS
What about the fans? Marseille 1998, Charleroi 2000, Bratislava 2002, Albufeira 2004, Stuttgart 2006 – the evidence is plain. Admittedly there are no available figures on how many English football fans speak five languages, have finished higher education or have reached the absolute peak of their field in less than a decade. There is, of course, unlimited evidence of monosyllabic thuggery.
· PUNDITS
Should we compare Mourinho to football pundits? They are a special breed of television presenters who are experts at spouting insipid, clichéd rubbish in droning voices while offering absolutely no analysis. Irish residents will have had the chance to compare RTÉ’s pundits to the English riff-raff, and will have seen what real analysis is all about. A special mention here should go to that most English of (alleged) Scotsmen, Alan Hansen.
· PLAYERS
Apart from the fans, of course, the main group of people involved in football are the players themselves. England boasts such iconic individuals as Luke McCormick, Joey Barton, Lee Hughes, Steven Gerrard (allegedly), Glen Johnson, Ben May, Jordan Robertson (again, allegedly), Jermaine Pennant and Marlon King. Again, there are no figures available as to how many languages the average English footballer speaks or whether he has finished higher education, but there is ample evidence of violence and extremely arrogant anti-social behaviour sometimes ending in death.
· HACKS
And last but not least we have the hacks themselves, the journalists who believe they report on football in order to satisfy the fans’ desire for more news, but in reality insist the fans be interested in a footballer’s every move in order to keep the hack in a job. Far from speaking five languages, journalists at The Times – a top-end newspaper, allegedly - cannot spell and have no idea of grammar, producing unreadable articles every Sunday. (At least the tabloids come up with memorable headlines, not least the ones announcing Inverness Caledonian Thistle’s victory over Celtic or Manchester United’s last-minute signing of Berbatov.)
And then we have perhaps the worst offender, the international laughing-stock that is the BBC, whose sporting forum encourages swearing, personal insults, racism and potentially dangerous taunting on a daily basis (in spite of their apparently irrelevant “House Rules”) while refusing to allow well-written and balanced articles on serious issues within the sport.
· THE AGENTS
Shall we just leave the agents out of this?
PAINT IT BLACK
Perhaps this is painting English football with too much black. Admittedly there are many footballers and managers who do a mountain of unpublicised work for the less fortunate members of society, although as Mourinho is also on that list, in this attempt at balancing things the gesture is cancelled out.
It is also understandable that the industry insists on complete dedication to the cause, but that same industry should encourage the players to study and learn more about the world around them rather than encouraging them to reach the highest level of some computer game. Football can also be considered akin to boxing in that it is an opportunity for kids who have not had exactly that, an opportunity. However, again the football world should nurture the players as opposed to seeing them simply as a way of making money.
In terms of the fans, their passion is a necessary part of the football experience; however, knives and racist chants are not.
BACK TO THE START
Whether this article has been too harsh on English football or not, based on all this evidence it is painfully obvious that in this sort of company, Mourinho is without any doubt a special one.
One question remains: was he arrogant to say as much? Well, how arrogant was this statement compared to enlisting the help of five friends to beat up a DJ who wouldn’t change a song (allegedly)? And how arrogant was it compared to driving with such disregard for anyone else that two children were smashed to death?
They were only two cases out of many people, but Mourinho really is one of a kind.
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
The full penalty of the law
(Note – all the teams named are the current teams of these players at the time of writing)
Only those who have spent the last few days on a different planet will not have heard of Steven Gerrard’s arrest and charge of assault and affray. It will be interesting to see how the authorities deal with such a famous and popular – at least as an international – player. It will be even more interesting to see how a club as prestigious as Liverpool decides to proceed with such a delicate matter.
What is increasingly more mundane, however, is the fact that a professional footballer has fallen foul of the law while showing his true colours. It is something we have come to expect in the last few years, as recent news items show. While Gerrard was “helping police with their enquiries” twenty-year-old Sheffield United player Jordan Robertson was arrested on suspicion of dangerous driving after a father of five was killed in a road accident over Christmas.
Earlier this year we have already seen 25-year-old Newcastle United player Joey Barton sentenced to six months in jail, also for assault and affray (note to Gerrard and the judge who will try his case, if it comes to trial), and 25-year-old Plymouth Argyle player Luke McCormick sentenced to seven years and four months for killing two little children in a car crash. Barton also has previous for night-time road accidents, having injured a pedestrian in 2005.
The football hall of shame has, in recent years, also seen the inclusion of Jermaine Pennant (driving offences), Marlon King (driving offences and two cases of assault, one involving punching a woman), and Glen Johnson and Ben May (shoplifting, of all things).
TO LET THE PUNISHMENT FIT THE CRIME
Luke McCormick was at first suspended by his employers, Plymouth Argyle, then sacked, although the euphemism “contract cancelled by mutual consent” was used in the press. When his friend David Norris – the man whose wedding had provided McCormick with the excuse to go overboard – made the immature and offensive “handcuffs gesture” during a goal celebration and compounded his stupidity by lying about the gesture, his employers Ipswich Town fined him £25,000.
(Some people may also recall Tim Cahill’s “handcuffs gesture” during a goal celebration earlier this year. This was directed at his own brother, who is serving a prison sentence and was meant as a gesture of brotherly support as opposed to one of insolent defiance, although it could also be argued that it may be seen to endorse violence.)
It remains to be seen whether McCormick will be welcomed back into the footballing fold, but the omens, for him at least, are good. Lee Hughes, the 32-year-old Oldham Athletic player, was jailed for six years in August 2004 for killing one person and injuring another in a road accident during the 2003-4 season. Hughes even fled the scene rather than face up to his crime.
Hughes’ employers at the time, West Bromwich Albion, terminated his contract after the player had been sentenced. However, not only was Hughes bailed awaiting trial – allowing him to shrug off any alleged distress and become his club’s top scorer – he was offered a new contract at Oldham Athletic while still in prison. Barton, Pennant, King, Johnson and May still earn the obscene amounts paid to professional footballers of any division, and there is no doubt that Liverpool FC will abandon all pretence of dignity or integrity by continuing to employ Gerrard should he be convicted.
THE DEBT TO SOCIETY
Lee Hughes would argue that he paid the price for his crime – he was convicted of an offence and given a sentence which he served in accordance with the laws of his country – and that those laws state that not only should he not be punished beyond that, but he should be allowed every opportunity to re-enter society on an equal footing with any other citizen. He should certainly not be punished by being refused work simply because of his record.
It is indeed shocking when the holier-than-thou element of our society decides to continue punishing people for mistakes they have made in the past. How can a person be expected to live a decent life if the meagre opportunities they have clung to in the past are now converted into a brick wall of total rejection?
However, there is a clear case in favour of not allowing people to resume certain occupations even after completing sentences, depending on the crime and the occupation. A person convicted of any sort of crime involving children should not be a school teacher, for example. Somebody convicted of fraud should not be allowed to work in government or in any job involving the handling of large amounts of money.
ROLE MODELS
Anybody who has worked with children knows how influential football is on their lives. When a kid has a ball at their feet, they run like their favourite player and celebrate a goal in the same way, even though the goal is scored between two jerseys. In 1986 some of my classmates even came in wearing plaster casts on perfectly healthy arms. Nowadays, of course, children even protest in the same way as their idols, first diving then twisting their faces in perfect imitation.
The point is that they see the actions of their heroes, and the consequences of such actions. Children are not stupid – they are far more intelligent than a lot of people give them credit for. They may or may not think that the actions are acceptable, but they will always take note of a lack of punishment, and incorporate that knowledge into their take on the world.
And subsequently, their take on the world around them and the society they live in will manifest itself in the way they behave towards members of that society. So do we really want to allow the likes of McCormick and Gerrard to be their role models?
Only those who have spent the last few days on a different planet will not have heard of Steven Gerrard’s arrest and charge of assault and affray. It will be interesting to see how the authorities deal with such a famous and popular – at least as an international – player. It will be even more interesting to see how a club as prestigious as Liverpool decides to proceed with such a delicate matter.
What is increasingly more mundane, however, is the fact that a professional footballer has fallen foul of the law while showing his true colours. It is something we have come to expect in the last few years, as recent news items show. While Gerrard was “helping police with their enquiries” twenty-year-old Sheffield United player Jordan Robertson was arrested on suspicion of dangerous driving after a father of five was killed in a road accident over Christmas.
Earlier this year we have already seen 25-year-old Newcastle United player Joey Barton sentenced to six months in jail, also for assault and affray (note to Gerrard and the judge who will try his case, if it comes to trial), and 25-year-old Plymouth Argyle player Luke McCormick sentenced to seven years and four months for killing two little children in a car crash. Barton also has previous for night-time road accidents, having injured a pedestrian in 2005.
The football hall of shame has, in recent years, also seen the inclusion of Jermaine Pennant (driving offences), Marlon King (driving offences and two cases of assault, one involving punching a woman), and Glen Johnson and Ben May (shoplifting, of all things).
TO LET THE PUNISHMENT FIT THE CRIME
Luke McCormick was at first suspended by his employers, Plymouth Argyle, then sacked, although the euphemism “contract cancelled by mutual consent” was used in the press. When his friend David Norris – the man whose wedding had provided McCormick with the excuse to go overboard – made the immature and offensive “handcuffs gesture” during a goal celebration and compounded his stupidity by lying about the gesture, his employers Ipswich Town fined him £25,000.
(Some people may also recall Tim Cahill’s “handcuffs gesture” during a goal celebration earlier this year. This was directed at his own brother, who is serving a prison sentence and was meant as a gesture of brotherly support as opposed to one of insolent defiance, although it could also be argued that it may be seen to endorse violence.)
It remains to be seen whether McCormick will be welcomed back into the footballing fold, but the omens, for him at least, are good. Lee Hughes, the 32-year-old Oldham Athletic player, was jailed for six years in August 2004 for killing one person and injuring another in a road accident during the 2003-4 season. Hughes even fled the scene rather than face up to his crime.
Hughes’ employers at the time, West Bromwich Albion, terminated his contract after the player had been sentenced. However, not only was Hughes bailed awaiting trial – allowing him to shrug off any alleged distress and become his club’s top scorer – he was offered a new contract at Oldham Athletic while still in prison. Barton, Pennant, King, Johnson and May still earn the obscene amounts paid to professional footballers of any division, and there is no doubt that Liverpool FC will abandon all pretence of dignity or integrity by continuing to employ Gerrard should he be convicted.
THE DEBT TO SOCIETY
Lee Hughes would argue that he paid the price for his crime – he was convicted of an offence and given a sentence which he served in accordance with the laws of his country – and that those laws state that not only should he not be punished beyond that, but he should be allowed every opportunity to re-enter society on an equal footing with any other citizen. He should certainly not be punished by being refused work simply because of his record.
It is indeed shocking when the holier-than-thou element of our society decides to continue punishing people for mistakes they have made in the past. How can a person be expected to live a decent life if the meagre opportunities they have clung to in the past are now converted into a brick wall of total rejection?
However, there is a clear case in favour of not allowing people to resume certain occupations even after completing sentences, depending on the crime and the occupation. A person convicted of any sort of crime involving children should not be a school teacher, for example. Somebody convicted of fraud should not be allowed to work in government or in any job involving the handling of large amounts of money.
ROLE MODELS
Anybody who has worked with children knows how influential football is on their lives. When a kid has a ball at their feet, they run like their favourite player and celebrate a goal in the same way, even though the goal is scored between two jerseys. In 1986 some of my classmates even came in wearing plaster casts on perfectly healthy arms. Nowadays, of course, children even protest in the same way as their idols, first diving then twisting their faces in perfect imitation.
The point is that they see the actions of their heroes, and the consequences of such actions. Children are not stupid – they are far more intelligent than a lot of people give them credit for. They may or may not think that the actions are acceptable, but they will always take note of a lack of punishment, and incorporate that knowledge into their take on the world.
And subsequently, their take on the world around them and the society they live in will manifest itself in the way they behave towards members of that society. So do we really want to allow the likes of McCormick and Gerrard to be their role models?
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
A lesson in history
Arsenal are enduring troubled times recently. Results in the Premier League so far this season have been unexpectedly poor, leaving the club with no chance of even pretending to compete with United and Chelsea. They have already lost more games than Hull City, and have even lost twice at home. So have Chelsea, of course, but the difference is that they at least look like title contenders.
In the Champions League their position appears to be stronger, but they have hardly convinced against average opposition, needing a highly biased referee – note the difference in the free kicks which led to Arsenal’s goal and Dinamo Kiev’s red card – to earn qualification without needing to win their last game. Chelsea have yet to impress either – but again they look more likely finalists.
Off the pitch things are hardly any better. William Gallas was photographed supposedly leaving a nightclub with a cigarette in his mouth, prompting sadly predictable references to Clinton. Gallas compounded his alleged sin by deigning to have an opinion on the team he captains – indirectly hinting at the reasons for the problems – thus inviting the ire of a manager who has always gone to ridiculous lengths to pretend his players are perfect.
Gallas’ replacement as captain is a highly unpopular youngster with no obvious leadership skills who has yet to demonstrate his mettle under the greatest pressure. And talking of youngsters, the teams fielded in the Carling Cup add more fuel to the fire by playing so well in a trophy already devalued by the likes of Arsenal that there are suggestions that they should replace the first team in the Premier League.
And perhaps the worst aspect of this crisis of confidence is the fact that record numbers of Arsenal fans are calling for Wenger’s head. Actually, no, the worst thing of all is the number of fans bleating about how this could possibly be happening in such a historic club.
A SENSE OF HISTORY
What do these fans mean when they talk about a historic club? Taking into account that most people do not know the exact difference between the words “historic” and “historical”, are they referring to the club’s history? Obviously every club has a history – it’s everything that has happened before today. Even teams that have never won anything have a past. Even MK Dons.
Are they trying to suggest that their club is older than most? Arsenal was founded in 1886, by which time dozens of clubs already existed in England alone. Age alone would make Prescot Cables a historic club.
Let’s face it, history means trophies, the only reason that clubs put teams out every week. And in that respect, Arsenal are simply a bunch of arrivistes.
NEW BOYS IN TOWN
Arsenal have won five league titles, five FA cups, one League Cup and the European Cup-Winners’ Cup – a fine haul indeed, but all won in the last twenty years. Before all that, Arsenal were just another run-of-the-mill team, except during a brief moment in time in the 1930s when they won another five titles and two FA cups. By the same token, Huddersfield Town dominated one decade, winning three league titles and an FA cup in the twenties – does that make them historic too?
For the rest of their existence, Arsenal were habitual runners-up who occasionally won the odd trophy. Most clubs manage to win the odd trophy, even if it is some random cup, including Leicester City, Norwich City and Luton Town. Even Sunderlandnil have won stuff.
Some may retort that United’s only period of dominance before the Ferguson years was from the late fifties to the late sixties, with the Munich tragedy causing a desperately unfortunate pause in that supremacy. However, at least during those glorious years United did manage to make history.
ONE OF THE FAMILY
There are, of course, other ways of interpreting the definition of the word “historic”. There is no doubt that there are certain clubs around England that have had a considerable “importance on or influence in” history, albeit in a more local sense. There is absolutely no denying, for example, the contribution that Newcastle United have made to the local community in the north-east.
The same can hardly be said of Arsenal, who are just another London team, and not even the only team in their area. Their brand-new stadium carries the name of a foreign country, not a local street or neighbourhood. Their fans are regarded as either non-participatory (as in “the Highbury Library”), members of the prawn sandwich brigade or people in distant countries whose favourite sons have managed to impress Wenger enough to secure a place in the team.
YOU’RE HISTORY
This is one of the unfortunate side effects of young fans jumping on the bandwagon of a club’s temporary success. I can remember when nobody had ever heard of Arsenal; kids nowadays only remember Wenger’s trophies. Arsenal fans like to look down on Chelsea fans as upstarts, people who support a club which has bought success and that only in recent seasons.
How conveniently they forget that that describes Arsenal fans of ten years ago to perfection.
And now that the Arsenal “faithful” are baying for Wenger’s blood, perhaps it is appropriate to mention the anti-climax being experienced at the club. The manager that many consider to be a genius appeared to be slowly but surely building up to a period of total European domination – yet when they finally stepped up to the stage, they were found wanting. And they have won nothing since.
Indeed it must be said that the overriding impression which comes from Arsenal today is that their years of success are now no more than history. Perhaps that’s what the fans mean.
In the Champions League their position appears to be stronger, but they have hardly convinced against average opposition, needing a highly biased referee – note the difference in the free kicks which led to Arsenal’s goal and Dinamo Kiev’s red card – to earn qualification without needing to win their last game. Chelsea have yet to impress either – but again they look more likely finalists.
Off the pitch things are hardly any better. William Gallas was photographed supposedly leaving a nightclub with a cigarette in his mouth, prompting sadly predictable references to Clinton. Gallas compounded his alleged sin by deigning to have an opinion on the team he captains – indirectly hinting at the reasons for the problems – thus inviting the ire of a manager who has always gone to ridiculous lengths to pretend his players are perfect.
Gallas’ replacement as captain is a highly unpopular youngster with no obvious leadership skills who has yet to demonstrate his mettle under the greatest pressure. And talking of youngsters, the teams fielded in the Carling Cup add more fuel to the fire by playing so well in a trophy already devalued by the likes of Arsenal that there are suggestions that they should replace the first team in the Premier League.
And perhaps the worst aspect of this crisis of confidence is the fact that record numbers of Arsenal fans are calling for Wenger’s head. Actually, no, the worst thing of all is the number of fans bleating about how this could possibly be happening in such a historic club.
A SENSE OF HISTORY
What do these fans mean when they talk about a historic club? Taking into account that most people do not know the exact difference between the words “historic” and “historical”, are they referring to the club’s history? Obviously every club has a history – it’s everything that has happened before today. Even teams that have never won anything have a past. Even MK Dons.
Are they trying to suggest that their club is older than most? Arsenal was founded in 1886, by which time dozens of clubs already existed in England alone. Age alone would make Prescot Cables a historic club.
Let’s face it, history means trophies, the only reason that clubs put teams out every week. And in that respect, Arsenal are simply a bunch of arrivistes.
NEW BOYS IN TOWN
Arsenal have won five league titles, five FA cups, one League Cup and the European Cup-Winners’ Cup – a fine haul indeed, but all won in the last twenty years. Before all that, Arsenal were just another run-of-the-mill team, except during a brief moment in time in the 1930s when they won another five titles and two FA cups. By the same token, Huddersfield Town dominated one decade, winning three league titles and an FA cup in the twenties – does that make them historic too?
For the rest of their existence, Arsenal were habitual runners-up who occasionally won the odd trophy. Most clubs manage to win the odd trophy, even if it is some random cup, including Leicester City, Norwich City and Luton Town. Even Sunderlandnil have won stuff.
Some may retort that United’s only period of dominance before the Ferguson years was from the late fifties to the late sixties, with the Munich tragedy causing a desperately unfortunate pause in that supremacy. However, at least during those glorious years United did manage to make history.
ONE OF THE FAMILY
There are, of course, other ways of interpreting the definition of the word “historic”. There is no doubt that there are certain clubs around England that have had a considerable “importance on or influence in” history, albeit in a more local sense. There is absolutely no denying, for example, the contribution that Newcastle United have made to the local community in the north-east.
The same can hardly be said of Arsenal, who are just another London team, and not even the only team in their area. Their brand-new stadium carries the name of a foreign country, not a local street or neighbourhood. Their fans are regarded as either non-participatory (as in “the Highbury Library”), members of the prawn sandwich brigade or people in distant countries whose favourite sons have managed to impress Wenger enough to secure a place in the team.
YOU’RE HISTORY
This is one of the unfortunate side effects of young fans jumping on the bandwagon of a club’s temporary success. I can remember when nobody had ever heard of Arsenal; kids nowadays only remember Wenger’s trophies. Arsenal fans like to look down on Chelsea fans as upstarts, people who support a club which has bought success and that only in recent seasons.
How conveniently they forget that that describes Arsenal fans of ten years ago to perfection.
And now that the Arsenal “faithful” are baying for Wenger’s blood, perhaps it is appropriate to mention the anti-climax being experienced at the club. The manager that many consider to be a genius appeared to be slowly but surely building up to a period of total European domination – yet when they finally stepped up to the stage, they were found wanting. And they have won nothing since.
Indeed it must be said that the overriding impression which comes from Arsenal today is that their years of success are now no more than history. Perhaps that’s what the fans mean.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
