Gary Speed 1969-2011

I realise a great deal has already been written about the tragic death of Gary Speed, but it seems churlish to devote column inches to any other football story from this weekend. All of a sudden, debating whether Mario Ballotelli is being treated harshly by referees seems almost insultingly trivial.

Gary Speed 1969-2011

Speed’s death has hit the football world hard. Shay Given started yesterday’s match against Swansea in tears, Craig Bellamy was left out of Liverpool’s squad for their game against Manchester City and Robbie Savage struggled to get the words past a huge lump in his throat when attempting to speak from the heart about his former teammate and friend.

From a supporters’ perspective, Gary Speed was that rare breed of footballer for whom pretty much all fans had a lot of respect for. His professionalism, talent and attitude seemed to transcend even club rivalries. I don’t know a single person that ever disliked Gary Speed, and we all know how irrational hatred can manifest itself when it comes to footballers.

As a West Ham and England fan, I have no affiliation to Speed other than he played the game I love. And yet when I heard the news that he had died on Sunday morning, I was overwhelmed with sadness. Hearing the tributes pour in, the spontaneous minute’s applause at the Liberty Stadium and radio presenters - so calm and professional by their nature - audibly devastated, was utterly heartbreaking. I am still shocked by the news, but sadness remains the stronger emotion.

Gary Speed was a man who at 42 had an exciting future ahead of him. He had recently enjoyed success whilst managing his country’s national team, was a well respected media pundit and seemed to have a happy family life and wide circle of friends. Whilst some footballers struggle with the aftermath of their playing careers, Speed seemed to be approaching it with gusto.

But something changed all that. Something drove Speed to the point where he was unable to look ahead to next year, next month or even tomorrow. Something in Gary Speed made him feel the only option was to end it all.

The question many will now ask is what was that something? What made him do it? Well we may never find out and to be honest, does it matter to us? To Gary’s friends and family it will, but to us - fans, media - we don’t have any right to know what drove him to this decision. Just because he was in the public eye, it doesn’t mean we deserve to know the inner workings of someone who was clearly in a very bad place. We don’t own footballers, just as we don’t own actors, singers or models. Our thirst for detail about them is completely irrelevant in circumstances such as these.

What we do know is that football has lost one of its greatest servants of recent times. A man who played and excelled for some of England’s biggest clubs in a career spanning 20 years. A man who was a star before Sky and the Premier League, yet still shone brightly in the global business that football in the 21st century has become.

I remember Gary Speed as a young player coming through, as a star of the Premier League and as a wily old veteran still cutting it at the top. He is someone that I only had respect for and as a football supporter, my heart goes out to the fans of the clubs he played for. Because if he earned this much respect from supporters of the clubs he didn’t play for, God only knows how much the fans of those he did play for will miss him.

RIP Gary Speed. 

England show how to ignore the possession obsession

At the weekend, in case you didn’t notice, England beat Spain at Wembley. Spain the European champions. Spain the world champions. Spain the team whose style is the envy of pretty much every international football team on the planet.

Lampard celebrates scoring 

So naturally, beating Spain would surely send the nation into a state of euphoria; a result that signalled that the good times were on their way back to English football, and that the trip to Poland and the Ukraine next summer will not be a wasted one? Well no, not exactly.

The press and many fans alike seemed to offer only grudging credit to Capello and the England team, despite the fact that they went into the game as heavy underdogs. The reason for this muted response is that England beat Spain playing a defensive style designed to restrict the opposition, rather than expose them. It wasn’t pretty and was far from the ‘tika takka’ style we have come to expect from the Spanish.

But you know what? It worked. Spain were by and large unable to penetrate England’s defence and midfield, and ended up frustrated and resorting to cynical fouls when things were not going their way. England’s tactic of getting men behind the ball, allowing the Spanish to pass the ball between themselves at will until they reached the final third, starved them of space and meant chances were few and far between. It was no accident that it worked. It was simply an example of an excellent tactical plan being executed to perfection.

Many people in England seem uncomfortable with this. They don’t like the idea of an England team, being the world super power that we quite obviously are, playing defensively. Perhaps they would have preferred us to play three up front and leave space for Spain to exploit? Or maybe have the midfield chasing Xavi et al like headless chickens; allowing the Spanish to pop the ball around and create chances for the lethal David Villa? Yes, that sounds like a good plan. I think we tried that against Germany in South Africa and it seemed to work just fine then didn’t it.

What England did on Saturday is exactly what they will need to do next summer if they are to have any chance of success at the Euros. They played tournament football. They tailored their game for the opposition and did it successfully. They stopped one of the best teams in international history from playing their natural game. They made the most of a set piece opportunity. They came away from a tight, often nervy game, with a victory. They’ll need to do all of those things and more in Poland and Ukraine, but it was pleasing to see Capello having at least some kind of tactical plan.

What I also think Saturday proved is that you’ll never beat Spain by continuing to obsess over the way they keep the ball. Yes English football needs to have more appreciation for possession, and I completely agree that for England to move forward, we must look beyond just pace and power. But there is also more to football than possession. In being patient and choosing when to close Spain down, England did their work in the areas where it made most impact. It was sensible, if unspectacular, and most important of all, effective. They deserve credit, not criticism for it.

Spain will rightly be favourites for next year’s European Championships and England will be hard pressed to beat them again. But it can be done, and England proved that on Saturday. It might not have been pretty, but it worked brilliantly. It showed England have it in them to adapt to the way tournament football is played. Something that’s been lacking ever since…..well, you know the rest. 

Olympic Park project looking good as it enters the home straight

I recently had the pleasure of taking part in a tour of the Olympic Park at Stratford. I use the word “pleasure” hesitantly, as I know feelings on the Olympics still remain high, with many unconvinced of the supposed benefits of London hosting the Games.

As I wrote earlier this year, I’m strongly in the “for” camp when it comes to opinion on the Olympics. My view is that without it, there would be no catalyst for regenerating this part of London. In all likelihood, the investment that’s already poured into the area in the shape of transport improvements, the Westfield shopping mall and the Olympic Park itself, would have been diverted elsewhere. As a result, this area would have remained desolate, because trust me, if you aren’t familiar with area now known as the Olympic Park, I can assure you that it was an absolute wasteland before development work started.

However, I appreciate that the project has not been short on controversy, and football has of course been at the forefront of that, with negotiations around the use of the stadium post-Games now becoming something of a farce. I think we’ve all heard more than enough about that particular spat between West Ham, Leyton Orient, Tottenham Hotspur, Newham Council, the Mayor of London, the Government, LOCOG…..as I said, we’ve heard enough and far better to instead look at how the park is shaping up, with little over eight months until the Games begins.

Many of you will probably have seen artistic photographs of the completed venues and on the whole, it’s hard not be impressed by them. Whilst the Olympic Stadium does not have the iconic uniqueness of something like Beijing’s Bird’s Nest, it remains an imposing structure that dominates the whole park. Whilst not a thing of beauty, it’s by no means an unpleasant structure.

The Aquatics Centre on the other hand, with it’s wave-inspired roof, is certainly amongst the most impressive sights you will see in the park. Given the appalling shortage of international standard swimming facilities in the country, it is also probably the venue that will offer the clearest opportunity for genuine sporting legacy.

Similarly the Velodrome is very aesthetically pleasing structure, that will probably play host to Britain’s best performances during the Games next year. Visible from the nearby A12, it’s a venue that turns the heads of many drivers and it’s a wonder that daily car crashes are not commonplace as a result. Again, it will give aspiring cyclists another opportunity to use world-class facilities for years to come. 

Perhaps even more importantly is that both the Aquatics Centre and Velodrome cater for non-mainstream sports, that if promoted and managed properly, could experience a surge in interest post-Games. The vast majority of children can both swim and ride a bike and enjoy doing so; there is no reason why the combination of top facilities and increased exposure cannot harness that interest, and bring those sports into the mainstream with a generation of British stars.

The tour also takes in the Basketball Arena. Now for me, this is the most disappointing of the venues. Many of you will have seen photographs of the arena, which has a large white bubble-like façade that it is visible for miles around. It’s an ugly structure that symbolises neither basketball or sport in anyway. In fact, it simply screams “temporary structure”, which is exactly what it is. The fate of the venue after the Games have finished seems to be a grey area; it will be dismantled and used for other purposes, perhaps the Glasgow Commonwealth Games, perhaps not. If the commitment wasn’t there to smash the thing down once the final game has taken place, this would be the most whitest of white elephants.

The Handball Arena has a more assured future. A large copper-coloured building, it looks more like one of the historic factory buildings that border the park to the west, than a sporting venue. Now I have handball tickets for next year, and this has caused much merriment amongst my friends and family, who quite rightly point out that neither I, or anyone we know, has any clue about handball. With that in mind, it’s hard to imagine the venue packing people in for handball fixtures after London 2012 has finished, which presumably is why it’s being earmarked for community sports use afterwards. Handball, basketball, indoor football and other non-sporting events will be able to take place in the arena, which for me seems to be one of the more sensible legacy decisions.

But as well as the venues, we also get to see a glimpse of the huge landscaping project currently taking place in the park. Anyone with an interest in the Olympic Park project will probably have seen computer generated images of beautifully manicured lawns leading to crystal clear canals and waterways throughout the park. Families were digitally inserted into the images to create a vision of relaxation and comfort in London’s newest open space. Knowing the area before the project started as I did, I was dubious they could pull this off, but in actual fact the landscaping is perhaps the most impressive part of the project. It looks just how the optimistic images proposed it would, and you can really imagine families using the space for years to come. Crucially, this is a legacy benefit that can be realised by people with no interest in sport whatsoever.

As well as the open spaces, we’re also shown other examples of non-sporting development work. The Athletes Village looks like a huge modern housing development, which is exactly what it will be turned into once the athletes have packed their bags, hung their medals round their necks and jetted off back to their home countries. A new school to cater for the increased number of residents to the area has already been built and is ready for its first intake. 

Other housing plots are also highlighted to us, although we’re tasked with stretching our imagination to its limits, as bricks and mortar will not be seen on many of these until the Games finish. One only hopes that the necessary infrastructure - bars, cafes, restaurants, youth and leisure facilities, community centres - follow the construction of these new housing estates, as otherwise the social ills of failed regeneration projects of yesteryear will rear their heads again.

All in all I was once again hugely impressed by the Olympic Park. Excellent venues have been created well ahead of schedule, and genuine thought given to improving the area beyond the lifespan of the Games and even some of the venues. I understand that the disruption, congestion and cost remain concerns for people, but I urge you to look a little closer at the project, and beyond 2012, to see the positive impact that hosting the Olympics could have.

If you would like to get a good view of the Olympic Park before the Games begin, I recommend the following:

• Taking the Docklands Light Railway from Stratford to Canary Wharf - excellent views of the stadium, Aquatics Centre and Orbit.
• Joining the Greenway cycling and walking route, that cuts through the site of the park.
• Head to the View Tube near Pudding Mill Lane Station, which as well as offering views of the park, includes a café and information resources.

Race row reminds us how far we have come

It seems the “R” word is on everyone’s lips at the moment. Whether it’s personal spats between Anton Ferdinand and John Terry or the continued calls for the Premier League to adopt a ‘Rooney rule’ to improve the number of black managers, the word “racism” is high on the football agenda and one and all are queuing up to have their say. 

Well if everyone else is having a go, I’ll pay my money and jump on for the ride.

Ferdinand and Terry square up

The aforementioned incident in Sunday’s game between QPR and Chelsea followed hot on the heels of Patrice Evra accusing Luis Suarez of making racist remarks when Manchester United faced Liverpool earlier this month. Further a-field, Cesc Fabregas has had to defend himself against accusations of racism in La Liga, and the pitiful amount of black managers in the English game - two to be precise - has led to a campaign for the Premier and Football Leagues to force clubs to include an ethnic minority candidate on their shortlists when hiring new managers. This follows a precedent set in NFL where the ‘Rooney rule’ has helped ensure talented black coaches get their chance at the top of the professional game.

So the media storm that’s broken over the last 24 hours is not without foundation. Clearly, there are issues of racism within the game and the authorities, clubs, players and fans cannot afford to put their collective blinkers on and pretend those issues don’t exist. As any manager will tell you; standing still is as good as going backwards in football. However, whilst the recent events do merit discussion, I can’t help feeling that that discussion is taking place without the sophistication required for such a serious matter.

Take Stan Collymore’s Twitter feed this week for example. Now whilst I believe Stan, like most broadcasters, can often be guilty of being deliberately obtuse in order to provoke reaction, his handling of the racism discussion seemed geared towards condemning English football as having returned to the 1970s, when casual racism both on and off the pitch was rife. Stan commented that racism was the elephant in the room; something that surely stops being the case when you’ve managed to devote a whole evening to discussing it?

Oliver Holt of The Mirror has also been a keen contributor to the discussion, having led calls for the Rooney rule to be adopted in football. Personally, I feel uneasy about positive discrimination as a concept, but am also aware that without it, there are limited levers to ensure ethnic minorities are not discriminated against. I would prefer work to be focused on changing attitudes within the administrative element of clubs, rather than using instructions to bring about change. Nevertheless, Holt should be applauded for highlighting the plight of black ex-players, who still, in 2011, find it tough to get managerial positions.

However, like Collymore, Holt has not handled opposition to his calls well. I fully believe him when he says he has had to endure countless abusive messages since he first embarked on the campaign, but he seems to too easily discount anyone not agreeing with the Rooney rule campaign as racist. The thought that people may agree with the sentiments of what he is saying, but not the means he is proposing, seems not to have occurred to Holt. 

Both Collymore and Holt - as well as others, admittedly - have worked tirelessly to open up the racism debate to ensure people do not forget the problems that still exist. But what both also do, is forget the immense progress English football has made in tackling racism in the last 10-20 years. 

As a child in the 1980s, I remember “black” being freely banded about as a derogatory term for opposition players. I also remember black players still not being commonplace in every team. The idea of a black team captain was still largely something from the future.

But in 2011, we should remember how far we have come. We bemoan the pathetic fines handed out by UEFA to clubs chanting racist abuse, because in England, those chants simply would not happen. Crowds are more multicultural than ever and whilst I’m not saying there are no incidents at all, racist abuse from the stands is something the vast majority of us would never dream of indulging in, and would take issue with anyone around us doing so. On the pitch, multinational teams take to the field every week and are roared on by thousands of adoring fans. And when the debate was being had over who out of John Terry and Rio Ferdinand should captain England, race was not for a second an issue.

Now I’m not saying we should congratulate ourselves for not being as racist as we were 10, 20 or 30 years ago. That’s hardly an achievement of course, but there has been the sort of progress that other countries in Europe, notably Spain and Italy, have failed to keep up with. 

To move forward and tackle the issues that remain such as lack of black managers, we must look at what has worked as well as where more work is needed. Whilst it might not seem it this week, there is plenty that has worked well and this work should not be either forgotten or underplayed.

At the moment, the argument is being dominated by either full blown racists, or commentators unwilling to accept alternative arguments and all too easily label people as racist. All this does is create something of a white noise around the issue; making it nigh on impossible that anyone with any real power will take meaningful action. Gentlemen, some rationality please. 

The Old Lady goes back to where it all began

With the new Premier League season starting this weekend there should be plenty of top-flight domestic matters to digest on this first Monday of the season. And yet CBM’s eyes have wandered further a-field; away from the safety of domestic bliss and towards the exotic mystery of the Mediterranean. Or Italy to be precise.

Juventus, 1903

The reason for this venture to southern Europe is our old friend Juventus - or the Old Lady as they are known in Italy. As you may have read, Juventus will be playing in a brand new stadium this season which in a move deemed unconventional by many in their homeland, is completely owned by the club.

Some of you will be surprised to know that it is highly unusual for Italian clubs to own their own stadiums. Instead, they usually lease the grounds from the local council or other authorities. It’s akin to Manchester United renting Old Trafford from Salford City Council, rather than owning it themselves and being in complete control of any renovation work. 

In these times of small government and big society (remember that?), it’s almost unthinkable that football grounds in England would be the assets of local councils, although perhaps that would go some way to arresting the ever-increasing ticket prices we see in our football and even bring clubs closer to community they are based in?

Anyway, I digress. Whilst Juve’s new 41,000 capacity stadium is a story in itself, the opposition for the grand opening of the stadium is the more remarkable element of the Old Lady’s reinvention. Imagine your club is opening a new stadium; how would they mark the official opening? Invite the local rivals? The champions? Barcelona? All would surely bring in the crowds and be considered fitting opponents for such a prestigious moment in the club’s history.

Well Juventus have taken a different approach, for the opposition for the grand opening of their still-to-be-named new stadium will be none other than Notts County. Yes, Notts County of League One; Notts County who are not even Nottingham’s best team, let alone England’s; Notts County whose last appearance in England’s top flight was in the 1991/1992 season.

But there is good reason for England’s other Magpies to be the guests of honour on Juve’s big night: if it wasn’t for Notts County, the likes of Alex Del Piero would be walking out on to the field in bright pink every week. For in their formative years, Juve wore pink kits - with black ties of course - until in 1903 John Savage (of Juventus) was entrusted with the task of sourcing a new, presumably less effeminate, colour scheme for the club. Before the Old Lady’s supporters could say “match fixing” a shipment of Notts County shirts was on its way to Turin, and Juventus have worn the famous black and white stripes ever since.

It’s a classic example of how England influenced football across the globe in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, although the fortunes of Juventus and Notts County since then could hardly have been more different. 

However, inviting County to open the new stadium remains a touch of class from a club that in recent years has only attracted headlines for the wrong reasons. Stripped of a title, demoted to Serie B and now seemingly stuck amongst Italy’s also-rans, the Old Lady is in much need of rejuvenation. The decision to invite County shows an appreciation of the foundations that made the club great in the first place, which is a welcome diversion from the constant horizon scanning that we’ve grown used to from Europe’s top clubs in recent years.

With the new stadium expected to bring a great deal more revenue - gate receipts will go to the club and not rent to the council, naming rights are also being sold - and also attract the type of passionate crowds that famously stayed away from the Stadio del Alpi, the Old Lady’s journey to redemption begins in earnest next month when Martin Allen’s Notts County visit Turin on 8 September. Who knows, this could be the start of the next chapter in the story of a club that started out pretty in pink.

For more information on the history of Juventus and their links to Notts Country, visit the club’s excellent English website.

Time to believe the Olympic dream

As you will no doubt tire of hearing by the end of the day, today marks exactly one year until the start of the London 2012 Olympic Games. The media have set up camp at the Olympic Park in Stratford to offer us guided tours of the venues, and Lord Coe will be doing the rounds and seemingly attempting to break the world record for the most recorded interviews in one day.

Venues on time and under budget

Having seen some of the early coverage I feel nothing but excitement about next year’s Games. The venues look fantastic and there is a real sense of pride about the world’s top sports men and women heading to my home city in a bid to make history. Listening to Lord Coe speak on the news this morning also reassures you that the event is being led by a man with sports at his heart, and whose passion and influence has been integral to ensuring that all venues are complete on time and under budget.

Aside from sports, we will today hear of the long-lasting benefits that the Olympics will bring to the communities of East London and beyond. The Olympic Village will be converted into affordable housing for local people; the handball arena will become a multi-purpose community sports facility; and the park itself - the biggest UK new park created in a century - will be open to the public. In addition, the new Westfield Shopping Centre will open its doors this Autumn with the shops, restaurants and multiplex cinema all creating jobs as well as helping to give an ailing area a huge shot in the arm.

This is the party line of course, and whilst I have bought it, many remain sceptical about the real benefits of hosting the Olympics. They claim that money used to fund the project could have been better spent tackling the country’s deficit - saving people from the cuts we have seen over the last year. They also claim that the months of disruption before during and after the Olympics - Transport for London’s Olympic Route Network will see lanes available only to Olympic athletes and officials and many pedestrian crossings will be removed - will bring the city to a standstill and put local people in danger at the same time.

Many also remain angry about the ticketing allocation process. LOCOG’s system of effectively drawing tickets out of the hat for oversubscribed events meant that thousands of British people - including relatives of competing athletes - will have to make do with watching the Games at home on TV.

I can understand the justification for these concerns, but in my view I don’t think they come close to matching the benefits of hosting the Olympics. The funding argument is not exactly black and white for example: yes we have a huge deficit and yes on the face of it, the money spent on the Olympics would have plugged a significant hole in out finances. But there wasn’t a straight choice between spending money on the Olympics or reducing the deficit. The money was only available because the Olympics presents income opportunities through ticket sales and investment opportunities such as the Westfield Shopping Centre and the new housing that will be available on site. Funnily enough, investors aren’t so forthcoming when you ask for money without offering anything in return.

The disruption is something that I believe to be a more justified concern. There will undoubtedly be traffic problems because of the Olympic Route Network, and it’s perfectly feasible that small businesses within the host boroughs - Newham, Hackney, Greenwich, Tower Hamlets, Waltham Forest and Barking & Dagenham - will suffer from this increased traffic and restricted delivery times. Removing pedestrian crossings may also bring potential for increased road accidents and public transport will also feel the strain as a result of the many visitors heading to venues across the city.

However, there is a year to go to develop the best possible solutions for these concerns. Given the efficiency with which the park has been constructed, I have faith that TfL and the Olympic authorities will reach a compromise. There will of course still be disruption, but there will have to be an element of Londoners biting the bullet; seeing the bigger picture that the Games will showcase London to the world and that the benefits are designed to be delivered over a generation, not a two week period.

In terms of ticketing, I must confess to being one of the lucky ones who managed to get tickets through the allocation process. I’ll be heading to the hockey, handball and boxing; not marquee events but I am delighted to have the opportunity to sample the Olympics at first hand in some way. So having been successful with my application my views may be biased, but I genuinely think LOCOG have been given an unfairly hard time over the process. Let’s be realistic: it’s not possible for everyone in the country to go the Olympics; some people will have to miss out. 

To complain that you didn’t get any tickets even though you applied isn’t really a strong enough argument; most people in the country applied and that’s why so many were unsuccessful in the allocation process. I hope I would feel the same if I had missed out on tickets too, but having failed to get a ticket for Oasis at Knebworth in 2006, I feel the pain of all those who hoped but failed with their application. Trust me on that one; it hurt.

So whilst by the end of today I will probably be sick to death of seeing the word “Olympics”,  for now I remain utterly captivated by the build up and cannot wait for the Games to start. The organisers have done a quite brilliant job in delivering the venues under budget and on time, and now deserve the nation’s backing. We as the home crowd can play our part in making this a memorable Olympic Games, but we can only do that by celebrating what’s in store not dreading it, and showing off London and the rest of the UK to the world.


I for one cannot wait.

Twitter should not tell the story, not be the story

After a few weeks of well earned rest, CBM has returned from its holidays and is ready for the season to begin again. Ok so we’re still a few weeks away from the big kick off, but the Scottish league started this weekend, and that’s enough for me to consider that football is once again back in our lives.

Twitter now common for players

Like some of you, I’ve been able to follow the fortunes of the Premier League’s stars on their expensive holidays via Twitter. Wayne Rooney seemed to travel half-way around the world to sing in a karaoke bar, Rio Ferdinand made his way to Asia - still promoting his many business interests of course - and Michael Owen fretted about the performances of his beloved racehorses. It’s an example of how Twitter is becoming an ever-more essential tool for being a football fan.

The use of Twitter by footballers has not been without controversy, with players such as Ryan Babel and Carlton Cole falling foul of the FA by posting messages deemed inappropriate by the powers that be. Some fans unfortunately also feel that following a footballer gives them the right to send as much abuse as is possible in 140 characters. And whilst I’m sure many players are tempted to send their own volley of bile back, the best approach seems to be from the likes of Rooney, who merely retweets the most vicious of messages as a way of highlighting the nonsense he has to put up with.

In many ways though, Twitter has become the antidote to the theory that modern footballers have lost touch with the fans; that there are no longer opportunities for supporter and star striker to engage in the way they might have done in days gone by. Thanks to Twitter, fans can now find out their heroes’ views on the weekend’s events, ask them questions - sometimes even getting answers - and find out more about the inner-workings of football clubs with updates on pre-season schedules and pre-match routines.

Far from replacing the face-to-face contact that a fan might have had with players in the 50s and 60s - when it’s romantically claimed you could regularly spot your team’s captain sipping a pint in your local - I believe Twitter has actually brought fans closer to players than they have ever been.

At what many might initially perceive to be uninteresting commentary on people’s lives, even the most mundane of tweets from footballers can offer interesting insights into the lives of the modern player. Take Michael Owen for example; hardly the sport’s most charismatic figure and his Twitter account would struggle to excite even the most easily pleased Manchester United supporter, but his tweets do have an everyman appeal that I find interesting. And ultimately, it’s interesting because despite the huge riches he’s acquired over the years, his life is just as dull as yours and mine.

I’ve read tweets from him about ordering a take-away curry to watch Match of the Day with his wife, heading to the pub on a Sunday afternoon for lunch and finding somewhere with the football on whilst out for a family dinner. Yes, it’s true that none of this information improves our lives in any way, but the fact that all of the above are the very same activities that much of the working population do on a regular basis, helps to show that footballers are not the alien species that we often assume they are.

Joey Barton is another case in point. Known for many years as one of football’s more unsavoury characters, it would be easy to assume that his tweets would offer nothing but an insight into a violent moron’s mindset. Yet in actual fact, Barton often uses Twitter to spark debate on wide ranging subjects from politics to football. He comes across as educated, eloquent and just the right side of opinionated to be interesting and not arrogant. Oh, and he’s a big fan of The Smiths too, which is alright by me.

Naturally with so many footballers now using the site, journalists scrutinise their messages to try and find any information that might help fill up their word count in the desperate days between one season ending and a new one beginning. And this is where my issue with the use of Twitter lies.

In my view, the media is there to tell the stories that the man on the street would otherwise not know. You read the newspaper because journalists investigate, interview and analyse in order to produce content that you in no way could find out yourself. That’s why we read the football gossip pages, because we are eager to find out where certain players might be heading, but have no way of sourcing the information. It’s why we read interviews with the likes of Fernando Torres and John Terry, because you or I will never get the chance to speak to the game’s biggest stars for 30 minutes.

However, over the past year the media - including the sports correspondents - have taken to writing their copy based solely on people’s tweets. So a story on a Premier League player committing to a football club may no longer be obtained as a result of the journalist developing a professional relationship with the player and becoming a trusted confidant; it can now be done merely by looking at a player’s Twitter account - just like you, me or anyone else in the world could do.

Now of course with sponsors wanting their pound of flesh from stars and making media access to them more difficult, journalists have to find other ways to reach the players. And Twitter becoming part of an ever-growing 24 hour news industry also means ‘breaking’ stories becomes more of a challenge than ever before. However, I struggle to see how printing a player’s tweet is news: it isn’t new information, provides no analysis of a situation and merely reproduces words the majority of fans will already have read and since forgotten.

At a time when the media is struggling to work out how to get the most out of print in a digital age, this approach strikes me as lazy, and will do nothing to enhance the fortunes of the media at a time when its stock could hardly be lower. We’ve known for a long time that people get their news from a variety of sources rather than their newspaper, so now is the time for the media to focus on how their content can excite, interest and educate the reader. Reprinting a two day old tweet is certainly not the way forward.

Why it's success for Big Sam I fear, not failure

With next season’s fixtures released and £20m transfers going through, it seems like the short wait is coming to an end and football is nearly back.

One man who is most certainly back is Big Sam Allardyce, who returned from his big break from football management and started his big new job at West Ham today - presumably taking the time to light up a big celebratory cigar and put his big hands-free kit in place.

New Hammers boss Allardyce

Opinion is still divided on Allardyce: some think he is a long ball merchant who will wash away the traditions of West Ham; others don’t care that he is a long ball merchant that will wash away the traditions of West Ham, so long as he gets them promoted.

One thing for sure is that he has hit the ground running. If the signing of Abdoulaye Faye was strong and safe, the purchase of Kevin Nolan from Newcastle was simply astounding. Many West Ham fans, myself included, are still in disbelief that one of the best English midfielders in the country last season has dropped down a division to play for West Ham. If the police have any sense, they will investigate this as a violent abduction, rather than a football transfer. 

However Nolan ended up at Upton Park, he is a fantastic signing that could well be the difference between West Ham being promoted automatically, or being one of a tight chasing pack who have to settle for the play-offs or worse. His experience, leadership qualities and ability to score goals from midfield should have made him a target for the Premier League’s top six, but  instead he chose West Ham and I doubt you’ll find a single Hammers fan who isn’t delighted he did.

Big Sam of course played a, somewhat predictably, big part in the deal. He made Nolan a mainstay of his Bolton team and handed him the armband too. Nolan has even confirmed that Allardyce is a major reason why he has decided to head to East London. So surely Big Sam is proving that he has what it takes to make West Ham a success again, and in the process win over the sceptics amongst the Upton Park crowd?

Well even if many fans do subscribe to that theory, I am not one of them. The appointment of Allardyce still rankles with me to be honest. Yes he is a high profile manager who was once interviewed for the England job, and yes he has undoubted ability at being difficult to beat and getting his players to stick to a system. It has even brought him relative success in the past: getting Bolton into Europe was a monumental achievement that many wrongly overlook. But I have grave doubts that West Ham United and Sam Allardyce are a good combination.

Few will argue that Allardyce’s teams put great emphasis on the physical side of the game, and most people will again agree that free-flowing passing football is not Big Sam’s favoured approach to getting results. Unfortunately for Allardyce, West Ham is a club that traditionally has always aimed to play the ball on the floor and entertain the crowd.

I know what you’re thinking; in fact I can almost hear it now: West Ham haven’t played good football for years, and all that matters is getting out of the Championship - however you play. Well, it’s difficult to disagree with either statement to be honest. As much as it pains me to say, West Ham haven’t really played entertaining football since the days of Harry Redknapp - half a Gianfranco Zola season aside. And yes, getting out of the division is of paramount importance and has to be the number one priority.

But I happen to believe that there is nothing wrong with trying to adhere to the club’s traditions. Not playing good football in recent years represents an unsuccessful diversion from our ethos, not a blueprint for the future. It is right that we try to revert to what first brought fans to Upton Park, and why we used to have a reputation for entertaining fans.

And whilst getting out of the division has to be number one priority, there is no evidence to suggest that you have to do it the ugly way. Look at this season’s promoted clubs: QPR, Norwich and Swansea can all play good football, and the latter are a joy to watch at times. West Brom have also passed their way to promotion, and Blackpool won plaudits galore for their attacking approach to the game.

So whilst I wish Allardyce the best of luck, I do feel that taking his approach may have chipped a chunk out of the soul of the club. It’s a route the club didn’t have to take: Chris Hughton - a former West Ham player - would have been better placed to lead the club to promotion whilst at least attempting to pass the ball.

The appointment will of course not effect my support of the club: I’m a fan of the club, not individuals and regardless of who plays for the team or who is in charge of them, it’s not something you can switch off. So I’ll be hoping for success even under Big Sam; I just hope that success does not come at too big a price.

Going down but not out

And so that’s it for another season. You can stop your stressing and start your celebrating/moaning/crying  - whatever is appropriate for the outcome your team’s season.

For fans of Blackpool and Birmingham, you have my sympathy: I know how it feels to slide out of the big time that is the Premier League, and in to the relative small time of the Championship. Well actually that’s not quite true, as West Ham rather furiously propelled themselves towards relegation in an unstoppable march to the Championship, rather than finally slipping out after losing their grip on the lip of the Premier League trapdoor. 

In any case, what I’m trying to say is that I know how deflating relegation is. It means playing at Ashton Gate and not Anfield; Millwall not Manchester United and worst of all, having to wait until nearly midnight on Saturday nights to watch highlights of your team. It’s the grim reality of being a Championship side, and not a Premier League one. 

But following Sunday’s last game of the season, I now also know that being relegated is actually not as bad as it first seems. Having had a week more than Blackpool and Birmingham fans to get accustomed to the idea of relegation, I’m now fairly relaxed about it. Of course there will be things we’ll miss about the Premier League, but going down needn’t be the end of the world. In fact, it’s just another example of how as fans, we have no influence or control over the fate of our football clubs.

This thought struck me mid-way through West Ham’s final day home defeat to Sunderland. With the Hammers already losing 1-0 and looking unlikely to pull back the deficit in a month let alone the remainder of the match, I felt oddly relaxed when many around me seemed deeply concerned that more, not less of these poor performances could be expected over the coming months. 

It’s hard to put my finger on exactly why I was unconcerned, but it’s clear that the jovial atmosphere at Upton Park played its part. The fans were in fine voice throughout, but not always in support of the team: They cheered as a giant beach ball was palmed around the stands; sang about the inglorious trip to Coventry that awaits us next season; and a conga danced its way along the front row of the Chicken Run. Generally, fans were enjoying themselves despite one of the club’s worst ever seasons in the top flight. And that’s what made me realise that being in the Championship will not be the end of the world.

The truth is, the fans will be back next season. Ok there may be a few less of them than this season, but by and large, they will be back. They will cheer on the team as they do now, and I’m sure they will boo when the team underperforms, as they do now.  Relegation will not change that; not for West Ham, not for Blackpool or Birmingham; and not even for Stockport or Lincoln who sadly dropped out of the Football League this season.

For what neither relegation or promotion can change is that you support your football club unreservedly. When you make a decision to support a football team, there are no caveats that mean you get to opt out should they ever be relegated. You don’t get to switch on or off, or opt in to cheer them on only on the good days. Unfortunately unless you’re lucky enough to support the likes of Manchester United or Liverpool, there’s likely to be more bad days than good. It’s something you have to deal with, not decide you’ve had enough of.

It’s why on Sunday afternoon I laughed to myself as the realisation that I will never have control over what West Ham do finally dawned on me. I know that I’ll still be supporting them whether they get promoted at the first attempt next season, or suffer a Leeds-like fall from grace and drop in to League One (please God no). As depressing as that thought may be, there is nothing I can do to change it. 

So supporters of Blackpool, Birmingham and any other clubs suffering relegation this season, fear not; it will get better. The pain will subside and before you know it, you’ll be filling in your season ticket renewal form and plotting away trips to grounds you never knew existed. Don’t try and fight it, just embrace it. Your football life is completely in the hands of your club’s squad, its manager and the board. 

Actually, given West Ham do not yet have a manager and the recent behaviour of its owners, perhaps I should be a little more worried than I am...

Foreign owners are not the problem; idiots are

After two months without a win and yet another customary second half collapse, West Ham’s relegation at the weekend was hardly unexpected. Unfortunately, neither was the appalling way in which the Hammers’ board dismissed Avram Grant shortly after the final whistle on Sunday.

Gold and Sullivan

The exact circumstances surrounding Grant’s departure have been the source of much rumour and debate; some claim he was sacked in the tunnel immediately after the game, whilst others believe Karren Brady’s televised post-match chat with Dave Whelan in the directors box was to request a room to use in order to hand Grant his P45. Whichever scenario is true - if any - it seems like yet another tactless act from West Ham’s board, who must now surely take their fair share of blame for the Hammers’ disastrous season.

That Grant was sacked is not the issue here. His record as manager of the club was desperately poor, with good cup runs masking alarming league form. With relegation confirmed following the 3-2 defeat at Wigan, he simply had to go. But why couldn’t the board have waited until Monday morning? Why couldn’t they allow the man, who was clearly hurting, the chance to collect his thoughts over a glass of wine and take a bit of time out of the glare of the media? 

Just because he failed in his task to keep West Ham up, does not mean he warrants humiliation. When the fans have asked for him to be sacked, it’s not because they want to see the man hung out to dry, it’s because they want someone in that will return the team to winning ways; no-one asked for a sacrificial lamb.

The actions of Gold, Sullivan and Brady have brought shame on West Ham United. They have shown a lack of class that many fans at Upton Park will not forget - even if they would not disagree with the decision. But this weekend’s events are unfortunately typical of a board that has misunderstood passion for posturing, and so far managed to oversee the dismissal of two managers and a relegation in the space of 18 months in charge.

Make no mistake, the good will afforded to Gold and Sullivan for rescuing the club when close to financial oblivion  has well and truly gone now. The fans are tired of their constant interference in team affairs, the murky and undignified way in which the Olympic Stadium bid was handled and their constant airing of the club’s dirty laundry in the media. With them at the helm, West Ham have become a club that few people respect anymore.

All of this makes you wonder if West Ham made the right choice in selecting Gold and Sullivan as the winners of a four-way bidding process last year, which also included representatives from the USA and the Far East. At the time, Gold and Sullivan presented themselves as the only bidders with the club’s interests at heart; they were fans from their childhood and knew what the club meant to the Upton Park faithful. Heck, David Gold even trained for the club as a youngster; what could go wrong?

For many, the clincher was that they were English. West Ham had been stung by foreign owners before with the Icelandic bank collapse remember, so surely there was no way they could risk bringing in another group of nasty amateur foreign mercenaries? And what about those Hicks and Gillett fellows? Only in it for themselves that lot. And Shinawatra; the Glazers; Alexandre Gaydamak, they’re all the same. Or so the general feeling amongst English football fans seems to be.

And yet no-one seems to mention the list of greedy and incompetent English owners of football clubs do they? Doug Ellis was hardly revered by Aston Villa fans during his time in charge, and I’m sure not many Manchester City supporters hanker for the days of Peter Swailes. West Ham themselves had Terry Brown, who remains a hate figure amongst the fans for sitting firmly in the back seat unless the opportunity arose to make a few quid on a home grown player.

No, the foreign owners are not the problem; idiots are the problem. And West Ham have two of them in charge. 

The nationality on someone’s passport should not dictate whether they can run a sporting organisation or not. True, there are plenty of examples of foreign owners that have failed their clubs, but so too are there examples where they have moved their clubs forwards. Ellis Short for example, is beginning to establish Sunderland as a top flight fixture in a way they haven’t been for generations; Randy Lerner, for all his failings, has certainly improved Aston Villa’s standing since the days of Doug Ellis; and whisper it quietly, but the Glazers have actually overseen one of Manchester United’s most successful periods in their history.

There remains a “little Englander” approach to club ownership, that masks the real failings in football organisation. That the owners are not English should not be our concern; our concern should be ensuring fans have a voice and are represented at the upper echelons of clubs’ structures - regardless of the nationality of the owner. 

Just because someone is not English does not mean they will burn the club’s history books and run away with the safe under their arm. But too many people are too easily assured by the fact that prospective owners are local boys done good. With West Ham due to move away from their home in the next couple of seasons and classless acts such as the dismissal of Grant; Gold and Sullivan could end up doing more damage to West Ham’s history than any foreigner ever could.

Down and out in E13

The feeling of hope is something covered on numerous occasions by CBM; usually in the context of its utter futility when it comes to following football. For whilst hope is often what takes us to the stadium in the first place, it just as often leaves us bruised and broken and vowing never to return again.

Grant's Hammers look doomed

On Saturday afternoon, West Ham delivered a first class demonstration of the theory that it’s not the despair that kills you; it’s the hope. For the opening 10 minutes in West Ham’s encounter with Blackburn, the atmosphere was electric; hugely positive, signing even from the expensive seats and so loud you could barely hear yourself think. 

But as soon as Jason Roberts scored what seems like his 100th goal at Upton Park for his 50th club, the crowd fell silent and there was a collective, unuttered agreement that the game was up: West Ham were soon to be a Championship side again.

It was evident in that moment that whilst we as fans hoped for a victory, no-one actually believed it would come. We hoped the team would repeat 2007’s exploits and produce a sequel to “the Great Escape”, but deep down the belief was not there. Right now, I’m sure Avram Grant is hoping he can cling on to his job with two victories in the final two games of the season; I doubt anyone, anywhere actually believes that will happen.

And that’s exactly why I’m now embracing the prospect of relegation, and not living in misguided hope that we’ll escape. Hope has masked what deep down, we’ve known for the last few weeks and perhaps all season; West Ham are simply not good enough.

Free from both the hope and expectancy of a dramatic turnaround, we as fans can now move on. Sure, there are two games to play and we will still get behind the team, but having won just two of our last 14 games and lost five of the last six, it’s difficult to see how a team missing vital players such as Parker, Noble and Upson will be able to win those two games. Even if the unlikely was to occur and West Ham do pick up six points, it may still not be enough.

In my lifetime, I’ve seen West Ham relegated three times before, and no doubt I’ll see them go down even more times than that in years to come. Despite often having some of the best players in the country, West Ham are known for underachieving and unfortunately, the class of 2010/2011 has lived up to the club’s reputation exceptionally well.

Just because we have accepted relegation is a near certainty, and are comfortable that it is not the disaster that it would be for the likes of Manchester United or Arsenal, does not mean we can be content though. The fact remains that this squad of players should not have been in relegation trouble, even if it was also unlikely to trouble the top half too much.

So who to blame for such an underachievement? The usual suspects in such matters are the board, manager and players. In West Ham’s case, all three can take at least a portion of the blame. Starting with the board, owners David Gold and David Sullivan saved the club from a financial meltdown last season but have far from covered themselves in glory. Their appointment of Avram Grant has proved disastrous, and their constant communication to the media has surely caused unrest within the squad. Their botched attempt to appoint Martin O’Neill mid-season made the club look a laughing stock and their failure to attend away games displays a lack of respect to travelling fans and hardly sends the right message to the players. Make no mistake, Gold and Sullivan have had a big hand in this season’s debacle and the fact that they rescued the club when the bailiffs were at the door does not make them immune to criticism.

The players too should shoulder some responsibility, with some playing well below their potential and others simply not good enough. Upson and Cole for example, are England internationals but have barely warranted first team places for much of the season.

But ultimately, Avram Grant must take the lion’s share of the blame for West Ham’s terrible season. The squad was flawed, but good enough to avoid relegation; he was afforded cash to spend in January; he had inspirational players like Scott Parker at his disposal; and his team played to sell-out crowds most weeks. But Grant has made mistake after mistake. 

Rooted to a 4-3-3 formation that West Ham simply don’t have the personnel for, his substitutions have also left fans recalling the days of Glenn Roeder (he of the “let’s swap full-backs” school of tactical changes). His failure to inspire the team has been evident in an alarming amount of matches where promising first halves have been ruined by strangely opposite second halves (trust me, you will not believe the amount of times a different, altogether more useless West Ham has emerged from the tunnel following the break). 

In fact, it’s hard to think of any positive attributes that Grant has displayed during his time at West Ham. His assertion this weekend that West Ham have been playing some of the best football outside of the top six would be laughable if we weren’t already busy wiping away our tears. No Avram, we have not, and unfortunately we’ll now be aiming for a different top six next season, along with the likes of Leeds, Ipswich and whoever else joins us in the Championship. With Grant at the helm, I would not bet on West Ham even troubling that top six either.

And the winner is....

Congratulations to Gareth Bale, who last night was crowned the PFA’s Player of the First Half of the Season. Or at least that’s what the title should be called given the Welshman has missed a significant amount of football in recent months and his most electrifying performances came before the new year.

PFA Winner Bale

That’s not to say Bale has not had a good season; he has been exceptional and caused defences both at home and abroad untold problems with his pace and unrivalled ability to deliver pin point crosses on the run. But it must be said that he is still finding his way back to top form following a back injury that’s restricted his appearances in recent months. No matter, that’s not a problem when it comes to the PFA player of the year awards.

For some reason, the PFA asks its members to make their nominations for the end of the season awards in February. With three months worth of football still to play, and with honours at the top and bottom of the table still to be decided, it’s no surprise that the winners of the awards are often players who don’t retain their consistency over the course of the season.

The PFA and others may argue that with professional footballers at 92 league clubs to accept nominations from, it’s a lengthy process and that’s why players have to be balloted in February. I have two issues with this: firstly we’re able to count votes from the entire country in a matter of hours on election night, so I’m not convinced the PFA needs a three month lead time. And secondly, if it does take so long, why don’t they still start the process later and then make the announcement in the close season? I’m sill confused as to why we have to have the end of year awards ceremony a month before the end of year. They could even use the Community Shield as a platform to announce the winner; closing one season just as another starts.

Under the current system we can be left with winners who enjoy fantastic starts to the year but for one reason or another, aren’t able to sustain those levels throughout the duration of the season. In Bale’s case, it was no fault of his own; his form was terrific until curtailed by injury. 

And of course, with a month to go Bale may well reach his pre-Christmas form before the season ends. But waiting until the latter part of the season before asking players to vote would have afforded them time to judge the season objectively, and really consider who had shone the brightest over the course of 38 games. It just feels for the moment that Bale has won the award based on his performances in the autumn and not over the course of the season. 

The same system also applies to the young player of the year award, which I also think is flawed. Samir Nasri, Luis Nani, Gareth Bale and Joe Hart were all on the shortlist for the award. Yes they are all young players, but they are also seasoned professionals who have sackfuls of international caps between them. That they have had good seasons is not a surprise, as they are all established Premier League players. In the past, Cesc Fabregas has been short listed whilst captain of Arsenal and a regular in the all conquering Spanish squad. 

Personally, I believe this award should be renamed the “breakthrough” award; recognising the player that has come from relative obscurity to become a star of great promise. Jack Wilshere of Arsenal, Seamus Coleman of Everton and Javier Hernandez of Manchester United - all of whom were short listed in any case - would remain eligible whilst others such as Marc Albrighton of Aston Villa and Martin Kelly of Liverpool would also be considered. It would celebrate progress, not simply youth.

For what it’s worth, I think Gareth Bale and Jack Wilshere have had tremendous seasons so far, and both players look likely to grace the Premier League for many years to come - unless the likes of Real Madrid come knocking of course. Whilst the system may not be perfect, it has at least delivered two winners that play football in the right way, and it will be fascinating to see their development over the coming years. Just how far can they go?

Cup holders and conductors: a visit to see the LA Galaxy

It’s been a barren few weeks for Claret and Blue Monday, and I’m using the two-pronged excuse of full-time employment and travelling to explain the lack of activity. I say travelling, I really mean a week’s holiday rather than some ill fated attempt to find myself in the Far East.

Home Depot Centre, LA

Anyway, I digress: the week’s holiday to the US did at least give me the opportunity to take in David Beckham’s LA Galaxy vs. Philadelphia Union at the appallingly named Home Depot Centre. I was intrigued about the game: would there be any atmosphere? What would the standard of football be like? Was Beckham still any good? And was I likely to get a cup holder at my seat?

Taken in order, I’ll start with the atmosphere, which was great throughout albeit not quite what you’d expect from an English professional football match. 

In one corner and behind one goal there were small sections where the most vocal of the Galaxy’s supporters were located - similar to many English grounds perhaps. The difference is that both of these sections had an appointed conductor at the front of the stand, orchestrating events by starting off songs and encouraging the fans to get involved. In England this would seem contrived and any club adopting a similar approach would be accused of lacking genuine passion and having no soul. Or called Arsenal. 

But Galaxy deserve not to be lambasted for attempting to create a European style atmosphere in a country where the sporting experience for spectators is based on years worth of traditions from baseball, basketball, grid iron and ice hockey. They have a difficult task to change the way Americans watch live sport and unlike those sports, there were no odd sound effects during the game and a constant level of noise was maintained thanks to the official conductors. I suppose that’s a less patronising way of saying “ah bless them, they’re trying at least”, but they made it a really enjoyable evening.

In terms of the standard of the football on show, the story is less positive I’m afraid. In the game I saw at least, the passing was woeful and even some basic skills such as controlling the ball seemed beyond some of the players. Movement off the ball was at a premium too. In short, I’d say the standard was Championship level at best and at times, it veered towards being League One.  David Beckham and Landon Donovan - the Galaxy’s captain and formerly of Everton - were streets ahead of the rest of players, and often cut frustrated figures as their team-mates failed to read from the same book as them, let alone the same page.

Which leads nicely to the performance of Mr Beckham. The former England captain was impressive in a central midfield role; arrowing 50 yard passes to each wing with consummate ease. Unfortunately these passes were not acknowledged by the crowd, whose sole interest seemed to be in getting the ball in the box as quickly as possible and having efforts on goal. When he and Donovan interchanged, they caused Philadelphia all sorts of problems, but there were also times when Beckham lacked the quality in front of him to be able to create clear cut chances in the way we are used to seeing him do. As said previously, movement from Galaxy players was generally poor, but Beckham did at least set up the game’s only goal when Leonardo headed home one of his trademark curling crosses. Overall, Beckham played well without being spectacular, but his frustration with team-mates was evident and there is the nagging feeling that from a football perspective at least, his time in LA has been wasted owing to the fact that he still has much to offer to top flight football in Europe.

And so on to possibly the most important element of the visit, the cup holders. I’m pleased to report that the Home Depot Centre has indeed installed cup holders to the seats. Even better than this is the fact that you can take beer to your seat and drink throughout the game. The kiosks even sell margaritas, just in case you prefer to watch football as if you are on a beach holiday in Hawaii. Whilst the latter is not really in keeping with the spirit of watching football, the fact that drink is available throughout the game and there was no sign of violence, is something that English football fans and administrators alike should take note of. 

It must be said that despite many people drinking alcohol at the game, the atmosphere was generally friendlier than any I have experienced at matches in England and other countries. None of the songs being sung mocked the opposition in any way, and the crowd was made up mainly of families, many of whom brought their very young children with them. It does mean however, that the games perhaps lack that certain “edge” on the pitch that makes football in Europe, and especially England, so exciting and at time exhausting. 

And it’s on the pitch where football in the US needs to make the most progress if it is to grow and rival the more traditional sports such as baseball and grid iron. Off it, they are fine: the majority of the crowd were decked out in expensive merchandise and made a good racket, a plethora of food and drink kiosks were doing a roaring trade and a healthy amount of occupied corporate boxes mean the Galaxy at least are ticking the marketing men’s boxes in a way that some English club’s would dream of.

However, the standard of football remains the sticking point. The way they are selling the product is fantastic, but the product itself is not quite up to scratch yet. If they are to really expand the game and draw people away from the NFL, NBA etc, vast improvements need to be made to the entertainment on show. With the likes of Beckham, Thierry Henry and Rafael Marquez already plying their trade in the MLS, they are heading in the right direction, but improving the quality of homegrown players is the real challenge, and as England knows only too well, that’s easier said than done.


Home Depot Centre is well worth a visit if anyone is looking to go to Los Angeles. A really good atmosphere that differs enough from European football to make for a very interesting night. Cup holders at your seats too remember...

Sofa so good for new pundit Hartson

The most impressive performance of this weekend? No, not Scott Parker at Upton Park; nor Ben Foster at Wembley; and certainly not Mark Clattenburg’s lenient interpretation of what constitutes violent conduct - apparently it’s not deliberately smashing your forearm into someone’s face. No, the best performance of the weekend was on the Match of the Day 2 sofa, and it came from John Hartson.

Hartson during his Celtic days

Hartson has been increasing his appearances in front of the cameras following his retirement from the game and successful fight against cancer, and on Sunday night he joined Mark Bright on the sofa as part of what many might have thought a weak team of pundits. And yet, Hartson’s eloquent but passionate performance put many seasoned pundits - Bright included - to shame.

He had that rare quality in a football pundit of being able to combine genuine views with decipherable delivery. As a result he came across as someone who not only had something to say, but could actually say it in a way that people at home could understand. Bright must have been marvelling at Big John’s technique; feeling his own combination of idiocy and unintelligible stuttering had suddenly become woefully inadequate.

Hartson was measured throughout, yet his knowledge of the game always shone through. Whilst analysing the West Ham v Liverpool game, he picked out not the standard issue inspirational performance from Scott Parker, or the surprisingly poor display from Steven Gerrard, but the tireless running and defending from the front of Demba Ba and Frederick Picquionne. It showed an eye for detail that most newer pundits - many of whom are given their debuts on the Match of the Day 2 sofa - don’t possess either initially or ever at all.

It remains to be seen whether Hartson earns a permanent place on the Saturday night Match of the Day line-up, or in the newly non-sexist studio of Sky. What will hold him back if he doesn’t will be the fact that most of his career was spent away from England’s top four: that his delivery is excellent, he is passionate about the game without talking in clichés and isn’t afraid to offer an alternative opinion to the mainstream will matter not unfortunately. Pat Nevin suffers the same fate, despite being far better in the studio than Shearer, Hoddle, Redknapp and many others.

Hartson is someone for whom it’s difficult not to have a huge amount of respect for. He has battled cancer bravely and won, and has since continued to talk freely about his devastating experiences to raise awareness about the disease. I’ve heard interviews with him that were sometimes difficult for the listener given the frankness of their content; he pulled no punches and left audiences in no doubt of either the size of the challenge he faced or the pain he went through.

It’s changed my opinion of him: during his career and especially his time at West Ham, I felt there was a top class player just waiting to get out, only for a lack of motivation to hold him back. Too often he would score a great goal and disappear from games having felt his work was done; once ahead of an FA Cup tie against his beloved Swansea, he told the press that he hoped a chance didn’t fall to him as he didn’t want to score against his boyhood heroes. He also spent the best years of his career in the SPL with Celtic, when maybe with a little more application he could have been scoring hatfuls in England’s top four. 

But that’s not what Hartson wanted from life. He managed to play a very good level of football whilst still enjoying himself off the pitch, and his career saw him become one of the last members of Arsenal’s famed drinking club, whilst still managing to play Champions League football with Celtic. 

I remember reading an interview with Hartson where he spoke of Dennis Bergkamp’s shock at Arsenal’s drinking culture in the mid-90s before Arsene Wenger came along. Bergkamp was apparently bemused as to why someone would want to spend all day on Sunday in the pub with a copy of the News of the World - as Hartson was known to do at the time and many of you probably did yesterday.

Rather than express regret that he had wasted his talent or draw on hindsight to speculate what he might have achieved with more application, Hartson still maintained he loved his Sundays at the pub and wouldn’t have changed a thing. 

This attitude won’t gain praise from conditionists or even today’s press, but as fans, there is something in this that we should applaud. It shows that Hartson never once forgot his roots and remained a fan throughout his career, and may even go some way to explaining his effectiveness as a pundit. 

Given that he so nearly lost his life, the fact that Hartson got exactly what he wanted out of the game, not what others expected of him, should earn him praise and not criticism. Maybe we were wrong and there is more to life than football?