Tottenham Hotspur v Newcastle United.
White Hart Lane.
Tuesday 28th December 2010.
3pm Kick-Off.
Player Ratings:
Krul: 7/10 - His distribution was much better than the Man City game, although that wasn’t difficult! Cleared his lines well under pressure & made a good save tipping the ball over the bar from a Van Der Vaart free-kick, before producing an outstanding save from Roman Pavlyuchenko in first half stoppage time - aided & abetted by the post.
Simpson: 6/10 - Could & should have read the threat for the second goal better. Bale will get all the “Welsh Pele” plaudits once again, but Danny could have done more to stop the threat. Confused going forward & couldn’t make his mind up if he should attack or not, so kept getting caught in no-mans land. Aside from the sheep-shagger’s goal though, he kept Bale fairly quiet.
S. Taylor: 5/10 - Seems to have been included in the starting line-up only on the back of his new contract. There’s no guarantees that Williamson would have played any better than Saylor, but he certainly wouldn’t have done any worse. He needs to prove his worth now and hopefully won’t slip into the Shola Ameobi comfort zone now he’s getting his wedge for the next 5 and a half years.
Coloccini: 5/10 - Looks so much more comfortable with Williamson next to him in defence. Played as if he’d only been introduced to Saylor in the dressing room 5 minutes before kick-off. Was a bit headless at times & was caught following the ball on occasion. Seems to have lost his excellent early season form, and appears to be very much a confidence player.
Perch: 4/10 - Although he started fairly well against Aaron Lennon, this didn’t last & he was at fault for the first goal by allowing the tiny Tottenham terror to twist & turn his way past him. To be honest, hasn’t improved one jot since we bought him, starting off craply at right-back and now he’s crap at left back too. Shouldn’t be allowed to watch NUFC on the telly let alone play for us. I’d rather have an unfit Enrique than a fully-fit Perch every day of the week, Perch shouldn’t even be a squad-player. Must be the first one out of the door in January.
Routledge: 2/10 - Crap. Simple as that. Played too close to Simpson and didn’t use his pace except to leave the pitch at the final whistle. First of all, what's the point in having the pace if you don't use it? Secondly, even when he does use it, he has no end product. Didn’t trouble anyone except my brainpower trying to think up more insults for this waste of a shirt. May as well have not bothered even playing. If his house was on fire I have no doubt he would end up running around in circles until it burnt down around him……
Barton: 7/10 - NUFC’s best player today, although that’s not saying very much….. His delivery from free-kicks and corners was poor by his usual high standards, but he stood up well to non-stop grief from the crowd and non-stop hoofing up the arse and wind-ups from the Spurs players who were obviously sent out to try and wind him up. A rare off-day for Joey, and he will know - as much as we do - that he can & will play much better this season. Along with Peter Lovenkrands, Joey was the only Newcastle player who really put any effort into applauding the travelling fans.
Tiote: (subbed - Lovenkrands - 78 mins) 6/10 - Not his best game in a black & white shirt, but battled away and never gave up the cause. Kept getting caught in possession and his passing wasn’t as good as we’ve come to expect from him. He has set a very high standard for himself and didn’t live up to it today. It was criminal to take him off when the likes of Routledge & Smith remained on the pitch. Was involved in the Younes Kaboul sending off - although I missed the incident thanks to the twatty steward who kept standing in front of me (something which I was informed he does on a regular basis) - until after this incident when I had him ejected by his supervisor & the friendly, funny Gooner rozzer who was stood next to me in the second half game!
Smith: 4/10 - More pedestrian than the people walking along Tottenham High Road before the match. Seemed disinterested from the first minute to the last and contributed nothing of note. If he played in my local pub 5-a-side team he’d be dropped after this display. He wasn’t the worst Newcastle player on the pitch, but he tried his best to be. I think Smudge’s best days are long behind him & he doesn’t contribute to the depth of the squad in any way. His selection is always met with cries of “fucking Smith?” from Newcastle fans whenever his name is on the team sheet. Still, at least he’s not Danny Guthrie….
Gutirrez: (subbed - Ranger - 67 mins) 2/10 - Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear….. The above comments for Routledge all apply to Jonas today too. Played like Laurent Robert did when he couldn’t be bothered either, and will end up through the same exit door as the moody Frenchman unless he bucks his ideas up sharpish. Can’t beat his man, can’t cross, can’t head, can’t shoot, can’t tackle, can’t keep up with play, can’t track back, can’t be bothered.
Carroll: 6/10 - Wasn’t his normal imposing self today due to a lack of service and as a result he only really had one half-chance - putting a first-half header onto the roof of the net. He did, however, run after every ball & lost cause like he was a Jack Russell chasing a tennis ball in the park - as he always does. He must have looked around the dressing room after the final whistle & wondered why he bothered to put so much effort in when too many of his team-mates didn't seem interested. We’d be lost without the big fella if he left as without him, we have very little else to offer up front.
Subs:
Lovenkrands (for Tiote - 78 mins): 5/10 - Ok, confession time: I like Mr Lovenpants. I think he’s our best natural finisher by a mile and stays cool, calm and collected when he’s on the ball. He proved all these traits with his match-winning goal away to QPR on the last day of last season. Vastly underrated and underused this season, he didn’t get enough time to strut his stuff today, but showed intelligence with his touch and passing. Needs more of a chance and a run in the team to show his worth.
Ranger (for Gutirrez - 67 mins): 5/10 - Didn’t have as much impact as his previous outings from the bench, but still causes the opposition problems a la Tino Asprilla, as defences don’t know what he’s going to do next - as I doubt he does himself! Still young and learning his trade, he needs to mature quickly and a goal would do his game and his composure the world of good. Personally, I would have started him up front with Big Andy yesterday (leaving Smith on the bench) playing a 4-4-2 instead of the ineffectual 4-5-1.
Wednesday 29 December 2010
Tuesday 21 December 2010
Should The Lunatics Run The Asylum?
Mike Ashley. Where the hell do I begin? What could I possibly write about the situation he has brought unto himself yet again that hasn’t already been written? Well, amid talk ranging from a boycott of the concessions selling pies & pints at St. James’ Park & the club shop, to staying away from home games & mass walk-outs, I’ll have a bash at giving you my take on how to deal with the pesky parasite from darn sarf…..
The NUST have proved themselves to be not much more than rabble rousers who are interested in nothing but shameless self promotion & doing the occasional bit for charidee. Let’s face it; a supporter-led buy-out of the club isn’t going to happen, unless Barry Moat (yet another shameless self promoter) finds some more loose change down the back of the sofa.
The chances of some oil-rich Arabs coming in & ridding us of the current regime are about as slim as Mr Ashley’s waist, and this itself is fraught with its own dangers - just look at the comedy-drama going on at Manchester City for proof of this. From the good old’ US of A came the owners of Liverpool and Manchester United - and how we laughed when we saw the mess they made of supporter relations. Just like Mike Ashley, in fact, just with an added ‘yee-haw’ at the end of the sentences…..
So, where does this leave us? Stuck with Mike Ashley until the end of time? Do we hope that the new manager Alan Pardew has the same effect on his current Chairman as he did on his last one? (for those who can‘t remember, Southampton owner Markus Liebherr actually passed away). Do we burn him at the stake? Run him out of the city? String him up from the Tyne Bridge by his dangly bits? (All valid options I‘m sure you‘ll agree). Or do we eat humble pie & go to Mr Ashley, cap-in-hand, and try to negotiate a reasoned, rational way into his thinking?
Before you all want to use some of my own suggestions on me, let me explain….. Let’s pretend for a minute we are Mike Ashley. Yes, I know it’s not easy, and yes, I know we would all have done things very, very differently if we were he, but bear with me on this one. Let’s say you make a mistake at work. We all do it. It happens. Now lets say that all your customers - at once, en-masse - waited outside your work for you, full of anger & hate, foaming at the mouth, making threats about your personal safety and questioning your waist size and your parentage. How would you react?
Would you say “come in, lets talk, lets see if we can sort something out“? Would you quit immediately and crawl back under the rock you came out from? Or would you stick your middle finger up at them, tell them all to f*ck off & have a laugh at them behind their backs with your mates in the pub that night? What say they continued to do this day after day, setting up websites against you and pages & groups on social networking sites? Would this help improve your feelings towards them? Would it not just make you want to do the same things to them that I suggested we may want to do to him? Would you not give two-shits about them and just carry on regardless?
It is well documented that the best way to make any impact on Mike Ashley is to boycott his stores and his brands - to hit him in the pocket. However, what is the likelihood of this having the effect required? I know I don’t, & won’t, use his stores - and I know of many other Newcastle fans who feel the same - but what say of his hundreds of other stores around the country, where people with no emotional tie to NUFC will continue to shop regardless? Will they stop buying his stack ‘em high, sell ‘em cheap goods because we ask them to? No, is the simple answer to that.
(Just as a brief side-note, Mr Ashley’s ownership of both Sp0rt$ D!r£ct and Newcastle United has one persistent question burning a hole in my mind: How much money does SD contribute to NUFC? Are SD paying the going rate for all the advertising they get at St. James’ Park? Are they paying the same amount for the naming rights to the stadium that an outside company would? Is the hideous advert on the roof of the Gallowgate End putting money into the club and the squad? Or is he just using the ground as a free vehicle to publicise his other financial interest? My guess would be the latter.)
So there we have it. Fan representation. Now I’m not saying my plan is perfect - far from it. The possibilities of it actually happening are miniscule and better people than me & you have tried & failed. But… But… What IF we extended an olive branch to Mr Ashley? What IF we formed a reasoned, mature, informed group to try to negotiate some way to actually get him round a table and talk to him? To try to get him to see our point of view as I have tried to see things from his? To say to him “look, I know we haven’t always got on, and you probably like (!) us as much as we do you, but just hear us out, listen to our fears and see if we can all just get along for the good of the club” - which, after all, is the most important thing here, and is what we the fans, and dare I even say Mr Ashley himself, wants?
In an ideal world, we would have someone equally close to Mike Ashley as they are to the fans. Someone who could be equally honest with both, and deal with each party in the same manner. A negotiator if you will. A mediator. A diplomat. Someone who can explain his decisions to us & try to help us understand why he makes the choices he does - and to explain to him the reasons why we may not agree with those choices, in the hope that both parties can reach an agreement we’re all happy with.
I know this idealism raises many more questions than it answers. For example, how do we get close enough to the owner to put this to him? How do we sit him down and explain to him that this is for the betterment of the club, and that to have us all working together FOR the club is much more beneficial than us both heading in opposite directions, pulling it apart? That to truly be Newcastle UNITED, we must all join forces in our aims, in our hopes & dreams, in our vision for the future of the club. This can only happen in one way: to negotiate with the current owner. To show him that all we care about, is NUFC (and all the while hoping he feels the same)…..
Before any of that can happen however, we need to take a long, hard look at ourselves and what we are doing to contribute to this mess. Are we banding together to form a strong alliance capable of influencing change? No. Are we being sensible by discussing all the options available to us, going through all the pros & cons and coming up with a concise plan of action? No. Right now, the situation is so farcical that even the various protest groups are fighting against each other! Lets face the bare facts of the matter here: if we can’t even sit down and discuss things between ourselves, and continue to bicker over who’s right and who’s wrong and who’s dad is bigger than who’s, then we don’t stand a chance in hell of making a difference to the situation, and are merely providing outsiders with even more mud to sling at us.
In our quest for the best for Newcastle United, we need to think smart and act accordingly. To maybe show a bit of humility and hope that the same is returned. If we want positive change for our club, my suggestion would be to put away the hastily scrawled bed sheets, to untie the noose, and to stop fighting what is essentially a losing battle against Mike Ashley, and to prove to him that we can be grown up, reasonable and responsible in the face of adversity. This in turn, I feel, will have a much more positive effect on the situation.
Am I trying to dream the impossible dream? Maybe. But wouldn’t all our lives as Newcastle United fans - and indeed the club itself - benefit from for this? Definitely.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for your comment, they are always appreciated! Don't get me wrong, I think the banner wavers have their place - and I reserve the right for people to protest in whatever way they feel is most appropriate - I just feel that there are more constructive ways for us to let Mr Ashley know that we are unhappy with the way he is running the club, and most importantly, going about trying to change things.
With regard to the 'olive branch' idea, I would love the FA (or even UEFA and FIFA for that matter) make it compulsory for all professional clubs to have some kind of supporter representation who allowed direct contact with those running their club. Otherwise, the entire game - from the players, management and team owners/chairmen - risk alienating the most important part of the club, the fans.
Players, managers and owners will always come and go, yet the one constant is the supporters. Without us, they have no teams, and with no teams, they have no game. Yet as long as we continue to line their pockets nothing will ever change, as they expect nothing more of us than to pay our money and keep our mouths shut. In their eyes, we are not entitled to an opinion on any aspect of the game.
** I would just like it noted for the record, for anyone reading this post, that in no way do I support Mike Ashley and nor do I agree with the way he has been running NUFC. I am merely trying to look at an alternative (and hopefully more constructive) way of dealing with the current situation. As I said above, I fully support the right of NUFC fans to protest in whatever way they feel is most productive to them, regardless of whether I agree with their methods or not.
The NUST have proved themselves to be not much more than rabble rousers who are interested in nothing but shameless self promotion & doing the occasional bit for charidee. Let’s face it; a supporter-led buy-out of the club isn’t going to happen, unless Barry Moat (yet another shameless self promoter) finds some more loose change down the back of the sofa.
The chances of some oil-rich Arabs coming in & ridding us of the current regime are about as slim as Mr Ashley’s waist, and this itself is fraught with its own dangers - just look at the comedy-drama going on at Manchester City for proof of this. From the good old’ US of A came the owners of Liverpool and Manchester United - and how we laughed when we saw the mess they made of supporter relations. Just like Mike Ashley, in fact, just with an added ‘yee-haw’ at the end of the sentences…..
So, where does this leave us? Stuck with Mike Ashley until the end of time? Do we hope that the new manager Alan Pardew has the same effect on his current Chairman as he did on his last one? (for those who can‘t remember, Southampton owner Markus Liebherr actually passed away). Do we burn him at the stake? Run him out of the city? String him up from the Tyne Bridge by his dangly bits? (All valid options I‘m sure you‘ll agree). Or do we eat humble pie & go to Mr Ashley, cap-in-hand, and try to negotiate a reasoned, rational way into his thinking?
Before you all want to use some of my own suggestions on me, let me explain….. Let’s pretend for a minute we are Mike Ashley. Yes, I know it’s not easy, and yes, I know we would all have done things very, very differently if we were he, but bear with me on this one. Let’s say you make a mistake at work. We all do it. It happens. Now lets say that all your customers - at once, en-masse - waited outside your work for you, full of anger & hate, foaming at the mouth, making threats about your personal safety and questioning your waist size and your parentage. How would you react?
Would you say “come in, lets talk, lets see if we can sort something out“? Would you quit immediately and crawl back under the rock you came out from? Or would you stick your middle finger up at them, tell them all to f*ck off & have a laugh at them behind their backs with your mates in the pub that night? What say they continued to do this day after day, setting up websites against you and pages & groups on social networking sites? Would this help improve your feelings towards them? Would it not just make you want to do the same things to them that I suggested we may want to do to him? Would you not give two-shits about them and just carry on regardless?
It is well documented that the best way to make any impact on Mike Ashley is to boycott his stores and his brands - to hit him in the pocket. However, what is the likelihood of this having the effect required? I know I don’t, & won’t, use his stores - and I know of many other Newcastle fans who feel the same - but what say of his hundreds of other stores around the country, where people with no emotional tie to NUFC will continue to shop regardless? Will they stop buying his stack ‘em high, sell ‘em cheap goods because we ask them to? No, is the simple answer to that.
(Just as a brief side-note, Mr Ashley’s ownership of both Sp0rt$ D!r£ct and Newcastle United has one persistent question burning a hole in my mind: How much money does SD contribute to NUFC? Are SD paying the going rate for all the advertising they get at St. James’ Park? Are they paying the same amount for the naming rights to the stadium that an outside company would? Is the hideous advert on the roof of the Gallowgate End putting money into the club and the squad? Or is he just using the ground as a free vehicle to publicise his other financial interest? My guess would be the latter.)
So there we have it. Fan representation. Now I’m not saying my plan is perfect - far from it. The possibilities of it actually happening are miniscule and better people than me & you have tried & failed. But… But… What IF we extended an olive branch to Mr Ashley? What IF we formed a reasoned, mature, informed group to try to negotiate some way to actually get him round a table and talk to him? To try to get him to see our point of view as I have tried to see things from his? To say to him “look, I know we haven’t always got on, and you probably like (!) us as much as we do you, but just hear us out, listen to our fears and see if we can all just get along for the good of the club” - which, after all, is the most important thing here, and is what we the fans, and dare I even say Mr Ashley himself, wants?
In an ideal world, we would have someone equally close to Mike Ashley as they are to the fans. Someone who could be equally honest with both, and deal with each party in the same manner. A negotiator if you will. A mediator. A diplomat. Someone who can explain his decisions to us & try to help us understand why he makes the choices he does - and to explain to him the reasons why we may not agree with those choices, in the hope that both parties can reach an agreement we’re all happy with.
I know this idealism raises many more questions than it answers. For example, how do we get close enough to the owner to put this to him? How do we sit him down and explain to him that this is for the betterment of the club, and that to have us all working together FOR the club is much more beneficial than us both heading in opposite directions, pulling it apart? That to truly be Newcastle UNITED, we must all join forces in our aims, in our hopes & dreams, in our vision for the future of the club. This can only happen in one way: to negotiate with the current owner. To show him that all we care about, is NUFC (and all the while hoping he feels the same)…..
Before any of that can happen however, we need to take a long, hard look at ourselves and what we are doing to contribute to this mess. Are we banding together to form a strong alliance capable of influencing change? No. Are we being sensible by discussing all the options available to us, going through all the pros & cons and coming up with a concise plan of action? No. Right now, the situation is so farcical that even the various protest groups are fighting against each other! Lets face the bare facts of the matter here: if we can’t even sit down and discuss things between ourselves, and continue to bicker over who’s right and who’s wrong and who’s dad is bigger than who’s, then we don’t stand a chance in hell of making a difference to the situation, and are merely providing outsiders with even more mud to sling at us.
In our quest for the best for Newcastle United, we need to think smart and act accordingly. To maybe show a bit of humility and hope that the same is returned. If we want positive change for our club, my suggestion would be to put away the hastily scrawled bed sheets, to untie the noose, and to stop fighting what is essentially a losing battle against Mike Ashley, and to prove to him that we can be grown up, reasonable and responsible in the face of adversity. This in turn, I feel, will have a much more positive effect on the situation.
Am I trying to dream the impossible dream? Maybe. But wouldn’t all our lives as Newcastle United fans - and indeed the club itself - benefit from for this? Definitely.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for your comment, they are always appreciated! Don't get me wrong, I think the banner wavers have their place - and I reserve the right for people to protest in whatever way they feel is most appropriate - I just feel that there are more constructive ways for us to let Mr Ashley know that we are unhappy with the way he is running the club, and most importantly, going about trying to change things.
With regard to the 'olive branch' idea, I would love the FA (or even UEFA and FIFA for that matter) make it compulsory for all professional clubs to have some kind of supporter representation who allowed direct contact with those running their club. Otherwise, the entire game - from the players, management and team owners/chairmen - risk alienating the most important part of the club, the fans.
Players, managers and owners will always come and go, yet the one constant is the supporters. Without us, they have no teams, and with no teams, they have no game. Yet as long as we continue to line their pockets nothing will ever change, as they expect nothing more of us than to pay our money and keep our mouths shut. In their eyes, we are not entitled to an opinion on any aspect of the game.
** I would just like it noted for the record, for anyone reading this post, that in no way do I support Mike Ashley and nor do I agree with the way he has been running NUFC. I am merely trying to look at an alternative (and hopefully more constructive) way of dealing with the current situation. As I said above, I fully support the right of NUFC fans to protest in whatever way they feel is most productive to them, regardless of whether I agree with their methods or not.
Sunday 5 December 2010
FIFA: Football's Internal Failings Analysed
So, this was the week that FIFA upset the entire country & gave the 2018 World Cup to Russia. Without needing to go into too much detail, it is clear that England had the best bid in every respect, and that we also made the best presentation. FIFA Executive Committee (Ex-Co) members & even Sepp Blatter himself were also making all the right noises - how the ‘Motherland’ had ‘earned the right’ and ‘deserved’ to host the World Cup after such a long absence, and that we could ‘host the tournament tomorrow’ if needed.
The infamous British media then cranked up it’s nosey-parker machine and both the Sunday Times and tax-payer funded BBC (with impeccable timing) thought it would aid our bid immensely by accusing FIFA Ex-Co members of corruption, & by doing so only achieving two things: Firstly, informing the world what we already knew - that FIFA is the most corrupt organisation on the planet, and secondly, pissing off those FIFA Ex-Co members sufficiently to give the World Cup to a country who’s bid was one of only 2 (along with Qatar‘s 2022 bid) which was described by FIFA themselves as ‘high risk’.
Yes, it would have been helpful if FIFA had forewarned the FA that the criteria they had laid out (stadia, transport links, hotels, training facilities, security, etc.) would actually count for absolutely nothing in their decision making process, and that they would simply give it to somewhere that hadn’t hosted it before in order to “aid the development of football and leave a lasting legacy” in the winning country (this is despite the fact that Italy, France, Germany, Mexico, & after 2014 Brazil, will have all have hosted it twice…..).
England 2018’s bid chief - Andy Anson - has spoken passionately and eloquently about the failings in FIFA’s structure, and how they need to reform in order to regain the confidence of the footballing world (an excellent piece on the subject is here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/9257780.stm). In essence, the FA are hoping for FIFA to become more transparent and opening up their processes for all to see (alternatively, this could also be achieved by way of a full, open and thorough investigation into FIFA by the Swiss anti-corruption authorities). Yet for all their posturing & protesting, is our own FA really any different to those they point the finger at?
Lets face it, the FA are a farce, and have been for a considerable number of years. The corridors of power at Lancaster Gate, Soho Square and now Wembley, have been filled with the games’ administrators: faceless & nameless men in grey suites who (much like their FIFA counterparts) have never played the game at a sufficient level to fully understand it, who tend to put themselves about at high profile games and events travelling in first class 5-star luxury - all paid for by expenses - whilst making decisions on the game anonymously and in secret. If the FA are to start throwing accusations at - and making demands of - FIFA, then they need to get their own house in order first.
For example, lets look at the Chairmanship of the FA. Can anyone tell me who the current FA Chairman is? No, I thought not. In actual fact, there IS no Chairman at the FA. Roger Burden was appointed acting Chairman in May this year following the departure of Lord Triesman, who resigned after what he called his "entrapment" by a national newspaper. Burden initially was not interested in taking the role full-time, but later changed his mind and wish to be considered for the job. He has now changed it again and has withdrawn his candidacy to take over the job permanently following England’s disastrous 2018 World Cup bid by stating “I'm not prepared to deal with people (FIFA Ex-Co members) whom I cannot trust”. However he will remain in the position until a successor can be found, with the FA due to name the permanent chairman early next year. How can the FA challenge the leaders of FIFA when they have no leader themselves?
Then there are the mystery-members of the FA who sit on all manner of panels enforcing rules & regulations, making decisions on how the game is run and handing out punishments which fail massively to deal with the fans’ number 1 complaint - consistency. These people are as anonymous and answerable to no-one as the FIFA Ex-Co members who they accuse of being open to distrust and corruption (thus allowing both parties to pretty much do whatever they please without fear of recrimination). How can the FA call for FIFA to become completely transparent, when they are not now - nor are they willing to become so - themselves?
Sponsorship is another moot-point in the current game, and some (the FA being one) have accused FIFA of not giving alternative companies a look-in when it comes to certain deals. Current long-term sponsors of the ‘global game’ include adidas, Coca-Cola and McDonalds, and it has been suggested that these sponsorship deals are all secured behind closed doors, and are not open to tender, therefore breaking EU competition laws. I’m sure the likes of Nike, Pepsi and Burger King would all like a chance to enjoy the riches that the sponsorship of a World Cup brings, yet they are unable to do so due to the long-term watertight deals already in place. The FA publicly believe that by opening up the bidding process, it would again remove the accusations of corruption & would also raise the price of such deals.
However the very same accusations could be true of the FA themselves. Umbro, for example, have been providing the England team playing & training kits at all levels since 1954 (apart from a decade between 1974 and 1984 in which Admiral supplied the kits). That’s a whopping 46 years in total! Most recently, the tender for the England kit contract was up for review in 2008 - however without even inviting bids from other manufacturers, the FA announced that they had secured and signed a deal with Umbro until 2018. Understandably, the likes of adidas, Puma and Reebok we are all livid (although Nike weren‘t so angry as they bought Umbro in 2008 - the very same year in which the contract with the FA was renewed without bidding…..). How can the FA complain of FIFA’s unfair contract awards when they themselves do exactly the same thing?
Following on this theme, the FA’s greed and uncouth business manner, led to them demanding an increase from £10m per year to £40m per year from principal sponsor Nationwide. The building society (who in return offered to double their offer to £20m per year) decided this did not represent good value for money and thereby ended their 11 year partnership. This has led to other principal England team sponsors (such as McDonalds, Carlsberg, Lucozade and Tesco, to name just 4 of the many) to reconsider and renegotiate their contracts with the FA, at a time where many companies are reigning in spending. In a spectacular own-goal, the FA’s pure greed could leave them on the back-foot and possibly forcing them into a position whereby they have no option but to accept vastly reduced offers. How can the FA lay claim to being experts in sponsorship & promotional matters, when they have continually left themselves open to accusations of unfair, underhand and biased business dealings and contract negotiations?
In conclusion, the FA have left themselves wide-open to exactly the same criticisms and accusations as they themselves are throwing at FIFA. It would be enormously hypocritical of them to continue their child-like, dummy-spitting tirade at football’s world governing body (regardless of how much of a point they may have), without getting their own house in order first. It’s high time the Football Association lead by example, and dropped their “do as we say, not as we do” attitude.
The infamous British media then cranked up it’s nosey-parker machine and both the Sunday Times and tax-payer funded BBC (with impeccable timing) thought it would aid our bid immensely by accusing FIFA Ex-Co members of corruption, & by doing so only achieving two things: Firstly, informing the world what we already knew - that FIFA is the most corrupt organisation on the planet, and secondly, pissing off those FIFA Ex-Co members sufficiently to give the World Cup to a country who’s bid was one of only 2 (along with Qatar‘s 2022 bid) which was described by FIFA themselves as ‘high risk’.
Yes, it would have been helpful if FIFA had forewarned the FA that the criteria they had laid out (stadia, transport links, hotels, training facilities, security, etc.) would actually count for absolutely nothing in their decision making process, and that they would simply give it to somewhere that hadn’t hosted it before in order to “aid the development of football and leave a lasting legacy” in the winning country (this is despite the fact that Italy, France, Germany, Mexico, & after 2014 Brazil, will have all have hosted it twice…..).
England 2018’s bid chief - Andy Anson - has spoken passionately and eloquently about the failings in FIFA’s structure, and how they need to reform in order to regain the confidence of the footballing world (an excellent piece on the subject is here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/9257780.stm). In essence, the FA are hoping for FIFA to become more transparent and opening up their processes for all to see (alternatively, this could also be achieved by way of a full, open and thorough investigation into FIFA by the Swiss anti-corruption authorities). Yet for all their posturing & protesting, is our own FA really any different to those they point the finger at?
Lets face it, the FA are a farce, and have been for a considerable number of years. The corridors of power at Lancaster Gate, Soho Square and now Wembley, have been filled with the games’ administrators: faceless & nameless men in grey suites who (much like their FIFA counterparts) have never played the game at a sufficient level to fully understand it, who tend to put themselves about at high profile games and events travelling in first class 5-star luxury - all paid for by expenses - whilst making decisions on the game anonymously and in secret. If the FA are to start throwing accusations at - and making demands of - FIFA, then they need to get their own house in order first.
For example, lets look at the Chairmanship of the FA. Can anyone tell me who the current FA Chairman is? No, I thought not. In actual fact, there IS no Chairman at the FA. Roger Burden was appointed acting Chairman in May this year following the departure of Lord Triesman, who resigned after what he called his "entrapment" by a national newspaper. Burden initially was not interested in taking the role full-time, but later changed his mind and wish to be considered for the job. He has now changed it again and has withdrawn his candidacy to take over the job permanently following England’s disastrous 2018 World Cup bid by stating “I'm not prepared to deal with people (FIFA Ex-Co members) whom I cannot trust”. However he will remain in the position until a successor can be found, with the FA due to name the permanent chairman early next year. How can the FA challenge the leaders of FIFA when they have no leader themselves?
Then there are the mystery-members of the FA who sit on all manner of panels enforcing rules & regulations, making decisions on how the game is run and handing out punishments which fail massively to deal with the fans’ number 1 complaint - consistency. These people are as anonymous and answerable to no-one as the FIFA Ex-Co members who they accuse of being open to distrust and corruption (thus allowing both parties to pretty much do whatever they please without fear of recrimination). How can the FA call for FIFA to become completely transparent, when they are not now - nor are they willing to become so - themselves?
Sponsorship is another moot-point in the current game, and some (the FA being one) have accused FIFA of not giving alternative companies a look-in when it comes to certain deals. Current long-term sponsors of the ‘global game’ include adidas, Coca-Cola and McDonalds, and it has been suggested that these sponsorship deals are all secured behind closed doors, and are not open to tender, therefore breaking EU competition laws. I’m sure the likes of Nike, Pepsi and Burger King would all like a chance to enjoy the riches that the sponsorship of a World Cup brings, yet they are unable to do so due to the long-term watertight deals already in place. The FA publicly believe that by opening up the bidding process, it would again remove the accusations of corruption & would also raise the price of such deals.
However the very same accusations could be true of the FA themselves. Umbro, for example, have been providing the England team playing & training kits at all levels since 1954 (apart from a decade between 1974 and 1984 in which Admiral supplied the kits). That’s a whopping 46 years in total! Most recently, the tender for the England kit contract was up for review in 2008 - however without even inviting bids from other manufacturers, the FA announced that they had secured and signed a deal with Umbro until 2018. Understandably, the likes of adidas, Puma and Reebok we are all livid (although Nike weren‘t so angry as they bought Umbro in 2008 - the very same year in which the contract with the FA was renewed without bidding…..). How can the FA complain of FIFA’s unfair contract awards when they themselves do exactly the same thing?
Following on this theme, the FA’s greed and uncouth business manner, led to them demanding an increase from £10m per year to £40m per year from principal sponsor Nationwide. The building society (who in return offered to double their offer to £20m per year) decided this did not represent good value for money and thereby ended their 11 year partnership. This has led to other principal England team sponsors (such as McDonalds, Carlsberg, Lucozade and Tesco, to name just 4 of the many) to reconsider and renegotiate their contracts with the FA, at a time where many companies are reigning in spending. In a spectacular own-goal, the FA’s pure greed could leave them on the back-foot and possibly forcing them into a position whereby they have no option but to accept vastly reduced offers. How can the FA lay claim to being experts in sponsorship & promotional matters, when they have continually left themselves open to accusations of unfair, underhand and biased business dealings and contract negotiations?
In conclusion, the FA have left themselves wide-open to exactly the same criticisms and accusations as they themselves are throwing at FIFA. It would be enormously hypocritical of them to continue their child-like, dummy-spitting tirade at football’s world governing body (regardless of how much of a point they may have), without getting their own house in order first. It’s high time the Football Association lead by example, and dropped their “do as we say, not as we do” attitude.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)