The Letters File
by Gary Jacob
Save our Des from the BBC bureaucrats
Figures just out for the 1997/1998 year reveal that the BBC bureaucrats are eating into the annual licence fee income at the expense of the sporting budget. £109m was spent on licence fee collection and enforcement, £25m on restructuring and £65m on a Corporate Centre.
This all amounts to 10% of the £2044m available from the annual licence fee income.
At the same time, the BBC have underestimated the effects of losing a number of battles for sports coverage to their main aggressors, SKY, ITV and Channel 5. The consequence...no more FA Cup final, Ryder Cup and Test matches.
Football supporters could except any loss, except one. Come a Saturday night, every football supporter sits down to watch Match of the Day.
We impatiently listen for Des Lynam's witty one liners, intertwined Alan Hansen's acerbic remarks.
But maybe for not that much longer. It is a small known fact that Des Lynam, Gary Lineker, Trevor Brooking and Alan Hansen's contracts with the BBC all run out in 2000.
The BBC has chosen to ignore Des Lynam, when he asked for Match of the Day to start at an earlier time.
Maybe Des Lynam should follow Michael Wearing and characterise an army of BBC bureaucrats, who spend their days restructuring their Corporate Centre and collecting licence fees. The programme? A satirical serial called `In the Dugout'
Player power
"There has never been a better time to be a footballer than now.
In my opinion, the players have got far too much power now" -
quote by Alan
Shearer, in a recent television programme entitled Football Millionaires,
narrated by Alan Hansen.
So is Emmanuel Petit threat to leave Arsenal at the end of the season, following disagreements with some Premiership referees, an indication of this player power, or not ?
No player is bigger than the game. But more importantly, neither is any referee, and it is the players that supporters pay to watch.
Petit, or any footballer for that matter, should not be allowed to hold the FA to random about the standard of referring. However, we call the Premiership the best league in the world. Yet, it would be ironic if we let a potential football of the year leave, but sweep the problem of poor referring under the carpet.
Good referees are referees that never get mentioned. All the recent newspaper talk is of the referee...
A rotten banana
The build up to this seasons football premiership was saturated with articles from football pundits pondering one topic. "How are the crowds going to ridicule Beckham ?" "How will Beckham react?"
Every football player will tell you that they have received verbal abuse from crowds. In certain cases, it is after all a complement - a sign that the crowd are worried about that player.
I say ``in certain cases'' as we should not forget that many black players have been subjected to racial abuse from fans and players for many years. It was only 10 years ago that John Barnes, while in his first season at Liverpool, had bananas thrown to him from the crowd. Thankfully, racism is being stamped out of the game.
But I ask myself, what is worse, a campaign to "show Beckham a red card" or "having a banana thrown at you ?" Surely, our perspective is badly skewed when we debate Beckham at length and leave that banana to rot.
Graham not golden
So at last the George Graham affair is over. The theme of many articles was his success at Arsenal and how Leeds were now a team capable of challenging for honours.
As an Arsenal supporter myself, I question this. Graham won two championships at Arsenal - but we were continually taunted, particularly by Spurs supporters, about our style of football. Vinnie Jones, while at Sheffield United, called it ``the Rolls Royce of our [Sheffield United] system'' --- a glorified long ball game.
Nothing Graham has done at Leeds suggests his brand of football has changed. What now of stylish Spurs ? Which Arsenal team do their fans prefer?
At a time when we question skill in the game, we applaud the work
of Graham. Gone are the days when a long ball functional team
will win the
Premiership --- possibly Blackburn were the last --- Alex Ferguson
and Arsene Wenger have changed this, and taken domestic football
to another plane after the doldrums of the late 80's and early
90's
Maybe Arsenal and Spurs should change names --- in 2 years time they won't be recognisable from the teams of yester-year.
Short-term memory loss
Sir, I write with regard to the pandemonium surrounding Arsenal's exit from the Champions League. Many newspaper articles have blamed Arsene Wenger for selling Ian Wright and not strengthening his squad.
You don't have to be a shrewd Arsenal supporter to recognise that Arsenal would never have won the Premiership with Ian Wright in the team.
His style of play encouraged the longer ball game --- a game that we have seen is woefully inadequate nowadays. While manager, Bruce Rioch tried to sell Wright, and met with supporter (and allegedly board) annoyance. Does it not say something about the respect that Wenger commands that he faced no opposition when he sold Wright only one and a half years later?
This year's pre-season transfer merry-go-round saw newspapers criticizing the current "player power", "over-inflated player transfer fees" and "player wage demands".
Wenger made a stand against player demands, and Patrick Kluivert was criticized for wanting 40,000 per week. Yet now hypocritically, newspaper articles conclude that Wenger was wrong not to buy him!
Are the press and supporters so fickle that, a late goal in each of their first 3 Champions League games, together with recent poor performaces, now amounts to scrutinizing Wenger's judgement ? May 16th 1998...such a long time ago.
As more and more money enters the Premier League, what has improved
- Grounds, in line with the Taylor report.
- Premier league games, as foreign players offer something different.
- English players, as foreign players teach our players how to play.
- Refereeing standards, as err ... .
Managers such as Ferguson, Wenger, Strachan and Gullit, and pundits like Brooking and Hansen voice doubt on referring decisions.
Everything has turned professional, except the referee. Is the FA so arrogant to believe that unprofessional part-time referees, no different from 30 years ago, are adequate to cope with the modern game?
With 4 referees (assistants and substitute) per game, and 10 games per week, and even allowing for a modest salary of 20000 per year, the outlay would be only 800,000 per year. Surely, a small price to pay in a very professional game
Who is next ?
As Hoddle leaves for another life, Arsene Wenger, perhaps the `best' candidate for the England manager's job, declares that the successor must be an Englishman.
Where?
Of those who have entered the frame...Howard Wilkinson, the FA technical director, although revolutionising the youth development programme in this country, as a club manager was a champion of the long ball game --- a style of play that has caused England to fall 10 years behind the continental teams.
Kevin Keegan, a man for when the going got tough, the tough got going.
Bryan Robson, a man whose transfer policy was so poor, it relegated his team.
Terry Venables, a man whose most recent addition to his C.V. was the demise of a Nationwide League club.
Roy Hodgson, a good manager, but how can he be expected to motivate an England team, when his own club captain was unmotivated?
Perhaps we should all be Irish, and change the nationality of Alex Ferguson and Arsene Wenger? I am sure they had an English grandmother..
What defines ungentlemanly conduct?
With good common sense, Arsene Wenger called for the Arsenal versus Sheffield Utd FA Cup tie to be replayed. The argument was based on the unwritten rule of ungentlemanly conduct, which by definition, has no definition.
But what of an earlier tie, between Oxford and Chelsea? Vialli dived his way to a stoppage time penalty, thereby rescuing his team from defeat. Does this not also constitute ungentlemanly conduct?
It seems that the FA have now set a precedent. Any team suffering from a controversial decision, whether by the referee or not, will justifiably point to this game, and ask for a replay.
We are then at the mercy of the after-game honesty of managers and players. And where does this leave the referee?
To their credit, some referees avoid whistling at the first sign of foul-play, rather waiting to see if any advantage can occur. But, there comes a point during the foul, when this advantage can not only become a disadvantage, but can also favour the offender.
During the recent Manchester United vs Arsenal game, Roy Keane tugged at Patrick Vieira's shirt, while at the same time attempted to chop him down.
Vieira, to his credit did not react at first, until the provocation was too much, at which point he raised his arm. Although it was clear who the perpetrator of the foul was, both players received the same card.
This is just one incident in a long line of incidents where the perpetrator of the offence received exactly the same punishment as the recipient - the world cup threw up many other examples.
Taken to the extreme, a sacrificial poor player can kick away at an opposing talented player, and draw a reaction. Both players are then sent off, and the advantage favours the offending team. Obviously this is extreme, but how different are many other examples week-in week-out in the Premiership
A red mist
Now days, it is not uncommon, justifiably or not, for football managers to critisize the referee's decision. No one likes to be critisized, not even the referees.
This week, Paul Durkin was blasted by Alex Ferguson for sending off Paul Scholes.
On the face of it there was nothing unusual about this outburst. It happens week-in week-out in the Premiership. Except for one thing. There is a replay involved, which Durkin will take charge of.
Has Ferguson now ensured that Durkin will see the game through a red mist ? And will any 50-50 referring decisions go in his teams favour
A worthy cup ?
The Football League has repeatedly claimed that the Worthington Cup, and before that the Coca-Cola Cup, was a competition worthy of keeping.
Moreover, clubs such as Manchester United and Arsenal had been threatened with fines for fielding weakened teams.
It does seems very ironical then, that two Premiership games were played on the same day as the final. One of the games, Manchester United vs Everton, started at the same time as the Worthington Cup Final.
If the Football league and Premier league make this type of statement about the importance of the Cup, there is no argument for fines being a deterrent.
More importantly, what will UEFA think about granting the winners of the Cup a UEFA cup place ?
Did we really expect any more ?
Pardon me for adding to the considerable amount already published about the World Cup. A tidal wave of emotion engulfed the nation, with many commenting in the aftermath, ``we would have won it, had it not been for Beckham''. Do the public really believe this ? Did we really expect any more ?
Take a step back for one moment, and contemplate Italia 90 and Euro 96...ah yes..those penalties... . Parallel comments were made then - ``had we beaten those Germans'', ``how well we played''. Are the public and media so naive as to believe this ?
Memories are short lived. Italia90 - draws with R. Ireland and Holland. To proceed, a win over Egypt (one-nil). So onward to the Belgians and David Platt - but what about that post, which rescued us on more than one occasion.
Did we really deserve to beat Cameroon ? Germany, and the rest
is history. Can anyone really tell me we played well ?
But wait a moment, what about Euro 96 ? How unlucky we were. Parallels too apparent.
A draw with the Swiss, and victory over the mighty enemy, Scotland. Seaman's two saves, forgotten. Might it all have been different had either equalized the score ?
Then as every Englishman sings --- ``we hammered the Dutch. Did we ? Were they really a team? Internal strife took care of them. Spain and penalties, the Germans and history. Parallels too common. Did we really expect any more ?
Are we really this naive? Are the press so naive that a victory ensures we are world beaters, and a loss relegates us to the sidelines ?
What does the future hold ? I've often heard references to ``
our
young world class talent''. Where ? Owen. And... . Look no further
than Nigeria, Morocco and even Japan.
Naive? Yes. But skillful and comfortable on the ball. Take away that naivete. And in 15 years time, a superior team to us.
This cannot be. We gave the game to the world. Hmm...Cricket and Rugby ?
But wait. Our schoolboys do well. Beat those Germans and Brazilians. We must be good. They develop skills foremost. Then physical strength. Winning ? An irrelevance at the age of 15 (note the reverse of our system).
But by the age of 20...where is our Ronaldo, Bergkamp, Zidane and Okocha ?
I asked a South African colleague of mine - why it is that South Africa's brand of football was so different from the rest of the African teams on show.
True, this is like saying why is English football not the same as the French or Dutch. The answer was revealing. ``Perhaps it is something to do with South African schoolboys being coached by English coaches, whereas Nigeria et al. brought in continental European coaches''.
Deja-vu ? Skill first and strength later?
So come on Howard Wilkinson --- you could do worse than to look at the Ajax system.
So what does Euro2000 hold? Qualification, just. A semi-final place and then a loss on penalties. Didn't we do well.
Perversely, somehow as a nation, I think we like it this way. Being the unlucky loser, we can always point to near things.
Are we frightened of winning ? Can we really expect any more ?
FEATURES
THE ARSENAL AGM - FULL WRITE UP
FIVE REASONS: ARSENAL COULD WIN IN BARCELONA
CARLTON AND ITV UPSET US AGAIN
JEKYLL AND HYDE PLAY THE NOU CAMP