Littered with Failure

by Segun Odegbami © Segun Odegbami (March 20th 2015)

CIMG8139

Over-rated and Over-paid

I admit straight away that I am heading into a minefield of trouble writing today about coaches – for footballers, born ad bred in Africa, those termed managers in England for example are called coaches, so for readers in England especially, I am not talking about the men and women who work with players on technique and much much more, often for poor reward and unsociable hours.

Their work is under-rated and underpaid. I am not talking about them, I am talking about the bosses, gaffers, etc. I do not really like discussing them. I think they earn too much money for the work that they do. In short, I think that their work is over-rated and over-paid as players do most of the work that counts – on the pitch. It is they who must perform to top of their abilities every match, even when the tactics are wrong, they are used wrongly, or played out of position in an outdated and inefficient system that the boss favours despite evidence that it doesnʼt work.

Bluff and Bluster

Coaches dramatise most of the time that the players are playing to instruction when the team is winning, and not playing to instruction when they are losing. They act out their script in the full glare of television, standing by the sidelines, pretending to be taking down notes – those are the smart ones. They scream out instructions that no one on the field hears or understands, and impact little on how the players play.

They ‘pretend’ to those that pay them humongous wages and the fans that ‘hire and fire’ them that they are ‘conducting’ things on the field of play with their sideline dramatisation of moods, and play mental games with referees. From their field-level position by the sideline they have the poorest view of the game and yet they have the final say on their team.

They talk and bluff their way to millions of Dollars, hopping from one failed coaching job to another. They know how to play the media particularly after winning one or two trophies and thereafter earn those outrageously high wages.  

The world of football is full of them – failed coaches!

Extra Dimension

Do not get me wrong, I love coaches. As players we were forced to develop a ‘love’ relationship with them because they held our careers in their hands. That’s why you would hardly ever hear a player criticise or condemn his coach even when he knows the coach may be the worst in the world.

We had a great example in Nigeria. Throughout his coaching stint in the national team none of the players (including those that had trained under obviously much better coaches in Europe) was brave enough to tell the world that the particular coach was so bad he could not even coach himself to control a ball!

Let me admit again that I have never really thought coaches are as important as football makes them out to be, even if I also concede that without them the game would not be the same because of the extra drama and dimension they bring to the game. A successful coach is one who wins championships consistently. His successes are listed in the number of laurels and silverware in his chest of trophies.

A good coach is one who produces teams that often play well, always come close to winning trophies, indeed occasionally win one, but manage to leave their imprint on their teams. There are very few truly successful coaches in the world. You can almost list them on your fingertips. Two excellent examples are José Mourinho and Sir Alex Ferguson. Another is the recently retired German maestro Jupp Heynckes.

CIMG9334

The Mark of Success

I was actually looking at Mourinho’s records recently and found that since 2000 when he started his coaching career in Portugal he may only have failed to win a trophy twice in the years from then till now, for the different clubs he coached. That is consistency, the true mark of a successful coach who knows how to win trophies and championships.

Good coaches are also few. In this group would be Arsenal’s Arsène Wenger and Manchester United’s Louis van Gaal. They do not win enough trophies consistently to be listed as ‘successful’ in my humble estimation, even if the rest of the world may think otherwise.

Take Wenger. Many of his fans will swear he is one of the best coaches in Europe, if not the world. But his true worth is diminished with the epilepsy of his winning trophies. Until the FA Cup of last season Wenger has failed to win anything for Arsenal in almost a decade!

Successful coaches necessarily double as good coaches! Good coaches are not necessarily successful. Consistently winning trophies makes the difference.

Most other coaches do not fall within either of the two categories above. They are part of the larger population of ‘failed’ coaches! They are the steppingstones for successful coaches! You find them in most teams, hardly ever winning anything, and always been hired and fired during the seasons.

The Nigerian Example

Let me play a dangerous game here and look at the Nigerian experience. I looked through the history of coaches that have handled Nigeria’s team in the past and started to wonder how they ever got there in the first place.

That's Better, Siasia smiles

What made Berti Vogts, Bora Milutinović, Festus Onigbinde, Shuaibu Amodu, Samson Siasia, Lars Lagerbäck, and many others qualified to coach the team? Were they successful, good or failed coaches at the points of their engagement? Take Clemens Westerhof for example. Although he certainly played a part in Nigeriaʼs second success in the African Cup of Nations in 1994, on what basis was he hired in 1990?

He was a nobody in coaching before he got the job. He spent 5 years before he won the African Cup of Nations and led Nigeria to qualify for the country’s first World Cup. By all standards that is a great achievement that should define the man. But it did not.

It has been 20 years since he left the country. In that time he has coached other teams and won absolutely nothing. He has not even remotely come close to his Nigerian ‘achievements’.

Culprits

So who is that coach who would take on any team and transform them into winners? That’s the man African countries need – a coach with records of tangible achievements that can be counted in trophies and cups, and not one that has no records of any sort, or has Pyrrhic records!

By the way, I am just ranting about coaches after watching Mourinho lose to Laurent Blanc in the European Champions League. What a ‘bad’ match that was with the referee, Bjorn Kuipers – referee with previous form of controversies – as the worst culprit on the night.

Another African Mentality (Part One)

Editorʼs Note

We republish this article now for a number of reasons. Despite only winning the African Cup of Nations once, Claude le Roy has contributed to the development of football in several African nations. He unleashed Samuel Etoʼo on the international stage for Cameroon. He blooded André Ayew for the Black Stars. He coached the Democratic Republic of Congo twice before surprising a few naysayers with the Republic of Congo at the recent African Cup of Nations.

It is often forgotten that a young Frenchman, Hervé Renard got the opportunity to learn from le Roy as his assistant in Ghana. Renard made the most of the opportunity. He went on to make African history, becoming the first coach to win the African Cup of Nations with two different countries, Zambia in 2012 and la Côte dʼIvoire in 2015. Renard credits le Roy for bringing him to Africa.

CIMG2674

Derek Miller

By Satish Sekar © Satish Sekar (December 30th 2009)

An African European

Unlike many of the European coaches plying their trade in Africa Claude le Roy had extensive experience of Africa and African football. He was a student of Africa and immersed himself in the culture of the country. Le Roy loved Africa and had followed Ghana’s football carefully.

His predecessor Ratomir Dujković overplayed his hand and importance after Ghana became the only African country to reach the knockout stage of the World Cup in 2006. Dujković thought himself a Ghanaian national hero, but Africans didnʼt – Ghanaians especially did not share his opinion of himself. The Ghanaian Football Association turned to le Roy.

My father fought for independence of Algeria and was close to Patrice Lumumba in Congo in the first war of independence there”, le Roy told us exclusively. “That means that I was lucky to be brought up in a family so rich in culture. I had writers and journalists around me since my youth”. It is important to le Roy that readers understand the influences that gave him his beliefs in life and also football.

CIMG2647

It is not because I have more culture than others”, he explains “It’s because I was born in a family who was completely open to the world and that gave me a big chance in my life. I think it is not by chance that I work in Africa: in Asia, all around the world, because I wanted to discover different cultures, to respect them, to know them”.

A Special Place

Africa will always have a special place in le Roy’s heart. “I love this continent and I love the people of this continent”, he said. “I come here since I was a kid and I was concerned by the different wars for independence in Africa – first in Algeria, then elsewhere. I have a lot of friends who came from Africa and that nurtured my interest. I was playing with them and I became more interested”.

CIMG2487

The love affair with the continent had begun. “It became more important when I was the head coach of the national team of Cameroon”, le Roy says. “The relationship with my players was fantastic and it came naturally after that”.

He doesnʼt like to compare the African teams that he has coached or their cultures. “There are so many African countries – it’s like Europe, you can’t compare a strange land, a German to a Scandinavian”, he said. “The same thing in Africa”.

And football is no different. “Cameroon – they are very strong in mentality as well”, he said. “You can call them the Germany of Africa. They always, always, always have strong willpower. In Ghana there is the skill of the West African people and Congo has the power of Central Africa in this part of Africa and in Senegal they are very tall. They have huge potential and physical strength and it depends also on the culture in some countries”.

The Pull of the Black Stars

So what attracted him to Ghana and the Black Stars? “In Ghana there are so many cultures”, he said. “There are so many questions, because we bring them so many new religions. They have religions – African religions in Ghana. We cannot change that. Many came. The Ketabi came, Arabs came, but the ways of the African culture is fantastic”.

So what about football? What was the lure of coaching the Black Stars? “It’s easier to be the national coach of Ghana than it is to be of a little country that doesn’t have a lot of professional leagues, because sometimes even the professional players don’t want to come for friendly games”, le Roy explained. “They have all sorts of pressure from their clubs, especially when playing for your national team because you can lose your place. Michael Essien is not afraid to come with Ghana, because he is important to Chelsea, when according to the club he should be there”.

Samuel Eto'o

Le Roy likes to give youth a chance. As Cameroun coach in 1998 he took a chance on a young striker, ensuring that he at least gained some experience at the highest level. “Samuel Eto’o was at the World Cup in France in 1998”, said le Roy. “He was nineteen. I took him. It’s now exactly what we need for the African Cup of Nations, World Cup and for the future”.

Eto’o went on to become the most prolific goal-scorer in the history of the African Cup of Nations.

Le Roy continued his policy of giving youth a chance by giving a début to the teenage son of Ghanaian great Abédi (Pelé) Ayew.

CIMG2646

André Ayew and all the players – they are the leaders of the new generation”, said le Roy. “Stephen Appiah is the skipper on the field. He’s a tactician. He’s really another coach, but Michael’s a little bit shy but he was perfect in his role and it was very good for him to be the captain”.

Le Roy is impressed with his captain and emerging team. “I was surprised with his speaking to the players about technical quality”, le Roy said. “They are very important – all of them. I have not two or three star players. All the players of this team are playing properly, because they are intelligent players. They like to talk about tactical problems of the team. They are fantastic and have great artistry and I enjoy a lot with this team. I’m very proud of them”.

Football – In Tact as Ever (Part Two)

By Traolach Kaye © Traolach Kaye (March 19th 2015)

Shenanigans

The BBCʼs Dan Roan alludes to how offended the Premier League will be by all these shenanigans to host the World Cup in the winter in Qatar to avoid the searing heat of an Arabic summer. That is most odd. English football is all about the Premier League. Clubs are either in the Premier League or aspire to be in it.

Those seeking to give the lie to this will claim that the Championship play-off final is the ʻrichest game in footballʼ … by dint, oddly enough, of the winner being ushered into the Premier League. Should football fans, globally, take umbrage at how the machinations of the Premier League, itself – something of a tyrantsʼ charter – have been upset and knocked marginally out of kilter by the decision to host the 2022 World Cup during the Winter months?

Roanʼs assertion that the FA might be upset as it may interrupt some ceremonially flavoured FA Cup programme – 2022 is the centenary of the Final at Wembley Stadium – is laughable. This presentation of the FA Cup as some Holy of Holies sits uncomfortably with how the event has been policed and how its attendees have been treated – Hillsborough, for example.

CIMG0560

Uncomfortable

It sits uncomfortably with how managers and players treat it. It sits uncomfortably with the stark reality of attendances at FA Cup games with certain clubs, at even advanced stages of the Cup. If it is important, why is it being treated as an after-thought, especially by the big clubs and the prize of qualification for the Europa League being seen as a unwanted burden, even though for some clubs, it is the only possibility of Champions League football.

Take Hull City for example. A lacklustre approach to it saw them dumped out without even reaching the League stage. This in the year that the winner of the Europa League gets into the Championsʼ League. Tottenham Hotspur and Liverpool dropped out in the last 32. Only Everton still fly the flag.

Disproportionate Effects?

If Roan is so concerned that the effect of hosting WC 2022 in the Winter Months will have a disproportionately negative effect on the ʻSmaller Clubsʼ, he would do well to look at how the same ʻSmaller Clubsʼ themselves treat the FA Cup, and how the FA Cup treats them. Name the last non-top flight Club to win the FA Cup?

Southampton, 1976. The last 10 winners are Arsenal, Wigan, Chelsea, Manchester City, Chelsea, Chelsea, Portsmouth, Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal. Who owns those clubs? Portsmouth at the time of their winning the FA Cup in 2008 were owned by Alexander Gaydamak. He had bought the club from Milan Mandarić who was subsequently charged with tax-evasion.

Gaydamak then sold the club to Sulaiman al-Fahim who had acted as spokesperson for Mansour al-Nahyan and smoothed al-Nahyanʼs takeover of Manchester City. Al-Fahim in turn sold the club six weeks later to Ali al-Faraj, a supposed Saudi oil tycoon. Portsmouth went to rack and ruin and who paid the price? The loyal supporters who were the backbone of the club and who ultimately saved the historic club.

By 2013, Portsmouth FC had finally returned to the ownership of the fans themselves, with the club having been bankrupted, relegated three times and almost forced out of existence in the intervening period. But we must keep an eye out for FIFA, it seems.

Fit and Proper

Anybody can own an English football club. They are for sale every day of the week on whatever index you choose to consult. They are open to bids from everyone, irrespective of their morals, their achievements, their politics, their ethics, or the pedigree of their finances. They are not even the Harrods of their time, for which a purchase price AND favour had to be first agreed. Who buys these clubs?

The best known example is everyoneʼs favourite ʻBillionaire from Nowhereʼ, Roman Abramovich – a long-time associate of Vladimir Putin. Abramovich rose from nothing to dominate the Russian aluminium and gas sector, after being the understudy of Boris Beresovsky who was subsequently found dead at home in March 2013 soon after a protracted legal battle with Abramovich ended badly for Beresovsky.

Other noted humanists such as Thaksin Shinawatra, Tom Hicks, George Gillette, Mike Ashley, Vincent Tan, Venkatesh Rao, the al-Mubaraks, Alisher Usmanov and the aforementioned al-Fahims, Gaydamaks, al-Farajs, Mandarićs, etc. either own outright, have owned outright, possess, or have had strong financial interests in various English clubs.

Chicken factories. Bangladeshi sweatshops. Human rights abusers. Leveraged buyout merchants. Corporate raiders. Oligarchs. Oil tycoons. Silicon valley entrepreneurs. Eastern-Bloc businessmen. But look out for FIFA.

CIMG0207

Mike Ashley, owner of Newcastle United has used his position to try take advantage of the collapse of Glasgow Rangers such that Rangers was in danger of becoming a satellite club of Newcastle United. But look out for FIFA.

Universal Problem

This is not alone an English problem. Perspective is loaned to the matter when one considers that Real Madrid have agreed a £350m deal with a construction company owned by a member of the family that owns Manchester City. These clubs are supposedly in competition. They are instead each otherʼs keepers. This is supposedly the football that we should be worried will be ʻtorn apartʼ by a tournament being hosted in the Winter months – a tournament 7 years now.

No self-respecting journalist capable of even the slightest abstract thought could possibly find themselves offended uniquely by FIFAʼs alleged corruption juxtaposed as it is against the backdrop painted above. A brief examination of those invited to do business in England, and fêted for doing same, says a lot about this. 

England held its nose and took its reluctant place at the trough in the run up to the decision to award the World Cups for 2018 and 2022 respectively. Had England walked away early-doors and refused to have anything to do with the selection process, then we might have avoided the entire saga. Instead, the tit-for-tat will continue, presumably up and until such a stage as England is awarded a World Cup to host.

And letʼs remember that three-times beaten finalists the Netherlands have never hosted the World Cup, let alone suffered a long delay waiting for it to return. Isnʼt it their turn first?

FC Barçelona On My Mind

Segun at Wembley

by Segun Odegbami © Segun Odegbami (March 2nd 2015)

Fan

I guess every reader of this column knows by now that I am a fan of FC Barçelona. I love the team because, like me, they are football purists, always winning by playing the better football, cleanly, clearly, and on the field – never in the boardroom. In the past decade, it is hard to find many lovers of football that have not been captivated by the club’s achievements, its football brand and philosophy, its youth academy and its very exceptionally gifted players.

Without question, FC Barçelona have been the team of the 21st Century, winning the world’s most coveted club trophy three times since 2000, getting to the semi-finals six times, and the quarter finals twice. Compare this to Bayern Munich and Real Madrid, which have won it twice each in that period, although, under José Mourinho, Real Madrid had a semi-final hoodoo, broken by Carlo Ancelotti winning the historic ʻLa Décimaʼ last season against cross-town rivals Atlético de Madrid.

Nevertheless, to the chagrin of Realʼs supporters, there is no question of who has played the better football and been more successful this century. It is clearly the Camp Nouʼs finest. This century the world has been treated to a brand of football that had never been seen previously in the history of the game.

The Blueprint

Tiki-Taka was a deliberate style of football conceived in Barçelona’s youth academy, complimented by acquiring some of the best players in the world – but many of Barçelona’s young players, not only held their own in élite company, they went on to play for Spain and made them World Champions for the first time in their history and the only nation to win and retain the European Championship.

Tiki-Taka became an art exhibition on display every week and everywhere FC Barçelona played. The team taught the rest of the world the ultimate art of ball possession, the quick one-two passing and movements, the short interchange of passes, back and forth and sideways, the players running and pressing when they lose possession, and maintaining a fluid but intricate organised pattern of movements all the time like a well-oiled machine.

With this style of play the team simply ran rings around most opposing teams. They were a delight to watch, even though critics of their style began to describe them as boring and rather monotonous. In the past decade, particularly, the ultimate challenge for European club managers was how to decode the team’s play. In the past three years a few have succeeded.

Real Madrid and Atlético de Madrid in Spain and Bayern Munich in Germany discovered the antidote and reduced Barçaʼs impact and dominance. FC Barçelona needed to do something different to compete to win the UEFA Championsʼ League again.

The New Era

As great players aged – not even Barçelona have discovered the elixir of perpetual youth – a new style was needed too. Barçelonaʼs captain supreme Xavi Hernández i Creus doesnʼt play so much now, but Andrés Iniesta Lujáremains an integral part of the new machine.

I have just watched Barçelona FC take Manchester City FC to the cleaners in the first leg of the round of 16. It was a very emphatic and comprehensive performance that captured the essence of a ‘new’ FC Barçelona.

What is clear is that Tiki-Taka has been dismantled and is metamorphosing into something new, something less dramatic but, potentially more exciting and more deadly when the ‘concoction’ fully matures!

The old Barça played with 7 or more midfield players without a permanent striker upfront. Now, from outside the influence of the Barçelona youth academy, the team has been experimenting with new players for two seasons. FC Barçelona may have returned to the conventional style of European club football but they have created a new headache for European club managers.

The price that Barça have had to pay for this new formation is a midfield and defence that now look less compact with more open spaces for opposing teams to play. FC Barçelona are no less exciting than they once were, are less patient in attack than they once were, are less dominant in ball possession than they were previously, and less imposing on opposing teams than they once were. But for everything that they now are in deficit over, they make up for it with a striking partnership of three of the best goal scorers on the planet in their team!

In Neymar da Silva Santos Júnior (Neymar), Luis Suárez Díaz and Lionel Messi Cuccittini, FC Barçelona now have a dream attacking formation almost unmatched by any other team with the exception of Real Madrid.

Questions

Having said all of that the question now arises: can the new FC Barçelona win the 2014/2015 UEFA Champions League? I run a betting shop so I know a good wager when I see one. This one is not. I will not put my money on FC Barçelona winning the Champions League this season.

Do not get me wrong. With a little bit of luck they can win it but the chances of that happening, in my humble estimation, are slim. Looking at how they have been playing this season, with Tiki-Taka dismantled, and a new style still developing, it may require the experience of one more season for the emerging philosophy to take a firm hold and make them champions once again.

Lionel Messi – Back and Better

Lionel Messi’s lethargic performance at the World Cup cost him a great deal. All he needed to do was alter his mindset and commit one hundred percent to the cause and lead Argentina to win the World Cup. That feat would have earned him the highest honour in the history of football – the best footballer that ever lived.

But something happened to him during the World Cup that I still cannot fathom. He did not play with the spirit of one that wanted to win very badly. He ‘strolled’ through the matches, and even got to the final playing without conviction and fire in the eyes. When Argentina lost Messi lost even more.

As a result, no one raised an eyebrow or complained when a few months later the hard-working, but obviously less talented Cristiano Ronaldo stole the show again and took away the crown of World’s best player from him again. Ronaldo thoroughly deserved it and it appeared as if the spirit to win had left Messi.

Now here comes a new season and suddenly, for the first time in a long while, Barçelona FC and Messi are back. Lionel Messi is playing spiritedly again. It is quite apparent in the way he plays these days, chasing and running around, joining in defending when his team loses possession, getting involved more than ever before during play, and playing his team from the front through physical effort.

It reminds me of the Messi of the early days of his career. He anchored Barçelona FC’s unique brand of football that dominated world football in the past decade. At that time there was no disputing the fact that in Barçelona and Messi the world had the best team and the best player respectively.

For Lionel Messi there is no doubt in my mind that he is the greatest to have ever played football. He may not have the complete range of skills like Pelé, or almost singled-handedly led his country to win the World Cup like Maradona, but in terms of sheer natural ability and affinity with the ball at his feet, there has never been a better player.

There is a magnetic relationship between his left foot and the ball that makes him do almost anything with it at will, almost effortlessly. It is hard to put into words his ease and comfort on the ball, his dribbling ability even in the tightest of corners, how he wriggles between defenders, how he rides tackles, how he glides and races past defenders, how he makes difficult shots look so easy, how he makes goal scoring a habit.

From what I have seen of Messi this current season, if all goes well and he remains injury free, he is set to extend his grip on world football. He will likely win the World’s best player award again for an unassailable 5th time. And probably the world will now accept, as I have claimed over and over again, that there has been no player like Lionel Messi in the history of football!

Football – In Tact as Ever (Part One)

by Traolach Kaye © Traolach Kaye (March 4th 2015)

Hmmm!

CIMG0560

Qatar 2022: World Cup fall-out could tear football apart …” – Dan Roan BBC Sports-editor

If they donʼt believe it, why are they saying it, if they do believe it, they shouldnʼt be soccer analysts, so one way or another, they are wrong. Sometimes when you see these clowns…..well, then, you would have to wonder not about my sanity, but the BBCʼs sanity …”

The latter quote was made by the Former Manchester United and Milwall player, Eamon Dunphy, reflecting on BBC Match-of-The-Day Pundits during the 2006/2007 Premier League Season. So where does this leave us?

Weʼve been here before. Either the BBC donʼt believe what they are broadcasting or publishing, or they have gone mad. If they do believe it, they arenʼt fit for purpose, that purpose being to follow their mission, ʻTo enrich peopleʼs lives with programmes and services that inform, educate and entertainʼ.

So, what is the BBC saying? In perfect keeping with the tone of their attack which commenced with gusto on December 2nd 2010, the BBC continue to react to every utterance by and announcement of FIFA with a contrary response which both finds fault with whatever pronouncement FIFA has offered whilst seeking to always remind the viewer/reader that FIFA is corrupt, is upsetting football, is racist, is out of touch, hates women, and is just generally no good.

The New Mission

The BBC is no opinion-piece merchant. Funded by the taxpayer, and with an explicit mission to ʻenrich, entertain and educateʼ, they appear capable only of one of above trifecta, namely entertainment. 

Entertaining their own opinion, entertaining the opinion of conventional wisdom, entertaining the opinion of whatever agenda must be pushed, foisted and promoted until the target audience is left in no two minds about how things are and how things must be. Regarding FIFA, they operate a one-size-fits-all policy, employing key words in their riposte, irrespective of what it is that FIFA may have said.

Roan doesnʼt run the BBC, and is merely an agent of same. He is however the sports-editor of the BBC News. Fresh from goading, rather than entertaining, informing or educating Liverpool fans during the protracted takeover of the club by Fenway Sports Group (then a Sports Correspondent) Roan now today finds himself charged with spearheading BBCʼs latest thrust against that perennial threat to Global Peace and Harmony – FIFA.

Knock, Knock, Knocking

The door of FIFA has been kicked, yet the rest of the rotten structure seems not at all close to crashing down. FIFA, the masters of largesse, have pushed out the boat in many quarters, Brazil, Japan, South Korea, South Africa and now Russia and Qatar. This largesse has made them very popular, especially in Asia and Africa.

It is no surprise that these are confederations that have many votes, which comes in handy at election time. Carry Asia and Africa and simple arithmetic tells the result – a lesson some have not grasped. Sepp Blatter certainly understood it.

Blatter and Hayatou 6

FIFAʼs major product – the World Cup – is something nations compete with each other to host. Football is increasingly popular and is the dominant global sport. England wanted to host the 2018 World Cup and failed to get enough votes. The results were a national embarrassment. It was not a bad bid, but it was out of step with FIFAʼs intentions and also those of individual federations.

Ever since, we have been treated to a monologue on the ills of FIFA. We are now expected to believe that Football itself is on the very verge of destruction because FIFA has decided to host the 2022 World Cup during the ʻWinterʼ of that year.

What is Football?

Football? Torn Apart? What is football? What does somebody mean when they say ʻFootballʼ. Do they mean the ball itself? Football, the game or sport? Football, the TV slot? Football, the Industry? 

When Roan and the BBC opine that ʻFootball could be torn apartʼ, they think, or more accurately want us to think, that they are talking about football in the Global, organized grass-roots sense of the word.

Football associations, football clubs, jumpers-for-goalposts, Football tournaments, the very fabric of football itself, the very essence of the game, is at risk. Uncle Sepp is going to get us all. In fact, the BBC are are referring, perhaps blithely, to their own narrow, oblique view of what football is and what football is about. Football the business, football….our businessOur gameThe game we gave the WorldThis thing of ours. 

Outraged?

It is no great leap to suggest that their contrived outrage stems from a sense of loss, a sense of exclusion, that they are no longer running the show and are merely instead a bit part of an organization that pays them no heed.

Third-party private organizations are entitled to organize their events as they see fit. It is up to other parties how they respond to this. Jérôme Valcke, FIFAʼs General Secretary, has told people to “Get on with it”. BBC pundits Danny Mills and Phil Neville agree with Valcke, but Roan has responded by kicking and screaming. He could do worse than consider the sentiments of the aforementioned home-grown pundits and others who have asked candidly, “Whatʼs the problem”?

The problem is that certain people have a bee in their bonnet about FIFA and rather than express it, they prefer to engage in tangential oblique nonsense. Mr Roan wants the reader to consider how the Winter World Cup imposes on the ʻCherished Festive Fixture Programmeʼ. It is lovely alliteration. It is also terrible reason. This ʻFestive Fixture Programmeʼ is not in fact a programme as much as it is semi-organized chaos, itself the subject of no small perennial, year-round criticism by domestic parties, It is bemoaned and criticized by players and managers alike, all year, every year. It is not liked. It is due for reform.

Hedged Bets

The author has hedged his bets. Perhaps aware that the ʻfestive disruptionʼ claim was as tenuous as it was false, Roan claims that More international friendlies are almost certain to be sacrificed.”  But International Friendlies are themselves the bane of the very Premier League whose best interests Mr Roan says are being interfered with.

However, we know how important some of these international friendlies can be. Consider one in particular. England tried to do business with Jack Warner by travelling to Trinidad & Tobago for a nothing friendly in 2008 in order to court Warner into providing support in CONCACAF to vote for England to host the World Cup of 2018. It was a fiasco as extracts of Michael Garciaʼs report on corruption in FIFA show. FIFA gleefully released those extracts, which suggested that Warner et al received a quid pro quo from that ill-advised friendly.

After this match Warner was exposed as corrupt and quit FIFA, exposing some of his dealings with the very dubious former head of the USAʼs federation, Chuck Blazer. Warner has a history – he was caught selling his complimentary tickets for the 2006 World Cup. He paid it back and it was business as usual until Blazer, once Warnerʼs protégé, decided that his apprenticeship had lasted long enough and tried to oust Warner.

It is conveniently forgotten that the fall of Qatari football executive and once cheer-leader of Blatterʼs 1998 bid for the Presidency of FIFA, Mohamed bin Hammam, was originally expelled from FIFA due to his attempt to ʻbuyʼ Warnerʼs influence for his own Presidential bid – exposed by Blazer. The American is no whistle-blowing anti-corruption pioneer. Blazer was neck-high in Warnerʼs shenanigans. But Warner was targeted by England to help their World Cup bid. Does this not question their anti-corruption credentials?

IronCIMG6958

England now wants to talk about corruption, but what was the football reason for the 2008 fixture in the Caribbean? What did then England manager Fabio Capello gain or learn from it? Did Capello request that particular opponent and if so why? For FIFA, attack became the best form of defence – given an open goal by the FA.

Perhaps England would do well to hold her tongue. but they try to berate FIFAʼs corruption. The BBC was at least consistent. Andrew Jennings has highlighted FIFAʼs corruption issues long before it became fashionable to do so. The FA complained that the BBCʼs Panorama programmeʼs exposé of corruption in FIFA on the eve of the vote impacted negatively on Englandʼs doomed bid.

A cursory examination of recent events lends no small credence to the opinion that England should keep its counsel. England had hoped to host the 2018 World Cup which instead went to Russia – worse still the Russia of Putins, Abramovichs, Usmanovs and Berezovsksy, etc.

England was shocked – outraged even. They had after all run a ʻgreat campaignʼ, part of which had been courting the influence of Jack Warner. Their bid had been officially presented by Prince William, nephew of Prince Andrew, the former trade envoy who told the Serious Fraud Office to keep out of the British Aerospace deal with Saudi Arabia. Glass houses?

Mayweather vs Pacquaio – The Biggest Fight of All Time or Just The Biggest Fight of Right Now?

By Traolach Kaye © Traolach Kaye (February 26th 2015)

Fight of the Century?

Five years later than originally desired, and with both combatants having shown significant signs of physical decline, Floyd Mayweather and Emmanuel ʻMannyʼ Pacquaio will finally face each other on May 2nd 2015 at the MGM Grand Garden Arena, Nevada.

Billed as the ʻFight of the Centuryʼ (we are less than 15 years into said Century) the title may be – albeit unintentionally – perfectly accurate. The last great ʻsuperfightʼ, fittingly at the same weight limit of 147 pounds, between Oscar De La Hoya and Felix Trinidad, took place in September 1999 and was billed as the ʻFight of the Millenniumʼ, by which stage we were at least some 999 years into the millennium in question.

That fight, which purported to determine the Championship of the Welterweight Division, ended in farce as a seemingly-dominant (but hardly destructive) De La Hoya faded badly down the stretch and elected to run for the final three rounds. Trinidad finished the stronger of the pair and was awarded, bizarrely, a majority-decision victory. A big fight, yes. A great fight, no.

Most boxing fans have steered clear of the more acute hyperbole, preferring to refer to the fight as being just ʻBigʼ. How then, is a ʻBigʼ fight defined?

Distinctions

Before we begin, we draw a distinction between ʻBigʼ and ʻGreatʼ, with ʻBigʼ applying to fights which are scheduled but yet to take place and ʻGreatʼ applied to those fights which have reached stirring conclusions, irrespective of how they were billed or how eagerly they were anticipated.

Boxing cannot be viewed or interpreted in a vacuum. It is a unique sport in that it is a fringe sport with the potential to, at a momentʼs notice, and for one night only, go Global. In this regard, Pacquaio vs Mayweather may well be the biggest fight of this Century, of All-Time, of Right-Now depending on what criteria we apply.

There are fights which mean nothing to the overall historical perspective of boxing but which attract interest and notoriety beyond the talents and accomplishments of the individual participants. Arturo Gatti vs Mickey Ward. Jerry Quarry vs Ron Lyle. Diego Corrales vs José Luis Castillo. Fights which lacked either pedigree, prodigy, or both. Stand-alone bouts, maybe even Championship bouts, that we either looked forward to, or looked back on with fondness, but which did not significantly shape the sport or alter its route in any appreciable fashion.

Mayweather vs Pacquaio may not fall squarely into this category but it comes a lot closer than many might assume.

If the named fights represent the entry-level ʻBig Fightʼ that every hardcore fan wants to see, or recalls with fondness, then Lewis-Tyson, amogst others, expands on the general concept.

Tysonʼs notoriety, violent pre-fight outbursts and the ridiculous perception embedded in the minds of die-hard Tyson fans that Mike was somehow the perfect foil to the ʻchinnyʼ, ʻvulnerableʼ Lennox Lewis, combined to create an event which was far greater than the sum of its individual parts, those parts being a fragmented heavyweight title, a good champion in Lewis, a finished-fighter in Mike Tyson and an average venue in Louisiana.

However this fight did have pedigree and it did have prodigy. Both men either were, or had been, outstanding Champions, and Lewis would go on to cede his title upon retirement, but only after a dogged wretched victory over Vitali Klitschko, who absolutely went on to become the Heavyweight Champion and defend that title.

Lewis, however awkwardly, passed the torch on.

Ticking Boxes

There are then the fights which tick all the boxes. George Foreman vs Muhammad Ali, Sugar Ray Leonard vs Roberto Durán, Joe Frazier vs Muhammad Ali I and possibly III, Sugar Ray Leonard vs Thomas Hearns I. 

It helps that all of the above were exciting bouts, but before they were fought the conclusion had been reached that they were ʻBigʼ fights. The pedigree of the combatants, their proximity to their respective physical peaks, the title at stake, the cross-over appeal between the boxing community and the broader public, the subsequent flourishing careers of both men … were all satisfied to one extent or another.

Does Mayweather vs Pacquaio therefore stay within the rubric of what a ʻBigʼ fight is?

It depends on who one asks.

To some in the boxing community, it is undoubtedly a big fight. We may take this with a pinch of salt, due regard being had to the physical decline of both men. Originally billed for 2008, the intervening period has culminated with Mayweatherʼs recent ʻstrugglesʼ with little more than a glorified bar-brawler in Marcos Maidana. Pacquiao has had his own struggles, being knocked out cold by Juan Manuel Márquez and going the distance with the solid if underwhelming likes of Chris Algieri, Brandon Rios and Tim Bradley.

The Biggest Fight Now?

Is it the biggest fight in Boxing right now? Yes, it is, but simply because there is nothing else comparable out there. The pedigree of both men is assured but not beyond revision. Mayweather cautiously cherry-picked his way up from 135lbs. He fought an ancient Shane Mosley and an ancient, part-time Oscar De La Hoya. He put off fighting Pacquaio for five years. He fought Ricky Hatton at 147 and only fought Miguel Cotto after Cotto had been through the ringer vs Pacquaio and Antonio Margarito.

Pacquaio for his end has been dogged by accusations of performance-enhancing impropriety and has, recently, been knocked cold. Neither Mayweather nor Pacquaio have scored a knock-out victory in years and the suspicion is that both men have agreed to fight merely because each has exhausted whatever cluster of fighters his respective network permitted him to fight.

Aspersions?

Aspersions therefore must be cast on the ʻBigʼ nature of the fight, ab initio.

Hardcore fans of this fight will claim that Cotto was still good, going on to beat Middleweight Champ Sergio Martínez. Some basic examination of this superficially sound observation reveals it to be little more than a trite convenience. Martínez, already pushing 40 years of age, had been showing serious signs of decline before being dragged down to 159lbs to fight Cotto, an example of the ridiculous inequality of bargaining power that riddles the sport.

An old, drained and injury-prone Martínez had already arguably been beaten by Martin Murray in Argentina and was within one clean blow of losing to the utterly disinterested and undeserving Julio César Chávez Jr.

Interestingly, the very same American fight fans who are such religious observers of alleged ʻrobberiesʼ in Germany saw fit to look the other way when Murray twice floored Martínez.

Martínez was no more a Middleweight Champ than he was a Middleweight by the time he fought Cotto. Cotto himself was half-ruined by the time he fought Mayweather, and his purported ʻtriumphʼ over Martínez does nothing to detract from that reality.

Then there also are questions regarding the progeny of Mayweather vs Pacquaio. The suspicion is that both men have exhausted their supply of easy, money-making cannon fodder and have been steered into this fight by Networks tired of the expensive soporific meander that both men have been on as of recent.

Preposterous

Should Mayweather win, he will be undoubtedly steered towards another ʻEpicʼ, ʻMassiveʼ showdown with the alleged Middleweight Champion, Miguel Cotto. Any serious fight fan not already smiling wryly at this preposterous charade could do worse than to ask themselves why the consensus-best Middleweight on Earth, Gennady Golovkin, is being studiously avoided by Cotto.

Cotto, desperate to fight Mayweather again at 160 for a massive pay-day, will not risk his title against a man sure to obliterate him. This is justified on the grounds that Golovkin, an undefeated former World and Olympic amateur star, is not a ʻPay Per View Forceʼ. His not getting a fight with Floyd Mayweather is justified on the grounds that he is ʻMuch bigger than Floydʼ. Mayweather fought De La Hoya at 154 pounds in 2007 and paid Juan Manuel Márquez $600,000 as compensation for coming in over the agreed weight limit for their fight in 2009. This perversion is loaned added hilarity by the suggestion that Golovkin, a Middleweight, can alleviate this injustice by fighting much bigger men, like Sergei Kovalev.

Pause them to consider these points. We have Cotto loitering at 160, freezing out Golovkin, like Marvin Hagler, and Tiger Flowers and others were frozen out in their time. We have Mayweather fans claiming that his win over Cotto was good by dint of Cottoʼs win over Martínez . We have Cotto and Floyd refusing to fight Golovkin and Cotto holding out for a pay-day with Floyd after Floyd has finally beaten somebody he should have fought years ago.

Newspeak

Clearly, those looking to tell us that this is a Big Fight based solely on boxing criteria have been obliged to come up with some magical thinking, some Orwellian Newspeak, to convince us that the opposite is the case. Accordingly, they have injected new impetus into their claim with phrases such as ʻPay Per View Forceʼ, ʻPound For Pound Greatnessʼ, ʻPublic Imaginationʼ, (the public must clearly have one, after all, they regard Miguel Cotto as the Middleweight Champ), ʻAmerican Audiencesʼ, ʻLive Gatesʼ and ʻTV Figuresʼ.

This fight will sell and will make more money than any other fight before it. Apparently this is what counts. Notwithstanding the fact that Foreman and Ali were paid bigger purses – $5m is worth over $30m in todayʼs money – the ʻfiguresʼ for this fight will be unprecedented. For years now social-media has dictated what is hot and what is not. Mayweather is heavily hooked into this set-up and Pacquaio – in a more traditional, iconic form – offers an aspirational image to the destitute of the Philippines.

Intriguing

None of this has anything to do with boxing per se, however. The next biggest fight out there for either man, irrespective of who wins, is against another man that both men have already soundly beaten, the afore-mentioned Cotto, who, as discussed earlier, is masquerading as the Middleweight Champion.

At least with De La Hoya vs Trinidad, there was an impression that the winner would be the Consensus best 147lb fighter on the planet. When that did not materialize, at least both Trinidad and Oscar went on to engage in a great many meaningful fights. I see no such outlook for Floyd and Manny. Both are much much closer to retirement than Trinidad or De La Hoya were. A fight with Cotto would reek of farce and convenience.

Mayweather vs Pacquaio is a good fight. It is an intriguing fight. It is an interesting fight. I will watch it. I might even pay to watch it, but I will not be regarding it as closing any chapters nor opening any new ones. I advise fans to approach it with the same mentality. Coming as it is five years too late, the outcome will not satisfactorily tell us who was the better man. Given the charade that is likely to follow, and the advancing years of both men, the fight has no progeny worthy of the name. Enjoy this fight by all means, but approach it, and depart from it likewise, with no small caution.

Respect

by Satish Sekar © Satish Sekar (February 21st 2015)

Reputations

CIMG9735

Carlos Velasco Carballo rapidly established himself as Spainʼs top referee since deciding to concentrate on officiating in 2010. He had built up a reputation as a firm but fair referee – one who managed to combine a disciplinarian streak with letting the game flow. This was quite an achievement. It was not unusual for there to be several yellow cards and the odd red card too.

Armed with the appropriate FIFA badge, Velasco Carballo refereed his first international in 2008. His first season refereeing past qualifiers for the Championʼs League coincided with a meteoric rise. In that season he was awarded the 2011 Europa League Final in Dublin. Radamel Falcao García Zárate – then playing for Porto – set a Europa League (UEFA Cup) record for goals scored in the competition.

It was a niggly match settled by a solitary goal scored by Falcao and liberally peppered by fouls and cards. 42 fouls resulted in eight yellow cards. This was a typical Velasco Carballo performance. The following season, he continued where he left off. Velasco Carballo refereed 19 Primera División matches and brandished 16 red cards.

He was Spainʼs representative at Euro2012 ahead of the more experienced Alberto Undiano Mallenco. He refereed the opening match in Poland against Greece. Sokratis Papasthapoulos was controversially sent off, having received two unfortunate yellow cards.

Stock

CIMG9677

Velasco Carballoʼs stock plummeted at the World Cup in the wretched quarter-final between Brasil and Colombia. Some say the occasion got to him, but that does not explain his performance. It wasnʼt just the record tally of fouls – 54 – some of which were appalling. Flagrant encroachment at a free-kick was not only unpunished, but rewarded. It was a performance that defied explanation.

He permitted over 40 offences before brandishing a yellow card in that match in Fortaleza and the first was for a comparatively trivial offence compared to what had gone before and later. FIFA insists that there was no directive to referees to show leniency when it came to showing cards and refused to criticise Velasco Carballoʼs performance in Fortaleza.

CIMG9671

Diego Maradona and Falcao were scathing in their criticism, but they werenʼt to know that Velasco Carballo had officiated against type. It remained to be seen how the Spaniard would perform post Fortaleza. If FIFA was correct and there was no directive then Velasco Carballo must have chosen to abandon his previous style and referee in an alien fashion, which he would no doubt stick to.

The Renaissance

His reputation had taken a mauling during the World Cup. But the signs were there after the World Cup that Velasco Carballo had refereed that match in an alien manner. Last December he refereed Eibar versus Valencia. There were 21 fouls, but 10 yellow cards, four in the last ten minutes. His first match of the new year took place on January 3rd between Sevilla and Celta de Vigo. There were 45 fouls. Velasco Carballo showed nine yellow cards and one red.

It was nowhere near as dirty a match as that infamous quarter-final. A league match between Real Sociedad and Villarreal last month had 24 fouls. He brandished ten yellow cards and a red card too. Just over a month ago he refereed a local encounter Levante versus Elche. Velasco Carballo showed a red card to David Navarro after just 6 minutes. He also showed six yellow cards. There were 26 fouls in the match. Clearly, this was not a referee who would not use his cards if the offence warranted it in Spain. What about in European competition?

He officiated the match between Schalke04 and Maribor in September. There were 24 fouls and five yellow cards were shown, all in the second half. He refereed FCK versus Bayer Leverkusen last August. Each side committed 12 fouls. He showed six yellow cards. Anderlechtʼs home defeat by Arsenal resulted in just three yellow cards with 27 fouls. Ajax beat the Cypriots APOEL comfortably at home in December. The 4-0 drubbing had 16 fouls, 8 each. Two Cypriot players were the only ones booked. It was hardly a dirty match deserving a flurry of cards.

His latest international after the World Cup was a Euro2016 qualifier between Iceland and the Netherlands. Iceland won 2-0. There were 23 fouls and only one booking – Nigel de Jong in the last ten minutes. But all of these statistics donʼt necessarily tell the whole story – not all fouls deserve cards. I have seen only two of his matches since the World Cup – Sevilla versus Celta de Vigo and last Thursdayʼs Europa League tie at White Hart Lane. His performances were true to form. Fortaleza was an aberration.

The Return

CIMG9735

Fans of los Cafeteros present at White Hart Lane would be forgiven a double take or two at his performance on Thursday night. It was the same referee who lost control of the quarter-final between Brasil and Colombia. There was never any danger of a repeat dose tonight as long as there were no ludicrous directives. It soon became clear that there were not.

Just three minutes into the match those familiar with the style and performances of Madrid-based referee Carlos Velasco Carballo – remember him – saw a familiar sight. The real Velasco Carballo jogging over to Spursʼ right wing with intent. Gonzalo Rodríguez brought down Andros Townsend. It was a bad foul that deserved a booking and got one.

Velasco Carballo had made it clear where his line was and the match quickly settled down. There was no danger that this would degenerate into foul fare. The referee was in control. The whole match had 24 fouls and just three yellow cards. The refereeʼs authority was never in doubt and it flowed. There was no need for more cards. This is the real Carlos Velasco Carballo.