Monthly Archives: June 2013

Happy Days Are Here Again – Bring On the New Season!

Good Riddance, Taggart

Good Riddance, Taggart

The best football season since the mid-eighties (apart from 1991-92, obviously) is almost upon us.  Despite the recession, austerity, bankers bonuses and the scandalous price of a pint, I’ve rarely felt so positive and optimistic about the immediate future.  Even the fact that Leeds United are crap, and will almost certainly remain crap despite the best efforts of poor old Brian McDermott, my outlook is one of sunny anticipation and excitement for the feast of football that awaits my tired and cynical old eyes.  And why?  I’ll tell you why. It’s because Fergie’s gone, that’s why.  Say it again and say it with relish.  Fergie.  Is. GONE.

Don’t get me wrong.  It wasn’t his annoying habit of winning things for the Mighty Man U that bothered me.  It wasn’t his oft-paraded bloody stop-watch held up as a mute instruction to the ref regarding time-keeping.  It wasn’t even his arrogance over whether he chose to adhere to various rules which bound other managers, things like press interviews, his notorious BBC ban, stuff like that.  The fact that he clearly considered himself above mere rules was irritating, but not on its own the reason why I loathed him so much.  It was none of these things in isolation.  And after all, when he lost it was such a pleasure.  Thank you Leeds in ’92, Blackburn in ’95, City in ’12 and a few others.  But it didn’t happen often enough, and really, he was almost as horrific in defeat as he was in – shudder – triumph.

The real problem with Fergie was the sheer, all-round, ever-present, all-pervading unpleasantness of the man.  His particular brand of arrogant Glaswegian gittery and the way in which he held sway over the entire game and media too – the whole Fergie package – that’s what got my goat.  Whoever we support, we’ll have had managers who crossed the line in this or that respect, and made you see why fans of other clubs regarded them as less than nice.  But Ferguson exceeded all these limits, most of the time – and not in a good way.  Comical defeats apart, I really can’t think of a solitary redeeming feature.  If I absolutely HAD to put my finger on one thing that annoyed me above all else – it was the demeanour of the man when he was happy, when he’d just won or when Man U had scored a goal.  Sadly, these events happened all too often, and the results were always utterly repellent.  When the Mighty Reds scored, there he’d be, emerging from his dug-out in that annoying daft old man shuffle, fists clenched and waving in uncoordinated celebration, casting a glance of odious triumphalism at the sullen members of the opposition coaching staff, champing away happily on his ever-present wad of gum while his nose throbbed an ugly shade of victorious purple.  A most unpleasant sight.

Happily though, it is one we shall behold no more.  Fergie has retired upstairs, where his baleful presence need be of concern only to the inheritor of the poisoned chalice, David Moyes Esq.  Moyes may wish to cast his mind back 43 years to the effect a newly-retired but still-powerful-in-the-background Busby had on HIS successor.  But that is his problem.  All we need wish is that an early and unceremonious exit for Moyes – should he fail – isn’t a signal for the caretaker return of the Govan Guv’nor, just when we all thought that nightmare was over.  Perish the thought.

So I’m really looking forward to a Fergie-less season, and even to the slight bewilderment of the assembled media, who will be wondering where to brown-nose, who to target for their obsequious flattery.  Again, their bereft sadness is not my problem.  I’m just going to enjoy the football scene as it will appear to me – bright and shiny, replete with promise and optimism after the removal of that horrible, nasty man.  Man U will be that bit more difficult to hate, with the really-quite-likeable Moyes in charge, however long that lasts. But I’ll manage, it’s in my DNA as a fan of the One True United after all.  And Mourinho is back, and Wenger is still there – men you can’t help but respect and admire.  It’s going to be a good season in the Premier League, something I can really enjoy for once, whatever my beloved Leeds United do to screw things up one division lower.

And it’s all thanks to That Man finally being gone. Hallelujah!!

Birds of a Feather: From Screen to Stage – and Back Again?

Birds of a Feather

Birds of a Feather

This article first appeared on “The Public Reviews” which aims to provide an informed critique in a wide range of theatrical productions as well as reviewing new album releases. It appears that, having made a successful transition from screen to stage, the story of the Birds of a Feather may be due to make a TV comeback, with the BBC considering a new series for the three main characters, Sharon, Tracey and Dorien.

The current fashion for stage adaptations of legendary TV sitcoms has spawned a number of notable successes, the steep challenge for the actors generally being: get as close as possible to the characters as created by much-loved original performers on the telly. No such issue arises here; the original Birds of a Feather, Linda Robson, Pauline Quirke and Lesley Joseph, happily still flock together – and the chemistry so evident in the TV show of the eighties and nineties manages to rekindle itself, and how, on stage 15 years or more later. With contemporary references liberally sprinkled throughout the script, getting the laughs as well as firmly establishing the situation in the 21st century here and now, the overall effect is one of an old favourite given a smart new coat of paint and an air of the fresh and new on a familiar and fondly-remembered theme.

Things have moved on in the lives of the archetypal Essex girl sisters Sharon & Tracey, and their wantonly nympho neighbour Dorien. Neither of the girls are with their former jailbird partners, for differing reasons, and Dorien has been adventuring elsewhere until her own misfortunes prompt a reunion with her old friends. The three are back in the old routine almost immediately with a round-robin of insults and bitchiness, some well-intended, others of a more crudely visceral nature. The technique of the “false corpse” is put to good use as well; one of the ladies may appear to crack a smile not called-for in the script – the actors’ dreaded “corpsing”. But it’s sometimes intended, as here, and it then has the desired effect of drawing the audience in and making them feel involved with what’s going on up there on stage. This of course they love, and they laugh and applaud accordingly, feeling part of a shared experience – which is a big beacon of success for any theatrical comedy.

The stage, of course, presents challenges rather different to those presented by acting in front of a camera, but the three main characters make an effortless transition. There are some sparkling moments, of high comedy and low ribaldry alike, and the rapport between the three – such a memorable feature of the original TV incarnation – is still very much in evidence, especially when they are relaxing into banter between themselves. This central triumvirate is the Alpha and Omega of a show that doesn’t do more than pay lip service to offering anything else. The supporting actors are up against it in having to create new characters against the tried-and-tested expertise of Quirke, Joseph and Robson. That they largely fail to make any real impression is somehow inevitable and does not detract from the overall effect – which is quite delightful.

The problem with the sub-plot is that it is rather thin. The problem with the main plot is that it is even thinner. But no amount of murder, betrayal, deceit or family issues can detract from the main point of the evening’s entertainment. The fact is that both plots are incidental to this point, namely the provision of a theatrical vehicle for the revival of one of the most memorable and witty comedy trios of recent times. In this, the show succeeds brilliantly, and the inadequacies of the two-thread storyline are forgotten and forgiven as the ladies go about their work.

The result is a technically brilliant exposition of a comedic triangular relationship between the two sisters and their erstwhile neighbour. The point of attack switches constantly; one minute we have Pauline Quirke’s Sharon on the back foot as the other two round on her, the next it may be Linda Robson’s Tracey or Lesley Joseph’s shimmeringly-brilliant Dorien who is under fire. The banter is sometimes light-hearted and sometimes plumbs the depths of vicious invective, but no-one can doubt the bond between these three. It is sharp, pacy, serve-and-volley humour and it has the audience screeching with delighted laughter, the acid test of any outstanding situation comedy passed with flying colours.

On the down side, the idea of video excerpts to bridge the gap between scenes is a bad one; a lot of plot and humour is lost due to the sheer inadequacy of the projection. Again, this is a drawback that is quite glaring in itself, but which doesn’t diminish the production as a whole – due to the stars’ utterly dominant performances.

For those who remember the TV series – they won’t be disappointed with what they see. For anyone who sees the show as a newcomer to Birds of a Feather, they will have their appetites whetted for more – and it appears a new small-screen series may be in the pipeline. If true, that’s something to be eagerly anticipated. On the evidence of this theatrical offering, there’s plenty of life left in the old Birds yet.

Image

Royalty: Isn’t it About Time For a Change at the Top?

Image

One of the many oddities in the life of our Queen, Elizabeth II, is the fact that she has two birthdays each year – as if one wasn’t enough when you already have rather too many years on your shoulders, weighing you down along with all those cares of state. That’s twice the messing about anyone else has, and there’s Christmas too, although happily there are flunkies by the dozen to lend a hand. But let’s face it, Brenda – as Private Eye magazine almost affectionately refers to her – is now in her 88th year even when you don’t count “Official” birthdays. Most ladies of her considerable wealth would expect to have had their feet up relaxing with the Dorgies for at least the last 27 years, rather than still be loaded with all these ceremonial duties. Is it not time, perhaps, for her to consider genteel retirement, or at least a more consultative and less active role?

Adding to the whole age question is the fact that her likely – though not inevitable – successor, son Charles, will himself reach state retirement age in November this year, and therefore stands the very real chance of becoming entitled to his pension before his pre-destined career has even got off the ground. The poor bloke finds himself in a dilemma uncannily similar to that which faced his illustrious forebear King Edward VII, known to his more intimate acquaintances (prior to his eventual accession) as Bertie the Bounder, due to his notorious predilection for the wilder pleasures of life. Bertie of course did realise his lifelong destiny, and became rather a successful King – entering history as “Edward the Peacemaker” due to his diplomatic efforts on the Continent. Sadly, all these admirable endeavours merely delayed a worldwide conflagration, and a scant four years after his death we were landed with the Great War. But Bertie the Bounder certainly Did His Bit while he was above ground and able to; Charles, who some might think has been a bit of a bounder himself on occasion, must be wondering if his own chance to serve will ever come.

The world nowadays is a very different place to the one which Queen Victoria left in early 1901. At that time, the Monarchy was simply a given – a fact of life along with the Empire over which it presided. The Monarchy and all the trappings thereof seemed in tune with the times, whereas now a lot of that ermine and jewellery has an almost defiant air of anachronism about it, as if the whole institution is saying to us, “Look – we know the Empire is long gone, and that we’re a tad outdated, but it’s just how we are – have you got a better idea?” The transition from a monarch who has been there forever, or so it seems, to a new King on the block (sorry, Charlie, if that’s a phrase which unhappily conjures up the headless spectre of the first King Charles) may well be much harder to manage today than it was when Bertie came to the throne 112 years ago. It may even be that there is a case for the new lad to be eased in to his unaccustomed role by an older and possibly wiser head. This is the argument for the Queen to step down now so that her guidance and counsel should be available to King Charles III, or even to King William V if that’s the way the Royal cookie crumbles.

Of course any suggestion like this, threatening as it does to advocate a departure from The Way Things Have Always Been Done, is likely to be met with a pretty frosty response from the patrician mandarins of the Establishment. They will tend to gaze snootily down a long collective nose and wonder out loud just who on earth this frightful oik IS, mooting such radical and frankly dangerous possibilities. But just because something has always been done a certain way is no reason to continue down that path. Small boys used to be shoved up chimneys to clean them, and they used to drag heavy loads in narrow seams underground in the mines as well. These are old traditions which nobody outside The Cabinet Office much misses. And we used to effect changes in the line of Succession to the Throne by the simple expedient of lopping the incumbent’s head off, or by defeating them in battle – a manifestation of the now unfashionable “Might is Right” syndrome. One such defeated King (Richard III) has only recently been dug out of a Leicester car park having wound up there over five centuries ago in the least dignified manner imaginable, mute testimony to the fact that lèse-majesté is not a new idea. And in any event, it’s not my intention to advocate abolition of the Monarchy – well, not in this article anyway – I just have the feeling that a few fresh ideas wouldn’t go amiss in the corridors of regal power.

One of the other oddities of the Queen’s life – so it has been suggested by various irreverent comedians – is that she thinks the world smells of fresh paint, as wherever she goes there is some industrious decorator a few steps ahead, adroitly wielding his brush and roller lest Her Maj should see a mucky mark and shame be piled on the heads of her civic or diplomatic hosts. Many a true word is spoken in jest – and she really has lived her whole long life, certainly since her maverick Uncle David gave up his Edward VIII crown for an American divorcée, with people trying to make things as brand-spanking glossy and new as possible for her. It’s a cosseted, artificial sort of existence, surrounded by eager sycophants, and let’s face it – you only live once. Shouldn’t our venerable Queen have the chance to savour a bit of real life before her time is up?

Isn’t it finally time for the job to be passed on to a new chap?

Best Leeds United Signing of the Summer

Nayls v Shrek

Nayls v Shrek

Leeds United will be linked with many new signings this summer, and the squad is definitely in need of a major tweak or three.  Or four, possibly five.  But it may well be that, for the medium and longer term good of our club, we’ve already secured our most valuable signature of this or many other summers.  Take a bow, Richard Naylor – who will now remain as the Leeds United U-18 Coach, charged with overseeing the development of youth players who will hopefully contribute to first team success in the not-too-distant future.

Fresh from the triumphs of last season, when his youngsters won their League and performed brilliantly in defeat at Anfield in the FA Youth Cup, Naylor has taken to this role like a duck to water.  With his input, the famed Leeds United Academy production line seems to be in the rudest health it’s enjoyed for quite some time.  Naylor only quit as a player last summer and has still to go through the formal necessities of obtaining the various coaching badges he will need to carve out a career in management.  But all the badges in the world are no substitute for natural ability and a way with young people that nurtures progress and success.  It is this intangible quality which seems to mark out Naylor as a potential coach to watch out for.

It is to be hoped that Naylor will make a big impact on the coaching and managerial side of the game – given his early achievements there’s little reason to doubt he will – and obviously everyone with a love for Leeds United will be desperate for Big Nayls to make his mark with his home town team.  Manager Brian McDermott is in no doubt that Leeds have got a winner in Naylor.  “If you look at the history of the Academy at Leeds they have produced some fantastic players and I think we have got a fantastic Academy,” said Brian. “Getting Richard signed up was very important to us, he is a Leeds man and he is a young coach.  I’m sure he is going to be doing his badges and working with the younger players, we are really pleased.  Richard enjoys coming to work, that is one of the things you try to create at any football club.  I certainly wouldn’t want to come to a place where you don’t have a bit of fun and you don’t enjoy what you do.”

Encouraging stuff, and music to the ears of anyone who believes the long-term good of the club is best served by excellence in the Academy – and an Academy is only as good as its coaches, whatever the talent that might be available in the youth ranks.  Naylor has made an excellent start to his coaching career, and appears to have a thorough understanding of the demands of his job.  Perhaps this is because, although he played most of his career as a central defender, he was a striker at Ipswich until the age of 25.  He therefore has top-level knowledge of radically different ways of playing; looking forward as a defender after previously operating with his back to goal as a striker.  This professional experience in two very dissimilar roles will maybe have given him a more complete and all-round appreciation of the game as a whole, something his young charges could well benefit from as they develop.

All the best for the future with Leeds, Nayls – may your association with your beloved United be a long, happy and successful one.

New Owner for Leeds United?

Dr. Marwan Koukash

Dr. Marwan Koukash

The BBC are reporting that the wealthy owner of Super League side Salford Reds, Dr Marwan Koukash, is looking to take over a football club.  Dr Koukash refuses to be drawn on the identity of the club he’s looking at, but describes it as “a huge club previously” which “just needs that little bit of extra investment to take it to the next level.”  Dr Koukash goes on to say “By bringing in the personnel that were previously associated with the club at its heyday and bringing people in who are genuine club supporters it will excite the fans.  Once I get the football club I will definitely have my own TV channel which will cover my three sports; racing, rugby and football.”

There is plenty there to encourage speculation, and in the knowledge that the current owners of Leeds United seem not averse to selling a controlling interest in the club, many Leeds fans will sit up and take notice when a wealthy Kuwaiti speaks of acquiring “a huge club previously”.  More intriguing still is the mention of personnel previously associated with the club “at its heyday”.  Leeds United supporters might ask “which heyday” as the nineties were an era of comparative success and prosperity, though not to be compared to the truly great era of the sixties and seventies when Don Revie created a global force in the hitherto humble location of Elland Road.  Some “previous personnel” might be welcomed back with open arms; others decidedly not.

It would appear that Marwan Koukash is looking at Championship level for his entry into the world of football; he admits that he almost bought a second tier club before he became involved in racing.  This begs the question of which other Championship club might fit the Koukash blueprint.  There are a number of sleeping giants in this league, as well as a few who are perhaps just big lads having a snooze.  Most neutral onlookers though would concede that Leeds United is by far the biggest name outside the Premier League, and it is this fact that makes Leeds at least as likely as any other club in the Championship to be scrutinised by a man who is willing and able to make the kind of investment which could elevate the club back to its accustomed spot in the top flight.

The time scale mentioned by Dr Koukash is “within the next month or so”.  If true, then some club is going to see big changes before Christmas, and whether this will prove a galvanising force to the new season, or more of a disruptive factor that could explode carefully-laid plans is a matter of some uncertainty.  Takeovers can be very, very good for a club, and they can be just the opposite.  Watch this space.

King to Reign at Elland Road? Marlon Tipped to Sign for Leeds

Marlon King aka "The Accused"

Marlon King aka “The Accused”

Yesterday I wrote an article about Leeds United being linked with Celtic’s Anthony Stokes, a rumour which – I think I made it clear – I’m not at all happy with. There were two planks to my argument against the recruitment of Mr Stokes – firstly that he’s not very good, having failed to pull up any trees south of the border (he’s done better up in Scotland, but quite frankly my Gran could score for fun up there and she’s been dead for 21 years) – and secondly that he doesn’t appear to be the nicest of chaps, with various indiscretions laid at his door, including the alleged nutting of a hapless Elvis impersonator.

Today was another day, and it has brought another none-too-tasty rumour. This one I find more palatable on the grounds of ability, but possibly even less so where personal conduct is concerned. Marlon King. Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear. The lad can play a bit, and even at the ripe old age of 33, it’s likely that he could be relied upon to give most Championship defences a thing or two to think about. He’s done the business at this level for quite a few clubs – one notable failure being a loan spell at Leeds, but at that time he was played out of position by the famously clueless Kevin Blackwell, so it was hardly a surprise that he ended up goal-less.

So, on the grounds of ability and scoring potential, and especially for free, this seems potentially a good signing. But there is a flip-side to Marlon’s coin, and that is his conviction in 2009 for sexual assault and ABH whilst on the books of Wigan Athletic, offences for which he received an 18 month sentence. It was also alleged that King had headbutted Dean Windass whilst at Hull City on loan, though this is not a crime which would necessarily alienate him as far as Leeds supporters are concerned. But the fact that Mr King has 14 convictions on his record since 1997 is doubtless a concern to Leeds United or any other club thinking of taking a punt on him. The rumour I saw today was on a Birmingham City fan site, and the responses from Leeds fans were not entirely positive. We’ve had our bad boys in the past, of course – Bowyer and Woodgate are particularly unedifying examples – but King appears to be a repeat offender at least in terms of getting on the wrong side of the law. Some of his transgressions are much worse than others, it must be remembered, and a record which includes a sexual assault conviction is a severe drawback to say the very least.

The fact remains though that King seems to have settled down somewhat since leaving jail on the more recent of two occasions. He has served Birmingham well, and he does retain the knack of scoring goals at second tier level. Worryingly however, he has been arrested and bailed yet again as recently as April this year after a car crash which left one man severely injured.

On balance, I feel that this would not be an ideal signing for Leeds United, though I’m not quite as emphatically of that opinion as I was with the Stokes rumour. If that leaves me open to a charge of putting on-field ability ahead of off-field misdemeanours and convictions, then – well, guilty, m’Lud. King will certainly end up wearing some club’s shirt next season, and quite probably in the Championship. If push comes to shove, I’d rather see him scoring goals for Leeds than against us, but overall I’m hardly impressed by the standard of striker tipped to be joining us down at LS11 for the new campaign. Can we have some better quality rumours, please?

“Loadsamoney” Cameron in “Tasteless and Ignorant Flash Git” Row

ImagePrime Minister David Cameron has had his judgement called into question yet again after a “date-night” meal out with his wife on Friday at a pizza restaurant in Soho.  Having enjoyed a simple repast of pizza and lasagne, accompanied by dough balls and a bottle of red – amounting to a bill of around £45 – the Premier stunned onlookers by airily leaving his delighted waiter a tip of £50.  One diner, struggling to find a reason for this munificent largesse, later wondered in a baffled tweet whether Mr Cameron was perhaps feeling flush after saving some money on his order by using a discount coupon.  Others have speculated that a tendency to be a heavy tipper could be compensatory behaviour given his history as a former member of the notorious Bullingdon Club, an exclusive society at Oxford University noted for its habit of smashing up restaurants and paying up on the spot for damage caused.  But Cameron has not always been so generous, once failing to leave a tip at all for a waitress who, not recognising the PM, said she was too busy to carry his coffee order to his table.

Whatever Mr Cameron’s motivation – and let’s not forget there’s a very happy waiter at the centre of this story – such extravagant actions are always open to criticism for a man so very much in the glare of public scrutiny.  Given that, and allowing also for his government’s implacable stance on its much-criticised austerity programme, it may be felt in some quarters that a £50 tip on a bill of rather less than that sends out all the wrong messages.  It’s an action, some may well carp, that can easily be related to the archetypal “flash git” yuppie of the eighties, so memorably portrayed by Harry Enfield as his “Loadsamoney” character, who would flaunt his wealth ostentatiously, waving wads of cash and lighting cigars with twenty pound notes.  This was of course satire, which is at the very cutting-edge of good comedy, and rightly so.  But all the best satire has that kernel of truth which validates its message, and the “Loadsamoney” image had many parallels in real life.  In casually handing over £50 to an incredulous waiter, Mr Cameron surely risks criticism from those who will say this shows the extent to which he is out of touch with millions nationwide to whom £50 would represent a weekly family shopping budget.

It’s not so long ago that Cameron’s blundering Work and Pensions Secretary, Iain Duncan-Smith, unwisely raised his head above the parapet with a claim that he’d be able to live on £53 a week, only to have to duck it down again hastily when a massively-supported public petition called on him to do just that.  The Coalition government seem a little damage-prone in terms of such tactical own-goals, and whatever message they are trying to get across about the need for everyone to tighten the belt, grin bravely and get on with it, is continually undermined by examples of individual ministers piteously whining that their lot is not a happy one.

The Tory MP for Mid Derbyshire, Pauline Latham, recently described how she was “left in tears” after clashing with officials from the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (Ipsa) over the matter of her security enhancements and just who is expected to pay the £9000 bill.  That’s a story which many will find less than heart-rending when so many pensioners face the “heat or eat” dilemma.  MP’s of all parties have agitated for a while now for salary increases of up to 32% at a time when public pay is frozen.  Failed bankers and incompetent Chief Executives are still routinely walking away from the disasters they have created with severance packages well into seven figures, whilst the poorest of the poor face a struggle to find the weekly bedroom tax bill, a struggle that has in several tragic cases terminated in suicide.

It is doubtful whether Cameron, replete with pizza, dough balls, wine and relaxed, chilled-out bonhomie, will have had any of this to the forefront of his mind when he grandly tipped his waiter before heading off back to work at the G8 Summit in Northern Ireland, where all his food and hospitality will be funded by grateful taxpayers.  The point is though, surely, that he should be aware of all of these issues, all of the time, and that this awareness should advise his every move.  To expose himself and by extension his government, to such ridicule and criticism over what was quite probably a sincere enough gesture (assuming that the tip really was from the PM’s own back pocket), shows a want of understanding and a failure to appreciate just how such public generosity, on a scale out of the reach of 98% of the population, will resonate with those who are struggling to make ends meet.  The lack of political awareness in a man elevated to Cameron’s high office is more than a little worrying.  If the tip had to be given, could it – should it – have been made in a less public way?  At least then, even if the story had come out, the effect would have been diluted by relative subtlety instead of appearing so crass and opportunistic.

The sad fact is that many in the Tory party, or even in the coalition government as a whole, will tend to dismiss an item of news like this as “pointless and frivolous” or a “storm in a teacup”.  But they would miss the point in so doing.  Because the incident is in the public arena, it has to be viewed in the context of the times, and that is very much a picture of so many people suffering and struggling due to our rulers’ insistence – against the better judgement of such bodies as the International Monetary Fund – on cutting, cutting and cutting again, cutting to the bone at the lower end of society where any further cuts are likely to lead to collapse.  And while this is going on, the PM is out on the town, taking in a show, heading off to a politicians’ junket with the finest of freebie food and drink, and casually, arrogantly chucking 50 quid at a waiter as if to say, “There you go, my good man.  It’s nothing to me.”

Mr Cameron, really.  It is time to give your head a shake, re-awaken whatever political awareness you ever had, and start to think about what you say and do.  Some of us out here would just love to have a chat with you about Real Life.

Celtic’s Stokes NOT the Answer for Leeds United

Anthony Stokes - Thanks But No Thanks, Celtic

Anthony Stokes – Thanks But No Thanks, Celtic

The rumours are circulating once more regarding likely additions for the Leeds United front line, already supplemented by the signing of Oldham’s Matt Smith.  The names of Noel Hunt (Reading) and Kevin Doyle (Wolves) have been freely bandied about, the former being spoken of as virtually a done deal, whilst apparently Wolves are still hoping to hang on to Doyle despite their demotion to League One.

It is the link with Doyle that has sprouted this frankly unwelcome story concerning Celtic’s Anthony Stokes. The former Arsenal trainee has had a thin time of it south of the border, and truth be told he hasn’t been that much more successful in the less demanding environment of the Scottish Premier League.  Seven goals in 23 appearances last term is not exactly prolific in a league where much is expected of a striker lucky enough to play for the only team of any real quality.  A spell with Sunderland yielded a paltry 3 goals in 36 outings, and loan outings with Crystal Palace and Sheffield United added just one solitary strike to that meagre total.

Stokes has seemed more likely to be keeping the press busy on the front page rather than the back.  He has been disciplined by Celtic for his attendance at the funeral of a Real IRA Chief and more recently there has been an allegation that he head-butted an Elvis impersonator in his native Dublin.  Stokes has a year left on his contract with the Bhoys, and has so far failed to agree a new deal.

For a player whose signature once cost the buying club £2m, Stokes would appear to have done little on the field to justify that price tag, or anything like it.  Off the field, he has attracted rather more publicity, but not in a good way.  Whoever is eyeing up the targets for Leeds United would be well-advised to give this lad no more than a cursory glance before moving on with all possible speed.  It’s one story among many; Leeds will be linked with many players this summer, and only a small proportion will make it to Thorp Arch for the guided tour prior to signing.  I sincerely hope that Anthony Stokes Esquire is not one of those few.

Murdoch to Hammer Another Nail Into Football’s Coffin?

Uncle Rupert

Uncle Rupert

News is emerging that Rupert Murdoch may be about to unveil a “Summer Super League” plan for football, whereby 16 “elite” clubs would compete in a league-type competition throughout the traditional European close season.  Matches would be played in cities around the world in a transparent move to open up new markets and further popularise the Sky/Murdoch brand before an international audience possibly running to billions.

The drawbacks to such a plan spring readily to mind.  There is an obvious issue around the physical and mental demands upon players who might now be called upon to perform without a break in the whole calendar year.  That is, assuming that the players involved would be the senior players of the “elite” clubs envisaged as making up this league; but that does seem a fair assumption.  It is hardly likely that a project like this would have the necessary appeal and marketability if the competing teams were to field development squads – stars would be a pre-requisite for success.

What, then would be the impact on existing competitions?  It would be easy to imagine that the effect on, say, domestic cups could be quite shattering.  We’ve already had the precedent of Man U withdrawing from the FA Cup one season for some money-making prestige junket to South America where they competed for a version of the World Club Championship, and predictably sank without trace.  If the likes of Man U, Man City, Chelsea and Arsenal were to be invited (as they most certainly would be) to compete in Murdoch’s latest commercial fandango, then we could quite probably predict that – at the very least – the FA Cup, and certainly the League Cup would slide yet further down the priority list for these in-demand clubs.  Already we see shadow squads competing for the League Cup, it wouldn’t be a surprise to see withdrawals from that competition, and the treatment of the FA Cup as a proving ground for promising younger players.  It would be the eager crowds in the Far East, Australia, the USA and the Middle East who would have the pleasure of seeing the Premier League’s major talents performing in the flesh.

The question also arises: what of the World Cup, and the slightly lesser competitions held on individual continents?  Would FIFA be prepared to take on Murdoch and his increasingly omnipresent empire?  The days when domestic cup competitions caused a thrill of excitement and a sense of occasion are already receding into golden memory.  Will the same happen to the four-yearly cycle of the greatest international tournament of them all?  It’s not impossible; and if it were to happen, we’d know what to blame – the three M’s.  Murdoch, Money and Markets.

The time is fast approaching when Football as we know it will be in sore need of rescue by seemingly the only people left who actually care enough to want to preserve its proud history and tradition: the fans.  Obviously, I mean those of us who are old enough to remember the game’s great days, before Murdoch got his talons on it; when you stood on a packed terrace and sampled an incomparable atmosphere as you cheered on your favourites for under a pound and moaned mightily when that went up to £1.50.  When the only games shown live on the box were really big ones, Cup Finals, major International games, European nights and maybe the odd smattering of League games here and there.  Those were the days when you would have laughed out loud at any suggestion that one day you might be asked to fork out £60 a month for “entertainment” which might include Norwich v Wigan on a Monday evening.

That’s the reality we have now, and it’s scary to look ahead and see how much more our game might change now that Uncle Rupert has had this spiffy new idea.  He’ll want to make sure his audiences have their entertainment in a way that doesn’t put undue strain on their attention-spans, and allows enough time to sell, sell, sell in those commercial breaks.  Didn’t someone once have a great idea about playing four quarters instead of two halves?  What about time-outs?  Why bother with boring draws, can’t we have an exciting shoot-out?

If you doubt things might actually go down that road – just cast your mind back 25 years, and see if you could have imagined then the kind of game we have to watch today, and ask yourself: couldn’t it maybe happen?  Aren’t we in real danger of losing the last vestiges of the game we used to know and love?  And isn’t it maybe time to think just what the hell we can do about it?

Leeds United: Will “Fame” Attract Quality Signings Over Money?

Image

 

The most worrying sound bite I’ve heard out of Elland Road this summer – and I won’t name names here – is the following little gem: “If a player has the chance to play for Leeds United, but turns it down for the sake of a few extra bob elsewhere, then we’re not interested in that player anyway.”  Or words to that effect.  Now that really worries me – and whether it’s arrogance we’re seeing here, or just naivety – I think it should worry all of us who have the club’s best interests at heart.

In case I need to remind anyone – professional football is about money, first and foremost.  Really, let’s not kid ourselves otherwise.  There’s a clue right there in the name: Professional Football.  The players are professionals – so are the coaching staff.  Even the directors are these days, though you might beg leave to differ on that one.  But no-one’s in it for the pure and simple love of the game; they’re all there to earn a crust or, in the current lollied-up climate, more likely a whole bakery full of bread.  This is not small boys and jumpers for goalposts.  This is the hard-nosed, mercenary world of professional sport.

So when a senior representative of Leeds United Football Club says – in all seriousness one presumes – that if a player declines the honour of wearing the famous white shirt with the fat blue stripe for more money elsewhere, then he can basically sling his hook; how should we feel?  Honoured, maybe, to support a club with such a clear appreciation of its own innate desirability?  Pride, at the sound of our club stating its values in the face of a money-grabbing world?  Or despair at the sheer, fatuous stupidity and hollow arrogance of imagining that any player worth his salt is going to put “prestige” ahead of the bottom line?  Make no mistake – this is arrogance.  It’s an unattractive characteristic we can ill-afford in our current, humble circumstances, and it’s one of those unwelcome features that gives our club, and indeed us fans, a bad name.

Prestige is all well and good.  It’s fine and dandy to be a world famous football club, albeit fallen on hard times, yet with a history containing a certain amount of glory (together with a whole lot of bad luck and “we wuz robbed” stories).  All of that is very nice, and we’re all suitably proud – let’s face it, it’s better than being Barnsley.  But prestige butters no parsnips, not on its own.  It doesn’t pay the rent, nor does it foot the bill for that penthouse apartment and flash car; the hallmarks of even Mr Joe Average Footballer in these Sky-funded times.  Sadly, in today’s Real World, you need lots of cold, hard cash for that sort of thing, and if Joe Average isn’t going to get it at Leeds, then he’s going to say “thanks, but no thanks” and head for somewhere more financially enlightened.  And where does that leave Leeds?  Still holding forth about what a great club we are, and what an honour it is to play for us?  Or might we perhaps, hurt and wounded by such rejection, sadder and wiser as to the ways of the world, give our head a shake and reflect that if you pay peanuts, you’ll attract only monkeys?  (This is all imagery and metaphor, Mr Brown, and no reflection upon any of the current playing staff, so chill.)

If Leeds start the new season having missed out on a succession of Joe Averages, and therefore with a team populated instead by too many Michael Mediocres, and all for the lack of that extra few bob, then the notoriously easy to disgruntle body of support will have good reason to be less than happy. What, they might ask, are we trying to achieve?  Can we not look to the negative example of the current government, who are achieving outstanding levels of apathy, feeble performance and general lassitude and failure to compete by the simple expedient of austerity as an alternative to investment?  Isn’t investment, indeed, what it’s all about?  The shimmering yet distant prospect of the Premier League with its promise of more millions than you could shake a stick at – surely that’s a prize worth investing in a chance to compete for?  Well, you’d think so.

Last season, around January transfer window time, there was talk of signing Birmingham City’sChris Burke, the kind of winger that might, just possibly, have solved our goal-scoring problems by increasing the quality of supply to our starving strikers.  For the want of £300,000, we now hear, that deal died a death.  And yet at that point in time, the play-offs were a realistic prospect, and that small shove in the right direction might have seen us over the line, and lo! The Promised Land might have beckoned.  Instead, we finished in a desperately disappointing lower mid-table position, reduced to the ranks of party-poopers for Watford on the season’s final day.  300 grand could have made such a difference, and reaped such rewards, but no-one was willing to be so visionary and to dare speculate with a view to accumulating a promotion.  How depressingly short-sighted is that?

Wind forward twelve months from now and – judging by the pearls of wisdom falling from the various media outlets of Leeds United so far this summer – we might easily be looking back on another drab and disappointing season.  And all because we’ve persisted with this policy of trying to make ten bob do the work of a quid.  If the people in charge of Leeds genuinely believe that the kind of players we now need to get us up where we still think we belong – the equivalents of Strachan, Sterland, Jones, Hendrie and Fairclough – are actually going to sign on the dotted line because “it’s an honour to play for the club” – then they’re sadly mistaken and bigger fools than I thought.  Investment is needed, if not in transfer fees – I’ve nothing against free transfers as such, there are diamonds out there in these Bosman days – then certainly in wages to make us competitive with the others who will be vying for the riches of the top flight.  Surely, after too many seasons of hollow promises and under-funding, someone at Leeds must see this?

Fingers crossed.