Sexism Exposes a Lack of Intelligence on Wider Issues

When David Beckham received the BBC Sports Lifetime Achievement award in December 2010, it was hard not to argue that this was more a victory for David Beckham’s PR people and their friends in the media, rather than an objective analysis of his sporting contribution in his still young life. Compared with some of the previous winners: Sir Alex Ferguson, Seve Ballesteros, Martina Navratilova and Pele, amongst others, Beckham’s achievements, so far, have been pretty limited. In a similar vein, prior to the 2010 World Cup, Talksport Radio appeared to make it their raison d’être to get Beckham into the England squad – and they were widely supported by a multitude of TV pundits. It was probably just as well, but unfortunate for the injured Beckham, that the England Manager was spared the wrath of populist media opinion by not having to make that decision.

No question he is popular, a great, but not world class, footballer and, according to RTG’s own sources, a genuinely nice person – if a little lacking in the brain department. However, his has been a remarkable public relations turnaround from the totally unfair bile and condemnation he received following his, and England’s, dismissal from the 1998 World Cup.

RTG has no problem with self satisfying award ceremonies, or popularity contests. Issues arise, however, when lazy TV and radio pundits, through lack of knowledge and thorough analysis, jump onto a popular bandwagon to apply pressure for their views to be acted upon. The aforementioned are just some examples of the media influencing, or attempting to influence, football irrationally. There are numerous other converse situations of players being branded as ‘divers’ or troublemakers that have subsequently influenced referees’ decisions. Referees have been suspended or downgraded because of media pundits, who, with the benefit of multiple camera angles and hours of hindsight, have condemned the poor souls to ridicule and humiliation for the benefit of filling TV airtime. There have also been players who have been punished purely based on the attentions of the media, whilst others more deserving have escaped because …well ... who knows why?

There was no real shock in the news that some presenters of a football show on Sky TV inadvertently made some sexist remarks. There was little surprise, also, in the fact that they were stupid enough to allow themselves to be recorded making those inappropriate comments. The big surprise, to RTG, at least, is that it took an incident of this kind for people to finally sit up and question the real contribution of the likes of Andy Gray and Richard Keys to football in the first place.

With all due respect to political correctness, the real issue was not just the ignorant ramblings of a self-aggrandising ex-footballer and his sycophantic side-kick, but also the question of why such men and notable others are being hugely enriched to deliver their lazy, clichéd, one-dimensional view of the game in the first place (apparently Andy Gray was on a £1.7 million salary).

It is quite possible that ‘dark forces’ were at work in Gray’s dismissal. His action against the News of the World in the phone tapping scandal was never likely to sit well with the owner of News International, Rupert Murdoch, who also happens to be the major shareholder in BSkyB. There is every chance he was the victim of one almighty stitch-up. But Sky’s constant arrogance in talking up its contribution to football in England and their sensationalist self-promotion had rubbed off on Gray to the point where, while he really believed he was something of an aficionado on the modern game, his analysis was predictably repetitive and focused purely on picking on the low hanging fruit rather than talking intelligently about the issues in the game.

It’s too easy, after all, to label a player as a diver or a cheat by highlighting him from several different camera angles, than it is to, say, learn the modern offside rule properly (something he belittled female assistant referee Sian Massey for, when it was he who struggled with its interpretation over the years). Did Gray ever criticise the structure and management of the game in this country? Or the money being pumped into the game by billionaires that totally distorts the competitiveness of football as a sport? Has he ever mentioned FIFA, except in his, and Sky’s, self-serving interest in promoting more reliance on TV replays?

Keys was just a below-average presenter who lucked out when Sky won the rights to monopolise Premier League football coverage and simply played the role of arse-licking hanger-on to Gray, feeding him the right lines and questions to make sure his over-sensationalised opinions could be aired to maximum effect.

So what? You may ask: so a few players/referees are inconsistently demonised by TV. Does it really matter? In RTG’s opinion it does. Firstly, we, the supporters have to pay for the pundits through the bloated Sky subscription fees - money that would be better spent on lowering the subscription fee or being invested in grass-roots football.

But there are other forces at work here. These guys influence the game in other more worrying ways. The most professional and impartial of referees can’t help but be swayed by the media, even subconsciously, if they are shown enough on TV. As discussed earlier, highlight a referee’s own mistakes often enough from the comfort of your commentary box and you can put immense pressure on him (or her!) not to give decisions a certain way.

If you doubt the influence of the TV presenter, just look at Italy where Aldo Biscardi hosted the programme ”Il Processo di Biscardi” (Biscardi’s Trial) for 26 years. The programme was considered among the most influential in Italian football but was tainted by publication of phone taps of conversations between him and former Juventus Managing Director, Luciano Moggi, in 2006 at the height of the Italian match-fixing scandal. Moggi influenced the choice of guests on the show, the choice of matches to be analysed, which incidents were to be analysed, the tone of the criticism and even the results of viewer polls. All with the aim of painting Juventus in a better light.

RTG is not suggesting that either Gray, or any other pundit for that matter, was up to the same underhand activity. Although RTG still finds it most curious as to the reasons for Gray’s fawning praise of the early Abramovich regime at Chelsea, where they could scarcely put a foot wrong, either on or off the field. But we shouldn’t take it for granted that this could never happen in the English game or that it hasn’t already. There are huge sums of money in football today. Teams are owned by billionaires who are used to using their money and power to get what they want. We’ll never know if there were other factors involved in the 2007 deal that saw Referee, Rob Styles’ company being awarded the contract to pave Roman Abramovich’s driveway. It was reported but did not receive the scrutiny that it should have done. And let’s not underestimate how reliant the media is on feeding off its own share of the football spoils.

It doesn’t seem unreasonable that we, the paying public, should expect the highest journalistic standards from regular front-line presenters, doing what is, after all, a journalists’ job. They should be guardians of the sport and not a mouthpiece for the businesses feeding off it. We want matches not only to be reviewed consistently, impartially and knowledgeably, but also have the pressing issues that affect all football supporters aired more widely.

Too often it appears that pundits do their research in ‘Hello’ and ‘Ok’ magazines and not in the FA’s rule book. David Beckham as next England manager anyone?

Media Works in Our Favour. Just This Once.

Israel, contrary to popular belief (including cynical RTG previous postings), played out of their skins to rescue England on Saturday. But thank God for the cynicism of a nation and its media. No-one could see how an Israel team, that had nothing to play for, would be victorious over a Russian team that shared many footballing, cultural and, above all, financial links with them. However, the pressure exerted by the English media, forced the Israeli coach to call a press conference prior to the match to deny ‘undue pressure’ had been applied from ‘outside’.

In a complete reversal of circumstances, following the result, the head of the Russian FA, Vitaly Mutko, cried foul. He has all but accused the English media of influencing the result of the game by energising an Israeli performance which had removed his team’s destiny out of their own hands. Additionally, it appeared to cause the Russian team to, in the words of one of their players, “shit in their pants”.

Did the English media play their part? Only the players involved can really tell. The point is that it seems normal these days to have to play a PR offensive in various media channels prior to any important match. Over many years, Sir Alex Ferguson has used various pronouncements on potentially lenient or easily led referees or xenophobic stereotypes, to head off possible obstacles to his own interests. This now seems to be a widely acceptable practice exercised by the majority of managers and coaches.

As England supporters, for once, the media has undoubtedly helped us out. Its record over the years has been the complete reverse. It has been the hirer and firer of England management over the last 35 years. And look where it has got us! For that matter, where has it got the English Premiership? Have their been any great debates about the most significant event to occur in the last five years – i.e. the arrival of billions of pounds in the form of Roman Abramovich and the securing of two Premiership titles? No. The media chose to focus on the fact that it would make the Premiership competition better by adding Chelsea to the competitive mix (i.e. to challenge Arsenal and Manchester United’s dominance of the league). Astonishingly, no downside could be appreciated, or anticipated. In fact, they chose to be positively sycophantic toward Chelsea and Abramovich. There were even pundits and commentators who expounded that blatant cheating was, in their terms, ‘excellent professionalism’. Hang your head in shame Andy Gray.

Lost in the midst of the Italian scandals of undue influence being exercised by referees in favour of the top teams in Serie A, was the manipulation of viewers of Italy’s most popular football analysis programme to those big teams. That is, controversial decisions made against the top teams were highlighted as being ‘unfair’ while controversial decisions made for those teams were glossed over and presented in a favourable light. RTG finds it hard to believe that these same sorts of influences are not being perpetrated by the media in this country.

The media in England have complained steadfastly over the last few years over lack of access to players and their remoteness. Yet, the fact is that, in its efforts to look after its own interests and not ‘bite the hand that feeds it’, the media has actually become just as remote itself. Laudable and debatable initiatives are raised but quietly and conveniently swept aside and forgotten. The Observer published a series of articles under the banner of ‘The Game that Ate Itself’ and FourFourTwo magazine published a special feature on ‘100 Ways to Save Football’. All very interesting but what has actually been achieved as a result? Nothing! Above all, what has been heard of the Stevens Report recently? What action has been taken? Nothing.

That’s why we’re doing this. There needs to be a body of people who are prepared to act. For the few of you who are reading this, we ask you to pass on the url to your fellow supporters and ask you to register with us now.

Reclaim the Game - The Weekend's Events

• As predicted in this very blog, Scotland go back to being also-rans and having to support whoever is playing England as their brave attempt to qualify from a tough group fell just short of the mark once again. A lot of talk about 'passion' and 'Scottish fans being like a twelfth man' came to nothing against the World Champions on Saturday. Ultimately, if you concentrate on good results against France and forget that you have to beat teams like Georgia, no amount of 'passion' makes a blind bit of difference. Better luck next time lads. You'll probably need it.
• Hard-hitting Times journalist and Sports Writer of the Year,2005, Martin Samuels, seems to have hit upon something that the rest of the English football-watching public missed. Speaking on the Sunday Supplement this weekend, he attributed England's problems to (and we quote) "our juniors having to play on a full-sized pitch". With no apparent explanation further than that. And there was RTG thinking it was maybe down to poor coaching, an apathetic and self-centred FA, years of neglect and unintelligent English players. Give that man a job in the FA someone!
• Moves are afoot to follow Sheffield Wednesday's example and ban the band from England games. We give this our wholehearted support. Not only are they an irritating and distracting dirge in the background of England games, they also contribute nothing to the atmosphere or encouraging England fans to sing and shout. In fact, they probably have the opposite effect. Whoever thought this was a good idea, are probably the same people who think a good England manager is one who clenches his fists a lot, runs around his technical area whistling and who makes waving hand gestures at his players that they neither see nor understand.
• England have been thrown a lifeline. Two things we should remember about this. Firstly, this does not mean that performances against Russia, Croatia and Macedonia have gone away. They still happened and they were still bad. Secondly, Steve Mclaren is not suddenly a good manager. We're not there yet but, if we get there, (and in the absence of any likely appointment of Jose Mourinho) he's probably as good as anyone available for the job. Hopefully that hasn't depressed you too much.

Hat's Off, Take a Bow (or not!)

Player of the Week - David Healy. Broke Davor Suker's record for number of goals scored in a European Championship qualifying campaign with a tally of 13 so far. Admittedly he has had 12 games in which to achieve it which Davor most likely did not. Interestingly, he can't get near goal-starved Fulham's starting eleven.

Villain of the Week - All those people (RTG included) who predicted Israel would lay down and roll over for Russia. Shame on us all! But thank God we answered our country's call when it mattered.

Hero of the Week - Omer Golan. Nice one old son. At least for the time being got us out of a tight spot.

Cliche of the Week - 'Golan Scales New Heights.' Or something similar.

Shock of the Week - The effort and sheer determination put in by Israel to prove that they were going to go for it.

When Does an 'Interest' Turn to Influence?

So no surprise at all that Gus Hiddink did actually meet (for coffees) with Roman Abramovich on a few occasions. In fact, following these meetings (that were definitely, absolutely nothing to do with Chelsea) it has been announced that he has extended his contract as manager of the Russian national team to 2010. According to reports, Abramovich apparently does not want to upset the Russian people by stealing away their manager. This despite the fact that the billionaire is bankrolling the Russian Football Federation and indeed the Russian oligarch is helping to 'find' the finance for a new national stadium.

But this raises some intriguing questions as to the extent and reach of powerful football men and organisations. In addition to his interests in Chelsea and the Russian Football Federation, Abramovich did, through his companies, sponsor CSKA Moscow to the tune of something like $30 million per annum - this for a team whose annual revenue was barely in six figures and would represent the equivalent of Arsenal, Liverpool or Manchester United being sponsored for billions rather than their current tens of millions. The logical conclusion being that this must have had an influence on competition within Russian football, in much the same way as his bankrolling of Chelsea has in the English Premiership. Indeed during that period it brought them three Russian Premiership titles.

UEFA investigated Abramovich's apparent conflict of interest and concluded that no rules were contravened as 'interests' are normally defined in terms of ownership. However, you have to wonder what would have happened if Chelsea, needing a certain result to go further in a competition, had played CSKA at that moment. But these levels of dubious influence are not confined solely to Chelsea and Roman Abramovich. All the big four have tie ups with other clubs such as Arsenal and Beveren in Belgium. In fact, Peter Kenyon was the architect of these types of deals when he announced that Manchester United were hooking up with the New York Yankees baseball team (a 'deal' that made United shares go up in price but never really came to anything). The truth is that these 'arrangements' (for want of a better word) are often announced with a fairly serious PR machine behind them only to disappear into the 'fog' that surrounds them over time. The main reason to have these arrangements seems to be a way for English clubs to recruit non-EU nationals.

Alongside this, you have the situation, following the Ondigital collapse, where the loan of players to Championship, League 1 and League 2 clubs is at an all time high. This was not a bad thing in the short-term given that so many clubs were left out of pocket by the collapse. But, we now have the increasing situation where richer clubs buy up the best young talent and farm it out on loan, even to to other Premiership clubs.

This adds more distortion to what is supposed to be genuine competition and can seriously hinder the development of young English players. Glen Johnson was a promising young player at West Ham and England. He was bought by Chelsea in 2003 and spent the next four years or so in the reserves or on loan - in this case to another Premiership club, Portsmouth (a practice RTG is completely against). His England career appears to be, temporarily at least, over. The point being, this is another anti-competitive influence that powerful people in football can exert almost without being questioned. Again it should be stressed this practice is not confined just to Chelsea. How ironic then that in possibly the most crucial weekend last season, Tim Howard was prevented from playing for Everton (by agreement) against Manchester United, his previous club. His replacement made costly errors which turned a two-goal advantage into a four two deficit while Chelsea could only draw.

We at RTG believe that the maximum size of a squad should be fixed. Changes can be made in the mid-season transfer window, but only within the numbers stated. Any additional players can go out on loan but only to lower division or foreign non-European involved clubs. There should also be limits on the number of loanees any one club can make or take and subsequent parity agreed across the whole of UEFA. The EU must also equalise its rules with regard to allowing non-EU nationals to play within member countries.

Most importantly, it is time that FIFA and UEFA draw up a new, comprehensive set of clear rules as to what constitutes an individual or corporate 'interest' in a football club and how that is to be monitored, if genuine competition is to be maintained.