Dalglish's Dignity Destroyed

How long before we see football making headlines for what happens on the pitch? Yesterday Spurs hammered Newcastle, Norwich and Swansea served up an end-to-end goalfest and, almost unnoticed, Manchester United defeated their arch-rivals Liverpool with two strikes from the in-form Wayne Rooney. Sadly scandal and outrage have once more undermined the efforts of the players to entertain fans growing increasingly tired of seeing the game’s name dragged through the mud.

After weeks of racism, court cases, captaincy rows and red cards, the stage was set for Old Trafford to remind us why it is that football is known as the ‘beautiful game’. Instead, we were served up an ugly and undignified mess which looks set to prolong and exacerbate the mutual enmity between two of the Premier League’s biggest clubs.

All it would have taken was a gesture: a brief touch of flesh on flesh which might have doused the flames of this most combustible fixture. Instead, Luis Suarez’s immaturity ignited the tinderbox and his manager poured fuel on the flames.
Despite myopic Liverpool fans’ protestations there is only one person to blame for the non-handshake: Suarez. His decision to ignore Evra’s offered hand was immature, idiotic and, worse of all, premeditated. Certainly Kenny Dalglish, had seemed convinced the player would make the important gesture: Suarez knew otherwise and, in an instant, undermined his manager and his once-proud club.

Perhaps Dalglish’s fervent and misguided support of the player was inspired partly by embarrassment and anger at him – he certainly lost his cool in a way rarely seen from a man more usually associated with taciturn and monotone post-match interviews. Sadly his reaction was inevitable after the tunnel-visioned support he has offered his player throughout this whole farrago.

From the very outset, Dalglish has fostered a siege mentality which has seen Liverpool FC close ranks to protect their player. In the Scotsman’s eyes, the criticism of Suarez has become a witch-hunt – a media conspiracy propagated by Sky Sports News and designed to deliberately harm and hound his controversial striker. This view is utter nonsense, of course. Suarez is under such scrutiny thanks only to his profile, his behaviour and his refusal to apologise to a man he wronged.

Kenny Dalglish’s half-baked conspiracy theories hold absolutely no water. And he has absolutely no evidence to back them up. When the FA released the water-tight 115 page document proving Suarez to have racially abused Evra, Dalglish hinted that the full truth had not been heard. But he failed to provide the required evidence to prove Suarez’s innocence. And given the club’s utter conviction of his innocence it seems strange that they didn’t lodge any form of appeal.

Instead, we’ve seen ill-advised T-shirts in support of Suarez, heard Dalglish welcome Suarez back from his spell on the sidelines by insisting that “he should never have been out in the first place” and now, an absolutely astonishing post-match attack on Geoff Shreeves, Sky Sports and anyone who would listen. Daniel Taylor summed it up brilliantly in The Observer: “outraged by everything, ashamed of nothing”.

His strident defence of his player was shocking and appalling. Pleading ignorance of Suarez’s refusal of Evra’s hand was silly at best. But furiously suggesting that Shreeves was “bang out of order for blaming Luis Suarez for anything that happened here today” was absurd beyond belief. Seeing one of the game’s greats acting in such a manner was hugely embarrassing – not least because he missed an ideal opportunity to take the sting out of the situation. All Dalglish needed to do was point out that Suarez’s actions didn’t help the atmosphere and that he’d have a word with the player in private. Instead, he fanned the flames.

Admittedly, Manchester United were not blameless. Evra’s celebrations at the final whistle were clearly cathartic – a massive pressure relieved in front of his own fans – but were certainly over the top and hardly likely to calm the situation. Sir Alex Ferguson rightly criticised the left back.

The United manager did go over the top in his criticism of Suarez, however. Having kept his counsel for so long, he then exploded. He was clearly incensed by the striker’s conduct during the day but his suggestion that Suarez ought never play for Liverpool again was an area he ought to have kept his nose out of. Dalglish neither wants nor needs Ferguson’s attempts to destabilise Liverpool FC – he’s doing a good enough job all on his own.

Racism Rears Its Ugly Head (And The Daily Mail Ignores It)

In the last couple of weeks racism has reared its ugly head in English football again. Accusations of racial abuse have been made against two of the Premier League’s highest profile players: Liverpool’s Uruguayan striker Luis Suarez and Chelsea captain John Terry. They are alleged to have referred to Manchester United’s Patrice Evra and QPR’s Anton Ferdinand as a ‘nigger’ and a ‘black cunt’ respectively.

First and foremost, it’s important to make clear that these allegations are unproven. Regardless, mud sticks and both of the accused will carry this reputational smear well into the future – whether it’s deserved or not. At the moment the evidence is vague – witnesses to Suarez’s abuse will be required to prove the case. There is video evidence against Terry – the onus will be on him to prove the words he is clearly seen mouthing at Ferdinand were not racial abuse. Terry claims the video (currently plastered all over the internet) were actually of him explaining that he might have been misheard previously – the England captain claims that as Ashley Cole runs across the foreground he masks Terry as he mouths the words “I did not call you a...”. It’ll be difficult to prove one way or the other.

One thing is for sure: nobody comes out of these situations looking good. And that’s the way it ought to be. There is simply no room for such abuse in society. It’s heartening that the Terry incident was reported by a member of the public (in the same way that Steve Finnan was accused by lip-readers in the Anfield crowd a while back) because it shows a lack of tolerance for such discrimination in football grounds – a situation would could hardly have been countenanced as recently as 25 years ago.

That football has cleaned up its act cannot be disputed. But the success of campaigns such as Kick It Out have not eradicated the problem – they’ve just removed it from public view and made it unacceptable to be seen as a racist. Which is why any instance of such abhorrent behaviour must be stamped out stridently and stringently by the powers that be.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, this is not the view endorsed by The Daily Mail. Our most right-wing rag yesterday published one of the most appalling articles imaginable on this very subject as journalist Steve Doughty essentially advised Evra and Ferdinand to just ignore racist abuse. Nothing can make this article seem worse than at really was (it can be read in full here) but I’ll paraphrase it for you in succinct bullet points:

• Spain is a more racist country than England (as if that justifies anything!?)
• Racism isn’t nearly as bad in England as it used to be
• Anti-racism campaigns are boring
• It’s ok to blurt out racist insults if you immediately apologise
• There are “worse things to complain about”
• The abused players should “put up with it and get on with the game”

I’m not sure this excuse for a story warrants further comment other than to say that the main reason racism isn’t as prevalent in society is exactly because people are not prepared to tolerate it, are no longer expected to stoically suffer it and because the majority of people have more enlightened points of view than journalists from The Daily Hate Mail.

I recently witnessed a horrific incident (in Flamingo Land, of all places) where a family subjected a group of black teenagers to a torrent of disgusting racial abuse. In a perfect demonstration of their ignorance they called these (largely African) kids ‘Pakis’ and ‘Arabs’, had to be physically restrained from attacking them. Their spiteful, hate-filled, faces were genuinely frightening as they spat their insults across a children’s theme park. It was a grotesque scene – but a salient reminder of just how pathetic and disgusting some people’s beliefs and behaviours remain. Credit goes to the staff who immediately removed and banned the family. I believe that some of the children’s parents are pursuing the matter with the police: The Equality Act rightly makes all acts of racism illegal and prosecutable.

If either of the accused players are proved to be guilty they should face sanctions commensurate with their status and position in society. Like the Flamingo Land racists they should be immediately removed from their positions via a substantial ban, hit with a huge fine and ordered to work in their communities to promote racial equality. It goes without saying that Terry should be stripped of the England captaincy – and should arguably be prevented from ever representing his multi-racial squad ever again.

It’s only this kind of punishment which will demonstrate how unacceptable racism is in football and society at large. As long as there are apologists for racists, as long as there are people willing to brush the situation under the carpet, the problems will remain. Patrice Evra seems to have received some criticism for the way he raised the issue of his alleged abuse, but regardless of the outlet he chose to express his accusation, if the player feels Suarez has a case to answer he’s perfectly justified in raising the issue. And if a high-profile player such as Manchester United’s vice-captain can raise the issue – anyone can. All racist abuse should have a light shone firmly and brightly upon it – regardless of what Steve Doughty believes.

The Invisible Booking

As Patrice Evra waved an imaginary yellow card at referee Andre Marriner, the Anfield crowd made their immediate displeasure known. Boos rang out at the French fullback which continued for the rest of the game. Even avuncular old Uncle Ray Wilkins was disgusted – or as disgusted as he’s ever likely to be. When Wilkins expresses the opinion that the ref should be allowed to ‘do his job’ it’s as unhappy and critical as the man is ever likely to be. But why is calling for another player to be booked such a big issue?

The incident in question saw Liverpool winger Stewart Downing take a blatant and appalling dive. If that act of simulation had successfully hoodwinked the match officials Evra himself would almost certainly have found himself in the referee’s notebook. Is it fair that Downing should commit an offence - which would have seen the fullback walking a disciplinary tightrope for the rest of the game - go unpunished? Surely not. He attempted to get his opponent into trouble in order to gain an advantage – why shouldn’t Evra retaliate in the same way? Evra was not the cheat in this situation – he was the player calling for the appropriate application of the game’s laws and a suitable punishment for the player who broke them.

Ray Wilkins’ opinion that the referee should be left to do his job seemingly only applies in certain situations. When a match official gets a penalty decision wrong, for instance, players expressing their anger are occasionally criticised for the way they broach the subject with the referee but rarely for being angry about the erroneous spot-kick decision. Why? Because it’s a game-changing decision? Because it happens to be in the eighteen yard box? Either way it’s still a challenge to the official’s control of the game and ought to be no different to the brandishing of an invisible yellow card.

Perhaps it’s because the ‘invisible booking’ is a trait which appears to have been imported from our cheating foreign cousins (much like diving was in the early days of the Premier League). Maybe this kind of cheating is less palatable than some traditional British steel – English football’s constant defence of robust (and potentially leg-shattering) challenges that ‘he got the ball’ is an utterly redundant one if the player was cleaned by a tackler ‘out of control’, but it’s one which is constantly heard from fans, players and managers alike. And it's a defence which misunderstands the rules and laws of the game.

Even Uncle Ray (a cultured player who plied his trade in Italy) seems to believe that bending and breaking the rules is more acceptable when done with some bruising muscularity. His defence of a Jamie Carragher tackle on Ryan Giggs, “Wily little bodycheck there from Jamie Carragher. Good defending”, is a perfect example. According to Wilkins' contradictory stance, the manlier form of cheating is perfectly acceptable. It’s not. And appealing for a player to be punished for his misdemeanours ought to be entirely justified, regardless of how he’s contravened the rules or where on the pitch the offence took place.