The right man
At the risk of turning this into a pure football blog (as opposed to an "infrequently updated with any old random shit" one), the FA's decision to appoint Roy Hodgson as England manager is noteworthy for more than mere footballing reasons. At a time when scrutiny over the UK media is as forensic as it's ever been, their collective reaction to the appointment has managed to cast yet another blow to their already abysmal public standing.
Past form suggests we should never be surprised at how low a tabloid headline may go, but the Sun's infamous piece of speech impediment-based mockery was crass and classless even for them. Still, what should we expect in a Murdochland where the solution to its sister paper getting caught with its tackle out was to close the thing down and effectively relaunch it a few months later?
Sports journalism in the last couple of days has proven itself to be every bit as base and compromised as its front-page counterparts. The basic formula appears to be: cosy up to the rich and powerful; do everything you can to advance their agenda; and, if you fail, to lash out and claim that public opinion (which you have done your best to dictate) has been ignored.
And for every failure (loveable old rentaquote 'Arry Redknapp now stuck at Spurs), there's a success in the vein of the pathetic whispering campaign involving "Super" Frankie Lampard and his chums which forced poor AVB out of Chelsea.
It's their brazenness that really rankles. Apparently, tabloid hack Shaun Custis in a conversation with 5 Live's Darren Fletcher admitted that Redknapp would have been given the benefit of the doubt if his first game as England boss was a disaster whereas Hodgson would most certainly receive no such leniency. Fletcher, as proof that it's not just the press who love their agendas, was on board with this all the way.
Broadsheet journos are not immune from this foolishness either - whilst not necessarily being bezzie mates with certain managers and players, they certainly don't like their predictions failing to come true. As plenty of comments below that article point out, at no point did the FA ever mention Redknapp as being in the frame for that position, despite most organs of the media annointing him as soon as Fabio had buggered off.
My own view is that Redknapp should count himself somewhat unlucky not to have bagged the top job, but he does have some obvious weaknesses that many fans are quick to point out. As of course does Hodgson, and that's the point - these are two very different characters who have both carved out successful managerial careers in their own particular way. You'd think a sensible media debate focusing on each man's pros and cons wouldn't be too much to ask for, but there you go.
The good news is that public anger towards the media continues to grow healthily, and for every blinkered Sun reader there's a more open-minded soul who's getting sick and tired of their fatuous ramblings. And some members of the football establishment are still able to think for themselves - Gary Neville tweeted the following:
To which journalist Ian McGarry inevitably replied:
Incidentally the "public mood" as it stands shows the clear majority of voters in online polls for various papers and websites supporting Roy Hodgson. I guess it's up to us to look at that tweet through the prism of what's been happening at Leveson and to make up our own minds as to whether journalists ever pay any heed to public opinion, other than telling us what it should be.
Past form suggests we should never be surprised at how low a tabloid headline may go, but the Sun's infamous piece of speech impediment-based mockery was crass and classless even for them. Still, what should we expect in a Murdochland where the solution to its sister paper getting caught with its tackle out was to close the thing down and effectively relaunch it a few months later?
Sports journalism in the last couple of days has proven itself to be every bit as base and compromised as its front-page counterparts. The basic formula appears to be: cosy up to the rich and powerful; do everything you can to advance their agenda; and, if you fail, to lash out and claim that public opinion (which you have done your best to dictate) has been ignored.
And for every failure (loveable old rentaquote 'Arry Redknapp now stuck at Spurs), there's a success in the vein of the pathetic whispering campaign involving "Super" Frankie Lampard and his chums which forced poor AVB out of Chelsea.
It's their brazenness that really rankles. Apparently, tabloid hack Shaun Custis in a conversation with 5 Live's Darren Fletcher admitted that Redknapp would have been given the benefit of the doubt if his first game as England boss was a disaster whereas Hodgson would most certainly receive no such leniency. Fletcher, as proof that it's not just the press who love their agendas, was on board with this all the way.
Broadsheet journos are not immune from this foolishness either - whilst not necessarily being bezzie mates with certain managers and players, they certainly don't like their predictions failing to come true. As plenty of comments below that article point out, at no point did the FA ever mention Redknapp as being in the frame for that position, despite most organs of the media annointing him as soon as Fabio had buggered off.
My own view is that Redknapp should count himself somewhat unlucky not to have bagged the top job, but he does have some obvious weaknesses that many fans are quick to point out. As of course does Hodgson, and that's the point - these are two very different characters who have both carved out successful managerial careers in their own particular way. You'd think a sensible media debate focusing on each man's pros and cons wouldn't be too much to ask for, but there you go.
The good news is that public anger towards the media continues to grow healthily, and for every blinkered Sun reader there's a more open-minded soul who's getting sick and tired of their fatuous ramblings. And some members of the football establishment are still able to think for themselves - Gary Neville tweeted the following:
Disgusting headlines,good journo's under pressure writing pieces for their mates and a certain paper needs putting out of circulation.
To which journalist Ian McGarry inevitably replied:
@GNev2 Or good journalists accurately reflecting the public mood? Even the most popular/successful England managers get stick.
Incidentally the "public mood" as it stands shows the clear majority of voters in online polls for various papers and websites supporting Roy Hodgson. I guess it's up to us to look at that tweet through the prism of what's been happening at Leveson and to make up our own minds as to whether journalists ever pay any heed to public opinion, other than telling us what it should be.
Comments