Posted May 10, 20159 yr “ We hear the word ‘philosophy’ a lot now in football, from different people, from managers. That’s his [Mourinho] philosophy, in that he will change and adapt to the players he has, who he is playing against, what the situation of the game is, within a game as well. He’s had a lot thrown at him of late - he’s been boring and questioned - I just think that is utter nonsense…. with the signings this man brought [we had] this great football, we saw that in the early part of the season. So forget this thing about Chelsea are boring, or they don’t play good football. …now Manuel Pellegrini has spoken in the last few days about Jose Mourinho’s team - ’a small team mentality’ - that’s just rubbish, it’s a winning mentality. City went to Anfield and got battered, went to United and got battered, they need more of that [mentality] in those big away games…. [it was] totally different [against Stoke] see, closing down, that’s a message from Jose Mourinho - away at Stoke, I’m going to put Mikel in, we’re going to push up the pitch and we’re going to press them - let’s not forget another rival of Chelsea’s this season, Arsenal, went there and couldn’t cope. …now we go to Swansea, a good footballing team, totally the opposite of Stoke, who want to play long. So, the idea before the game is they like to play the ball around at the back, we are going to press them, because we can take the ball off this team…. the message is press Swansea high and win that ball. So, a minute into the game, still pressing, still going, they make the mistake, 1-0 within minute five, again that’s a different way of playing away from home, pressing and not playing counter-attack. Lastly, Manchester United away from home, and you usually see them [Chelsea] counter-attack away from home. No, they’re going to do that at home [not at Old Trafford]. Afterwards, they get a lot of criticism, only 29% possession I think, but he [Jose] doesn’t care - he says afterwards they can have 99% of the ball…. so the tactic is sit back, let them come on to us, see if they make a mistake. Also we notice on the day, it was a massive thing, Zouma on Fellaini, the biggest problem in the Premier league for teams over the last month. He [Jose] was the first one to deal with the problem [of Fellaini] he wasn’t embarrassed, wasn’t ashamed to put a centre-back in midfield to nullify Manchester United at home…. and this is what they are brilliant at - you can have the ball, we’ll wait for a mistake. They are patient in the game, they are so ruthless when they get that chance and they’ve got the best player in the league who finishes it [this game] off. …we’ve been talking about the chant at Arsenal - they [Chelsea] have been boring, negative - this team have played 51 games this season, they’ve lost three. That is an unbelievable statistic what they’ve done, and I admire Jose Mourinho for the fact that he’s not embarrassed to change or get criticism about the way he plays - he just wants to win…. I think this team deserves a lot more credit than it’s currently getting.” Jamie Carragher (Sky’s Monday Night Football) 4th May, 2015. Not before time [albeit a week ago] this was thought-provoking punditry at its best from the only Jamie on Sky worth listening to. Of course, I would say this wouldn‘t I, what with praise for Chelsea always being music to my ears, but in this instance it was something of a collectors item, being the first high profile Sky-based, unequivocal rejection of all the damning (by faint praise) we usually get in our moments of triumph, from the media in general and Sky in particular. It was also a much-needed and long-overdue shaming of both the sour-grape brethren and holier-than-thou brigade, slapped down by Carragher’s convincing, commonsense arguments, and it got even better when Gary Neville weighed into the debate immediately afterwards. Somewhat self-indulgently, I have shelved his words of wisdom for later, paving the way with my own potted history of media coverage of the Premiership over the last twenty years. Okay, I admit it’s become personal, you’ve probably read individual bits of it before, and you may wish to dismiss it all now as an account that’s as subjective as any I have sought to denigrate myself. If that be the case, by all means move on to the next bold print and enjoy the Neville commendation unencumbered. As for the rest of you, thanks in advance for hanging on in there and I sincerely hope the notes struck are not too discordant… Imagine, if you will, the English Premier League laid out before you, not as an oft-reported cash cow sunning itself since inception, but as reclaimed realty, a verdant peninsular at the very tip of a once revered green and pleasant land known as the English Football League. In effect, a cultural shock in reverse, from William to Robbie Blake, whose career started in 1994 with Darlington, two years after the Premiership‘s emergence, a player never destined to reach any promised land, be it green or pleasant. But even he could not have foreseen the speed with which this newly-acquired strip would supplant the old homestead, both in financial terms and on a global interest scale, billions in revenue rolling up like the biggest of bonus balls in [what was initially perceived as] a lottery venture. That said and fast-forwarding to the present day, it is now worldwide recognition [as the most popular and exciting league around] that runs all the money-making close and, on further inspection, it is clear that the whole phenomenon has been Media-driven from the start… In the beginning it was Rupert Murdoch’s BSkyB hand on the tiller of the good (Premier)ship, directing historical account with broadcasting rights assigned to pay television, thereby leaving the terrestrially landlocked BBC and ITV to whistle defiantly in an ill-wind that blew them only highlights. Continuing this nautical theme and viewed through the eyes of the general public at that time, it was almost as if the BBC’s worldwide reputation had been usurped by a Sixties-style offshore pirate radio station observing the New Age settlers migration before relaying action ’live’ to their buyers-in to a brave New World. Consequently, when the vast majority of these subscribers were found to be of Mancunian allegiance, a course was set fair to tell them what they wanted to hear whenever possible, sometimes defying belief in the process, the seeing part duly taken care of by the club’s instant winning of back-to-back titles. Admittedly, the following year saw Blackburn’s Jack Walker buy-in on his own terms and disturb that status quo, but this was to be a minor peasants revolt and normal silver service resumed thereafter. Every weekend Sky’s live match coverage was encapsulated by the BBC, the licence fee payer’s piper being unable to play a full tune, but still content to churn out melodic edits steeped in a steering of viewers deferentially in the direction of the [self-proclaimed] Peoples Club [Liverpool] and The London Club [Arsenal] through a directorial policy borne of post-Hillsborough sympathy for the top English team of the previous two decades and their own traditional in-built favouritism towards London’s leading club over the same period - a preponderance of capital-based prejudice, bolstered by ex-Pool punditry, keeping a clipped-together format going from its southern heartland. It was to prove a comfy compromise, lasting long enough for Alan Hansen to propound his prophetic ’can’t win anything with kids’ theory, then to regret every word as Fergie’s fledglings swept all before them in an era of domination only slightly tarnished by an insouciant Arsene Wenger occasionally rubbing them up the wrong way with his self-righteous right-living, right-playing approach to the game. And so it was that by the turn of the century devolution morphed into this duopolistic dominance and Sky’s offshore zoom lens observance turned into a full blown, innovative-driven obsession that culminated in a [Government blocked] £623 million bid to take over Manchester United. That failure led to their stake in the club being sold to Irish racehorse owners JP McManus and John Magnier, whereupon a further sell-on to the Glazers appeared to leave Rupert Murdoch’s media outlet beholden and vicariously liable for the ensuing debt-laden situation … that is if ten more years of favoured coverage is anything to go by. Sceptics need only recall Sky’s guilt-by-association ambivalence when reporting on the shameful timeline of ownership - £800 million in interest, debt repayment and fees taken out of United by a family hell bent on not using a penny of its own money to develop it. Ironically, it was during this controversial period of FA fit-and-proper ownership that Chelsea emerged as a force, though Ken Bates earlier frosty relationship with the media ensured it would never be one for outright good and always laced with evil intent. That said, at this point we were no more than a diversion on screen and tolerated in print, miles away from being a genuine duopoly threat and, as Van Morrison might say, mere dwellers on the threshold - a circus act pitching up once a year to play alongside the everyday story of real-deal Premiership folk, down at the Theatre [of Dreams] and the Library [Highbury] - picking up an odd FA here or League Cup there, but always pulling out our tent pegs on another season performing on the highflying, highfaluting Pizza-flinging under card. Then good old Claudio came along and changed everything by securing CL qualification against the Scousers and, against all odds and his own personal expectations, by dumping Arsenal out of the same competition on their own patch. It was enough to make Media reaction waver on its Richter scale, but, hovering between a minor blip verdict for the vanquished and easily-tempered enthusiasm for us, it was never going to be described as seismic. What could not have been foreseen, however, was Roman’simminent arrival, and that WAS seismic!! For Chelsea supporters, his period of ownership needs no Media reprise, which is fortunate because the rest is ’history’ slanted and shaped by prejudice and epitomised by ITV odd couple, Clive Tyldesley and Jim Beglin in their commentary on our Champions League clash with Liverpool - unashamedly one-sided, portraying the Pudlians as England’s only true standard-bearer on view, our status seemingly as plastic as our blue flags were stated to be. Indeed, it was as if Chelsea’s subsequent back-to-back title success only served to heighten this Media myopia, description of it ranging from disciplined [at best] to cruel, relentless and brutal at its vitriolic worst. As a direct result, many fans probably believed acceptance and appreciation of us might happen in the post-Jose years that followed, but it wasn’t to be, even under the benevolent guidance of Guus and Carlo. Instead Roman’s buying power became an ever-present denigration, a stark comparison with impending Abu Dhabi investment and its supposed ‘massive statement of intent’ at Manchester City. Mercifully, our Champions League triumph with RobbieD escaped most of this descriptive dirge, but still suffered the oft-reported slings and arrows jibe [of outrageous good fortune] when a patriotic narrative such as ‘terrific English victory against the arrogant Germans on their own soil’ was there for the taking - and surely would have been had it been any of other English team involved. Of course, throughout this period a string of managerial sackings only added grist to a media mill apparently intent on grinding our silverware achievements down to a controversial dust storm whenever possible, every season becoming an open one as far as Chelsea was concerned. No matter the topic, be it abiding by FFP, harassing officials, simulation, diving or parking the proverbial bus, the club and its players were found guilty of offending quicker than you could say ‘classless’ and add it to our charge sheet. Jose’s return heralded little by way of change, an initial campaign without silverware hardly helping and our start-to-finish control of the Premiership this season destined to receive the same old put downs, plus an added gripe [that the trophy-laden Academy produced no JT-type fruit] thrown in for good measure. And so it was under the shadow cast by this backdrop that I sat down to watch last week’s Monday Night Football, completely unprepared for the enlightenment to come. First Jamie Carragher and then, much to my sheer delight, the following debunking of all previous bunkum, courtesy of Gary Neville… “ On the subject of style, they [Chelsea] are one of the best teams at killing games and I have to say, he [Jose] is the best manager by a mile and there seems to be this sort of snobbery at the moment around football that everyone has to play pure football and entertaining football. Atletico Madrid won La Liga last year, supposedly the best league in the world, but they didn’t win it playing ’Barcelona football’, they played a different style of game…. I think I can understand fans saying boring Chelsea, but when managers of other clubs comment on the style of Chelsea I find that ridiculous, I don’t understand it, they’ve got no right to. We’ve watched all our teams get smashed in Europe this season, Chelsea to be fair got knocked out and that was their one blip, but they didn’t lose, they actually drew in those two games against PSG. But when I watched the other teams play, they’re so [pause to find right word]… it offends me they’re so defensively naïve, it really does. I have to say that Chelsea are the best team by a mile, 15/16 points clear, the rest of them need to adopt some of the traits of this Chelsea team. And Jose Mourinho, well, he called this at Day One when he came into the country [at a press conference in 2013, when he said ’if we don’t do it [win the Premier title] but show an evolution in the season, show we are moving in the right direction, I think we will be Champions in the second season, and it is not a drama.’ … you’re thinking, Chelsea have got to overhaul the squad, they had quite a few ageing players, they’ve got to abide by FFP and they’ve got to win the league within two seasons [to do that] you’re going to have to do an awful lot of very good things. Also, if you said Chelsea are going to have a net spend of 55m [5th in the list] you have to say that is one unbelievable performance…. and there is one player who is being touted as potentially coming available this summer… that’s Bale and the talk is that he is going to Manchester United, Chelsea and Manchester City, one of those three if he does become available. If Chelsea win that battle and let’s say they lose Oscar and Ramires or a player like that for 50/60m, and they could get him for a net cost of £25m, I think the rest of the teams are in trouble for the next 2/3 years, I really do. And one last thing, Jose is unloved, which I don’ think will bother him, and apparently Abramovich has been at the Under-21’s game today, they’ve won four out of the last six FA Youth Cups - that is Jose Mourinho’s big thing now, longevity at the club and bring those young players through. He’s got fantastic young players…. if they get Bale and start to bring through the best young talent in the country, which they’ve got, the rest could be in a little bit of trouble for the next three or four years and they are going to have to act quickly on this. … the model of success over a long period is small turnover of players each year, continuity of manager, if you are looking at sort of bringing young players through, because I think that is a prime programme that you need to follow. So, I think it is absolutely there for Jose Mourinho. He’s got the successful youth team players, he’s got the potential to bring in one or two fantastic players each season, and just transform that squad.“ Scathing in parts and incisive throughout, this Neville assessment is a ’wake up to reality’ call for detractors and rivals alike, as well as being a possible insight into the club’s blueprint for the future. Quite frankly, inane and unfounded media criticism doesn’t cut it anymore for analysers like Carragher and Neville, who tell it as they see it, even-handedly and without the slightest hint of bias towards the clubs they once played for. Colleagues in studios and commentary boxes should take note, especially the ’other Jamie’, before it’s too late and cosy Saturday Night Football chat turns into demotion and a sour and second rate Sunday Morning Supplement slot. Talking of which, how nice it would be if that motley crew started to row back on Chelsea too. Asking just a little too much there? Maybe, but, in the immortal words of Bob Dylan - the times they are changin’. . Edited May 10, 20159 yr by Dorset
May 10, 20159 yr Brilliant post. It's great that two of the (very few) pundits who talk both objectively and intelligently on the subject of football have spoken so positively about us. They are beacons of light in a sea of hostility and vitriol that make our media so depressing.
