It strikes me that banter has changed. It once involved elements of wit and intelligence, perhaps the odd pun and vague bit of innuendo. You can sort of imagine Oscar Wilde engaging in it. But banter has recently been adopted by a sub-class of moron and appropriated to cover anything groups of men talk about that could loosely be described as mean-spirited, heavy-handed, dull, obvious, bullying, narrow-minded and/or any combination of the above.

This week banter has lost all sense of itself as a concept. Banter now exists solely as an excuse; a defence wheeled out by apologists to cover for the misguided utterances of twats. I’m not thinking of anyone in particular and certainly wouldn’t name them here. But the outpourings of hairy-handed balls enthusiast Richard Keys appeal to this definition.

Poor Richard. If you watch the clip it seems perfectly obvious he is the weakling in the group. The non-sportsman, reduced to impressing the jocks with what he imagines to be “tough talk”, referring to a woman as “it” and espousing bizarre sexual imagery. (Although when he refers to Jamie Redknapp “hanging out the back of it”, I can’t help but envision of some kind of slapstick encounter involving a faulty catch on the rear doors of a Transit van.) Perhaps in a pub or a private setting such comments, although grim and offensive, should not have been enough to cost him his job. But in the workplace, there can be very little sympathy for Keys’ fate.

Banter, in its modern form, seems to have found a particular home among footballers and goes hand-in-hand with conversational narcissism. I recently followed Darren Huckerby on Twitter (he followed me first and curiosity got the better of me) and was thrilled to receive an auto-DM from the erstwhile Norwich City forward expressing his hope that I would “enjoy his banter”. This confused me, since I always thought banter was supposed to be a two-way street. The implication that banter can be owned by a single person perhaps sums up what has gone so very terribly wrong.

Since everyone seems to “enjoy banter” except me, it’s tempting to conclude that I’m humourless, wussy, or both. So I was gratified to find that another adult male I mentioned the Huckerby thing to respond with the phrase “banter my arse”. Another chum suggested that banter is “always used by people who aren’t funny”. So, you see, it’s not just me who thinks banter is bollocks.

Apparently Keys and Andy Gray are now being lined up for jobs in Qatar – a country that is well known for its progressive approach to women’s rights. May they, and banter, rest in peace.

At the end of last season I felt it was the right time for Rafael Benitez to go. He seemed to have lost the confidence of the dressing room (particularly Steven Gerrard), his relationship with the owners had broken down and, overall, his performance in the transfer market had not been especially great (the bizarre Robbie Keane incident and vastly overpaying for average players like Glen Johnson being the main crimes). In Roy Hodgson I foresaw a manager who could steady the ship, satisfy the players’ desire for change and perhaps take us back into a Champions League position.

The early signs from Roy were relatively promising. The purchase of Joe Cole looked, at least in part, to be down to the interpersonal skills that Rafa had been sorely lacking. His initial press conferences displayed a refreshing openness that, again, was a welcome change from the cantankerousness of Benitez.

Since then it has become obvious that Hodgson is simply not up to the job. Here are the problems:

1. Small club mentality; personal outlook and approach out of sync with Liverpool fans

After the Everton game at Goodison Park, which Liverpool lost 2-0, Hodgson said it was Liverpool’s “best performance of the season”. Aside from being completely wrong, asking fans to somehow take solace from a 2-0 defeat in the local derby is not a tactful thing to do. Further evidence of Roy’s peculiar view of the footballing landscape came after the 3-1 loss at Newcastle. Hodgson implied that Newcastle is a difficult place to get a win – despite the fact Blackpool, Stoke City and Blackburn Rovers had somehow managed this apparently Herculean task and Newcastle had only previously won two out of eight at home. It was also the game in which Roy conducted his now legendary face-rub and started to look seriously, monstrously, out of his depth. Then, after the 1-0 defeat at home to Wolves (pictured above), Roy suggested Liverpool fans were showing “disrespect” to league’s bottom-placed club by expecting a win (video, from 2.20). It’s symptomatic of a personal and footballing outlook that simply does not tally with that of the Kop.

Video: “Legendary facerub”

2. Poor tactics; inflexibility/general cluelessness, especially away from home.

Hodgson’s away record with Fulham was incredibly poor but it would be reasonable to expect better performances from Liverpool, given the set of players he has at his disposal. However, the problem is Roy’s tactical approach and failure to instil a game-winning spirit. At Fulham he (and the fans, presumably) were happy to get a draw away from home, even against weaker teams. Indeed, the media and League Managers Association lauded him for his achievements. At Liverpool expectations are much higher, yet Roy still sets his team up in such a way as to contain the opposition rather than go out and win. True, this was sometimes also a problem with Rafa but with Roy it is ten times worse. Even at home, there is a negative vibe about things that has led to defeats by Wolves and Blackpool. A dismal, uninventive long-ball approach and constantly sticking to a rigid and old-fashioned 4-4-2, even when things are going badly, intensifies the problem, as does playing players in bizarre positions (Raul Meireles is not a right-winger, Roy). As a result of all this, Liverpool have now lost eight games and have a goal difference of -2 going into the New Year. It is our lowest points total at this stage of the season in 57 years.

3. Bad decisions in the transfer market

Hodgson was put into a difficult position with Javier Mascherano wanting to leave but Christian Poulsen, to the eyes of anybody with half a footballing brain, is not the man to replace him. Meireles seems like a reasonable purchase in a similar position but it might have made sense to pair him with Alberto Aquilani, who was instead allowed to go on loan to Juventus and is having a superb season. England’s fourth-choice left back, Paul Konchesky, is 28, and should not have been offered a four-year deal. In any case, he is not as pacy or skilful as assists-king Emiliano Insua, who was allowed to go out on loan to Galatasaray (following last night’s match, Paul Tomkins has done a compare and contrast between Insua and Konchesky here). The Joe Cole signing was apparently in motion prior to Hodgson’s arrival and may or may not turn out OK, although I can’t work out how he’s worth a reported £5m a year. Brad Jones still makes no sense to me. The fact that no moves were made to sign a striker before the start of the season is inexplicable.

But…

The players aren’t blameless. Fernando Torres, in particular, seems to have become bigger than the club and looks like he can’t be bothered much of the time. He will no doubt leave at the end of the season and this may be no bad thing – assuming the price is right (somewhere close to £50m should do it), he doesn’t end up at Manchester City or Chelsea and someone other than Hodgson chooses how to spend the incoming fee. Babel continues to under-perform, despite being given every chance to prove himself. Cole has been injured but has failed to show any form when he has played. The defence isn’t working as a unit and even Pepe Reina has been guilty of uncharacteristic errors. So yes, Roy is right when he moans about the players being poor. The question must remain, however, about the extent to which Hodgson’s training methods, tactics, outlook and man management have contributed to the malaise.

The Rafa Factor

I don’t buy Hodgson’s argument, and that of the resident Hodgson apologists at Sky Sports, that the players he’s been left with by Rafa are intrinsically bad. OK, so Rafa made some mistakes but he tended to get rid of the worst players relatively quickly. The much-derided Lucas, for example, has applied himself well and at last looks like a sound purchase by Rafa, as does Ngog, who cost just £1.5m. Soto Kyrgiakos has arguably been Liverpool’s best defender this season and was an astute buy at around a quarter of the price of Konchesky. Despite the ridiculous assertions of Andy Gray, Rafa was left with a less impressive squad when he took over from Houllier in 2004 than Hodgson was in 2010 (Dudek v Reina, Cisse v Torres, Traore v Insua, Biscan v Mascherano/Lucas, Smicer v Maxi/Aquilani, etc), yet he made a couple of excellent signings and wrung the best out of his remaining squad players, winning the European Cup in his first season. The simple fact is that while Rafa made some errors during his time at Anfield and subsequently managed to balls things up at Internazionale, he was fifty times the coach Hodgson will ever be at the top level of European football.

So?

Liverpool is not the sort of club that fires managers mid-season, and a lack of other options means Roy will probably be around until May (unless defeats in the next two games against Bolton and Blackpool suddenly tip the balance against him). After that, I simply cannot see how retaining Hodgson’s services would make any sense whatsoever. I’m not convinced that Kenny Dalglish is the right man to take over, even as caretaker, and despite my increasingly warm thoughts towards Rafa, he is not the man to take Liverpool forward. I’m impressed by John W. Henry and New England Sports Ventures, I think their approach to the transfer market is spot-on and the desire to return Liverpool to the top within five years is entirely achievable. We need a forward-thinking, young (-ish) manager to rebuild the team and offer something new to complement that ambition. Hodgson for England, indeed.

So here’s a breakdown of the New York Post front page:

1. The idea of a 1-1 win is obviously ludicrous. Americans understand this. They have draws in baseball and basketball from time to time. The paper is almost certainly making a jokey reference to an infamous 1968 headline relating to a college (American) football game, in which it was reported “Harvard beats Yale 29-29“, after Harvard scored 16 points in the final 42 seconds of the match. So, actually they’re being quite clever.

2. The clearly idiotic concept of “winning 1-1″ is a self-deprecating gag, a joke at the expense of the USA itself, which, in the eyes of the rest of the world, especially Britain, famously doesn’t understand football.

3. The subheading refers to the Battle of Bunker Hill. This episode in the American War of Independence is classed as a pyrrhic British victory, where massive British losses were sustained. So, again, it’s quite a clever and subtle historical joke.

It’s worth bearing in mind that the USA gave us Curb Your Enthusiasm, The Larry Sanders Show and The Simpsons, whereas Britain came up with Carry on Camping, Mr Bean and Two Pints of Lager and a Packet of Crisps. Just saying.

Word reached me this week of the High IQ Haiku World Cup Project. I’ve never tried writing haiku before but this idea appealed.

They’re inviting haiku relating to the forthcoming World Cup, or to World Cups past. So I went with Italia 90, the first World Cup I properly remember. Obviously this was the World Cup that first gave England its penalties complex but I thought it’d be a bit obvious to go for the semi-final heartache-type angle. It is, however, about another specific moment from that tournament.

If you can remember the opposition team and the name of the assisting player then I award you an imaginary £5. Well done!

According to the Daily Mail’s Joe Bernstein on Saturday, football fans would today enjoy a “transfer merry-go-round”. Robbie Keane would leave Spurs for Sunderland, Kenwyne Jones would depart Sunderland for Liverpool and Ryan Babel would be sold to Birmingham by Liverpool. Of course, none of this actually happened. A couple of weeks earlier, the same paper had reported that Jones would join Liverpool in time for the game between Liverpool and Spurs on 20 January. Again, total bollocks.

These are just a couple of examples from one newspaper but every day, particularly during the twice yearly transfer windows, the papers are filled with complete and utter claptrap, planted by agents and clubs and seemingly unchecked for even a microgram of credibility. This is particularly the case where big name players are concerned.

In October 2008, the Mirror reported that Fernando Torres had been offered £200,000 a week to move to Manchester City, while the Telegraph printed an immediate denial. A little over a year later in December 2009, the Mail reported that City’s hopes of signing the player had been “dashed”. Yet, just a month later, the People claimed City were lining up a £100m bid for the player this summer. Contradiction spawned from wild stabs in the dark are the hallmarks of football journalism.

The story in the People was bylined Steve Bates. That’ll be the same Steve Bates who reported in November that City would sign Spurs’ David Bentley in the January window, quoting “Eastlands sources”. Strangely, these same sources didn’t bother to mention that manager Mark Hughes would be sacked just three weeks later.

So to help Steve and his compatriots, I present the Words Dept. Football Journalism Bullshit Assistant. Simply print out the list of football-related names and phrases below, cut them out, rearrange them on your desk and a story will miraculously invent itself.

Words Dept. Football Journalism Bullshit Assistant (Patents Pending)

audacious

the San Siro

Vennegoor of Hesselink

smash

Anfield hierarchy

Kenwyne Jones

misfit

wage structure

come-and-get-me plea

Fernando Torres

unsettled

Hertha Berlin

Wayne Rooney

income tax rate

the Nou Camp

Guus Hiddink

Kia Joorobchian

Schalke

Paraguay international

£90 million

£150 million

£250 million

Younes Kaboul

Taylor was talking about Roy Keane, who grew a chinful of obscenely Santa-ish facial hair immediately before quitting as manager of Sunderland at the end of 2008. But it might be worth pondering his analysis in relation to poor Adrian Chiles (42), who looks more and more fed up by the day on BBC1′s The One Show. Nobody exactly knows what’s going on but he appears to have become moderately repulsed by co-host Christine Bleakley (30), who is said to be engaged in some kind of personal bedroom arrangement with pie-eating Chelsea midfielder Frank Lampard (32). (The ages in brackets signify my pathetic nod towards celebrity journalism.)

As Marple Leaf summed up on Twitter last night:

That scruffy yam on #motd can’t mention Lampard. Just knicked his bird.

Meanwhile Robin Brown has meticulously compiled an entertaining list of descriptions of Chiles’ beard, including my own observation that it makes him look like

the violent alcoholic captain of a Victorian steamship.

I strongly advise you to go and look at it right now.

Over the years there have been a number of public rent-a-gobs (the late Brian Clough, Bernard Ingham and Kelvin McKenzie to name three) who, even with the benefit of reflection and in spite of the findings of the interim Taylor Report, suggested hooliganism was to blame for the crush that led to the death of 96 football fans that day. The view may persist among others. Let them read this.

Boris Johnson has also made some ill-judged comments about the tragedy. He infamously suggested that Liverpool tends to “wallow” in its “victim status”, implying that the city needs to move on from events of the past, including Hillsborough. The sense of injustice conveyed here by a mother whose 15-year-old son died at Hillsborough while 40 ambulances were forbidden from entering the stadium – and who continues to ask why – perhaps explains why those involved find it difficult to forget.

As a Liverpool fan, I’ve never had any particular grudge against City. In fact, the air of genial nuttiness that seems to surround the club and its fans is rather endearing. But since they started gobbing off about signing Fernando Torres, Cristiano Ronaldo and Cesc Febregas following the takeover by Abu Dhabi United Group for Development and Investment last year, my antipathy has blossomed.

It’s understandable that a bunch of Arabian billionaires might be a little naïve about the culture and economics of European football but perhaps Cook should know better. He returned from Milan empty-handed today – after admitting never actually speaking to Kaka – and accused Milan of “bottling it”.

We wanted to go through the process in a professional manner; they didn’t want that and were only thinking of money.

This is just a thought, I grant you, but perhaps that’s because some bloke from Manchester landed on the doorstep with a cheque for a hundred million pounds sticking out of his arse pocket.

Cook is a former Nike executive who describes City as a “global franchise entity”. In an unintentionally hilarious profile in the Daily Telegraph last summer, he said:

I worked at a company – Nike – where we were accused of child labour rights issues. I managed to have a career there for 15 years and I believed we were innocent of most of the issues. Morally, I felt confident in that environment.

Of City’s former owner, Thaksin Shinawatra, the former Thai Prime Minister who has been accused of fraud, corruption and human rights abuses, Cook said:

Is he a nice guy? Yes. Is he a great guy to play golf with? Yes.

Meanwhile, Mark Hughes, City’s hapless manager, has been set the unachievable target of fourth place this season and was landed with a clearly puzzled Robinho at a few minutes to midnight on transfer deadline day last autumn. He appears to have had sod-all to do with the Kaka disaster. Instead, he has signed Craig Bellamy for £14m.

To repeat: Craig. Bellamy. Fourteen. Million. Pounds.

How Bellamy’s value has almost doubled in the 18 months since Liverpool sold him to West Ham is deeply perplexing. Given his unpredictable behaviour around team mates – Bellamy once famously twatted John Arne Riise with a golf club – perhaps it’s no surprise that Robinho has done a runner.

My initial reaction was to side with the hacks. I’m not sure whether this is because I’m a journalist myself. It got me thinking that perhaps the reason much of the coverage has been implicitly skewed against Kinnear (including idly flung insults such as “nutter”) is because the media in general tend to side with fellow journalists. Everyone else just sees a bloke trying to do his job while a bunch of know-alls try to undermine him before he’s got his foot in the door.

I can’t imagine it’s the first time a football manager has lost his rag like that. The only mistake Kinnear made was requesting that the exchange be made public. The most cringeworthy part of the entire episode is where the squirming Newcastle press officer waits until halfway through the press conference before requesting that the earlier bit is kept off the record. Which, of course, is just a really, really bad idea.

Audio:

The subtext here – well, actually, it isn’t a subtext, it’s entirely spelt out – is that people who like football are spiky-haired gobby little oiks who deserve to be covered in piss and horse snot by those who favour “proper sports” like rugby union and three-day eventing.

In the latest advert (above), which was released this week on the website wesupporteventing.com, I can’t work out what the footballing bloke is supposed to have done wrong, other than be a little bit cheeky to “Her Royal Pin-up Zara Philips” (copyright Daily Mail) while expressing a mild ignorance towards equestrianism. Perhaps the reason the horse gets angry is because the miscreant doesn’t doff his top hat, shuffle up on his knees and address the 12th in line to the throne in suitably deferential terms.

The ultimate insult comes when the idiotically anthropormorphised horse concocts a condescending snort of laughter – literally a bray – of the type heard from Land Rover drivers when they drive the wrong way at speed down a one-way street and mow down a couple of seven year olds.

A previous advert shows the same footballing bloke getting his face rubbed in dog piss as sniggering Josh Lewsey looks on. All in all, an entirely confusing and self-defeating piece of marketing.

Spotted via Motortorque.

]]> http://www.wordsdept.co.uk/2008/07/19/ignorant-about-equestrianism-like-football-land-rover-thinks-you-should-be-covered-in-horse-snot/feed/ 0