Kevin Keegan has resigned as manager of Newcastle following more than two days of speculation about what was actually going on at St James' Park. The former England boss has suggested he could not work at a club where players he did not want in his squad were forced upon him.
In a statement on the League Managers Association website, Keegan said: "I’ve been working desperately hard to find a way forward with the directors, but sadly that has not proved possible. It’s my opinion that a manager must have the right to manage and that clubs should not impose upon any manager any player that he does not want.
"It remains my fervent wish to see Newcastle United do well in the future and I feel incredibly sorry for the players, staff and most importantly the supporters. I have been left with no choice other than to leave."
Few will deny Keegan made the right choice. That a manager of his standing had Dennis Wise as his superior (or whatever the relationship was) never made any sense - a manager has to be allowed to manage, and that includes deciding which players to try and buy and which ones to sell.
Wise, the former Leeds United boss, is joint second favourite, along with Toon legend Alan Shearer, to replace Keegan on a permanent basis at 5/1. Gus Poyet has emerged as favourite at 9/4, but the prices are bouncing around all over the place as the news of Keegan's resignation is so recent.
Given Newcastle fans are among the most vociferous in the country, it will be interesting to see how owner Mike Ashley deals with the backlash (perhaps with a pint in hand?). There must be a chance he'll get out as soon as possible and the club, if they ever managed to sort themselves out, could still be a powerhouse. The new Man City owners are thought to have considered buying Newcastle, will some other mega-money consortium actually go the whole way?
Thursday, September 4, 2008
Chelsea boss denies Robinho rift
Chelsea boss Luiz Felipe Scolari has denied claims he was angry with the way the Robnho transfer saga was handled - and has warned fans not to believe unofficial "sources" who claim to know how his mind works.
It was claimed yesterday Scolari was left feeling "angry and let down" because Chelsea would not offer Real Madrid any more than £28.4million for Robinho, who eventually moved to Man City for £32.4million.
But those claims were made by "sources," rather than the big man himself, and Scolari how now officially debunked the talk. Apparently, he has no worries about missing out on the player and believes Robinho was surrounded by people who were not "serious about him coming to Chelsea" - but instead were "more interested in the best business deal". A Chelsea manager accusing a player of going elsewhere for more cash? It has been a few years since that excuse was last used.
Scolari told his club's official website: "I have seen the newspapers and that they say I am unhappy or angry with the club. These statements are not true at all. I have not said this and I do not think this. I am very happy with this situation. I talk to only a few people about my team, all inside the club. Other people have been quoted in newspapers saying they know what I think or feel, but they do not know. Only my close team knows.
"I have a press office at Chelsea and I hold a press conference every week. I do interviews for Chelsea TV and say things for the Chelsea website and my own website. If it does not come from one of these places, it will not be true, and will not be what I think."
He certainly protests well! But, assuming all of the talk in the press yesterday was pure tittle-tattle, is the claim Robinho's "people" were after as much money as possible a reasonable one. It seems unlikely as, unless they were psychic, how would they have known a middle-ranking English team like Man City would suddenly have come into money?
It seems a poor excuse, but the real danger will start in January and next summer if Roman Abramovich decides to start throwing cash around all over the place to try regain the initiative. And, sadly, that is more likely to happen than not.
It was claimed yesterday Scolari was left feeling "angry and let down" because Chelsea would not offer Real Madrid any more than £28.4million for Robinho, who eventually moved to Man City for £32.4million.
But those claims were made by "sources," rather than the big man himself, and Scolari how now officially debunked the talk. Apparently, he has no worries about missing out on the player and believes Robinho was surrounded by people who were not "serious about him coming to Chelsea" - but instead were "more interested in the best business deal". A Chelsea manager accusing a player of going elsewhere for more cash? It has been a few years since that excuse was last used.
Scolari told his club's official website: "I have seen the newspapers and that they say I am unhappy or angry with the club. These statements are not true at all. I have not said this and I do not think this. I am very happy with this situation. I talk to only a few people about my team, all inside the club. Other people have been quoted in newspapers saying they know what I think or feel, but they do not know. Only my close team knows.
"I have a press office at Chelsea and I hold a press conference every week. I do interviews for Chelsea TV and say things for the Chelsea website and my own website. If it does not come from one of these places, it will not be true, and will not be what I think."
He certainly protests well! But, assuming all of the talk in the press yesterday was pure tittle-tattle, is the claim Robinho's "people" were after as much money as possible a reasonable one. It seems unlikely as, unless they were psychic, how would they have known a middle-ranking English team like Man City would suddenly have come into money?
It seems a poor excuse, but the real danger will start in January and next summer if Roman Abramovich decides to start throwing cash around all over the place to try regain the initiative. And, sadly, that is more likely to happen than not.
So Liverpool and Man City are rivals...?
Liverpool's new-signing Albert Riera gave his first real interview after his £6million move from Espanyol. It was a fairly standard first-interview (as was Louis Saha's at Everton) but the way it has been interpreted shows yet again just how much the footballing world has changed in the past few days.
If, at this point last week, anybody on the street was asked to name Liverpool's rivals the answers would probably be "Everton and Manchester United" along with, to a lesser extent, "Chelsea and Arsenal". But according to an article on Goal.com, Riera has urged Liverpool fans to forget about his loan spell at Man City in 2006.
But why do they need to? Man City weren't rivals then, they were a distinctly average team who never really achieved anything of note. And, until the case is proven otherwise, Manchester City will still be a distinctly average team this season - though when the money kicks-in next summer, things will change.
Among other things, Riera said: "I went to Manchester City in January and we were playing for a place in the middle of the table. I was 22 but now I have three years more experience and this is very important in football. Since then I have played in a UEFA Cup final and I have played for the national team."
And also: "I know what has happened at City but the most important thing for me now is Liverpool. They are one team we need to be careful of but we need to look at ourselves. If we do good things we do not need to think about other teams."
A new Liverpool signing being asked about Manchester City. A team who have come out of nowhere thanks to a massive, obscene injection of cash. Who would have thought it just a few days ago?
Then again, Riera is probably right when he says "if we do good things we do not need to think about other teams," especially if by that he means kick the two American owners out in favour of Middle East consortium DIC. That will surely happen before the end of the year and, when it does, Liverpool will be in a far stronger position than Man City, because they are, after all, the far stronger (not to mention bigger) club.
When that does happen there will be two bottomless pit clubs in England, meaning the chain reaction of mega-money that will take football to the brink of destruction and beyond will continue at an ever-increasing pace.
If, at this point last week, anybody on the street was asked to name Liverpool's rivals the answers would probably be "Everton and Manchester United" along with, to a lesser extent, "Chelsea and Arsenal". But according to an article on Goal.com, Riera has urged Liverpool fans to forget about his loan spell at Man City in 2006.
But why do they need to? Man City weren't rivals then, they were a distinctly average team who never really achieved anything of note. And, until the case is proven otherwise, Manchester City will still be a distinctly average team this season - though when the money kicks-in next summer, things will change.
Among other things, Riera said: "I went to Manchester City in January and we were playing for a place in the middle of the table. I was 22 but now I have three years more experience and this is very important in football. Since then I have played in a UEFA Cup final and I have played for the national team."
And also: "I know what has happened at City but the most important thing for me now is Liverpool. They are one team we need to be careful of but we need to look at ourselves. If we do good things we do not need to think about other teams."
A new Liverpool signing being asked about Manchester City. A team who have come out of nowhere thanks to a massive, obscene injection of cash. Who would have thought it just a few days ago?
Then again, Riera is probably right when he says "if we do good things we do not need to think about other teams," especially if by that he means kick the two American owners out in favour of Middle East consortium DIC. That will surely happen before the end of the year and, when it does, Liverpool will be in a far stronger position than Man City, because they are, after all, the far stronger (not to mention bigger) club.
When that does happen there will be two bottomless pit clubs in England, meaning the chain reaction of mega-money that will take football to the brink of destruction and beyond will continue at an ever-increasing pace.
Man City fans need to be realistic - Hughes
Mark Hughes must have had a strange few months. One moment he was manager of Blackburn and winning plaudits, the next moment he was heading towards the end the transfer window as Manchester City boss. Then, as we all know, Man City were taken over by multi-billionaires on deadline-day and became the richest club in world football.
Now the former Manchester United and Wales striker has told fans to be realistic! Is that really a reasonable request when the new Middle Eastern owners can earn more in interest on their wealth than they can ever sink into a football team?
However, to be fair, the comments Hughes has made in an article in The Metro are probably spot-on. They show he is still aware money doesn't buy everything. Well, not quite everthing, anyway. And he's not telling fans to temper their desire for world-class players - far from it - but instead pointing out signing big-names in January, halfway through the Champions League tournament, is never easy.
He said: "There are exceptionally talented players around that we would bring to the club if they were made available. The difficulty will be getting the clubs to release those players. We obviously are talking about players whose clubs are involved in the Champions League.
"They may not be very receptive to losing those players midway through a Champions League season. Maybe it will be more difficult in January than people realise. But we will pursue targets we can realistically get."
At least the mainstream media is finally coming round to the idea that Man City do, in fact, have practically unlimited cash. The article mentions "almost limitless wealth," so hopefully fans of other teams in the Premier League and beyond will finally start accepting the full implications of Monday's takeover.
Now the former Manchester United and Wales striker has told fans to be realistic! Is that really a reasonable request when the new Middle Eastern owners can earn more in interest on their wealth than they can ever sink into a football team?
However, to be fair, the comments Hughes has made in an article in The Metro are probably spot-on. They show he is still aware money doesn't buy everything. Well, not quite everthing, anyway. And he's not telling fans to temper their desire for world-class players - far from it - but instead pointing out signing big-names in January, halfway through the Champions League tournament, is never easy.
He said: "There are exceptionally talented players around that we would bring to the club if they were made available. The difficulty will be getting the clubs to release those players. We obviously are talking about players whose clubs are involved in the Champions League.
"They may not be very receptive to losing those players midway through a Champions League season. Maybe it will be more difficult in January than people realise. But we will pursue targets we can realistically get."
At least the mainstream media is finally coming round to the idea that Man City do, in fact, have practically unlimited cash. The article mentions "almost limitless wealth," so hopefully fans of other teams in the Premier League and beyond will finally start accepting the full implications of Monday's takeover.
Silly money in the Unibond League
While I am convinced top-flight football is terminally ill and its death is inevitable, I would have to be a fool to deny the amount of spending in lower divisions is anything other than outrageous at times.
However, I was stunned to discover Eastwood Town, of the Unibond Premier League, have a wage budget of £9,000-a-week. Just to clarify, the league is one rung of the ladder below the Conference North and, therefore, three rungs below League Two and six rungs below the Premier League.
Assuming - and I honestly know little about the club or the league they are in - Eastwood Town have 20 players on their books. That would mean, on average, they earn £450-a-week each. Obviously some will earn quite a bit less and some quite a bit more. But, in any case, that does seem a lot of money for someone plying their trade in the seventh-tier of English football.
Interestingly, I only discovered this while browsing through the Manchester Evening News and found an article about a game between FC United and Eastwood Town. It transpires FC United, who were created when the Glazers took over Manchester United, have a wage-budget of just one-sixth the size of their opponents!
Is there anywhere a real, traditional fan can go to watch a football where money isn't the main influence on the game? Heck, even though it's unlikely the European Union would never allow it, perhaps it's about to to introduce a stringent, Europe-wide wage-cap with the maximum set differently for the different tiers.
Seventh-tier and averaging £450-a-week per player. Where did it all go wrong?
However, I was stunned to discover Eastwood Town, of the Unibond Premier League, have a wage budget of £9,000-a-week. Just to clarify, the league is one rung of the ladder below the Conference North and, therefore, three rungs below League Two and six rungs below the Premier League.
Assuming - and I honestly know little about the club or the league they are in - Eastwood Town have 20 players on their books. That would mean, on average, they earn £450-a-week each. Obviously some will earn quite a bit less and some quite a bit more. But, in any case, that does seem a lot of money for someone plying their trade in the seventh-tier of English football.
Interestingly, I only discovered this while browsing through the Manchester Evening News and found an article about a game between FC United and Eastwood Town. It transpires FC United, who were created when the Glazers took over Manchester United, have a wage-budget of just one-sixth the size of their opponents!
Is there anywhere a real, traditional fan can go to watch a football where money isn't the main influence on the game? Heck, even though it's unlikely the European Union would never allow it, perhaps it's about to to introduce a stringent, Europe-wide wage-cap with the maximum set differently for the different tiers.
Seventh-tier and averaging £450-a-week per player. Where did it all go wrong?
Newcastle a tragedy and disaster - Roeder
Is Kevin Keegan still the manager of Newcastle United? Who knows but, whatever happens, former boss Glenn Roeder has said the club is a "tragedy," moving from "one disaster to another".
When Alan Curbishley left West Ham yesterday (Wed, Sep 3) it was not even clear if he was the first Premier League manager to leave his post this season - because Keegan may have already quit or been sacked. One of the few things known is Keegan did not take training on Tuesday.
Roeder, currently manager at Norwich, should be saluted though for actually seeing through all the hype and spin. He clearly has the ability to remember football's better times and, impressively, can still see how those times continue to shape the present. For Roeder knows Newcastle is only the club it is due to the fans.
He told Radio Five Live: "The club is a tragedy and it goes from one disaster to another. There's no stability at the club and I don't think there has been for a long time. They go from one manager to another and the people who suffer the most are the most important people, the supporters. When they talk about Newcastle being a great club, it's only great for one reason - because it has great supporters."
It would be great if Mike Ashley, the Newcastle owner, takes note of what Roeder has to saw as, amid all the claims and counterclaims of the past view days, his words shine like a beacon across the darkness - just as Newcastle may shine like a beacon to attract foreign investment if Ashley decides he has had enough.
When Alan Curbishley left West Ham yesterday (Wed, Sep 3) it was not even clear if he was the first Premier League manager to leave his post this season - because Keegan may have already quit or been sacked. One of the few things known is Keegan did not take training on Tuesday.
Roeder, currently manager at Norwich, should be saluted though for actually seeing through all the hype and spin. He clearly has the ability to remember football's better times and, impressively, can still see how those times continue to shape the present. For Roeder knows Newcastle is only the club it is due to the fans.
He told Radio Five Live: "The club is a tragedy and it goes from one disaster to another. There's no stability at the club and I don't think there has been for a long time. They go from one manager to another and the people who suffer the most are the most important people, the supporters. When they talk about Newcastle being a great club, it's only great for one reason - because it has great supporters."
It would be great if Mike Ashley, the Newcastle owner, takes note of what Roeder has to saw as, amid all the claims and counterclaims of the past view days, his words shine like a beacon across the darkness - just as Newcastle may shine like a beacon to attract foreign investment if Ashley decides he has had enough.
As the big boys spend, the small clubs struggle
The death of football is not just an English thing. Different countries around the world are at different stages in the slide towards doom. But, even in the two-club dominated Scottish leagues, it's sad to see yet another club facing money problems.
Football fans in England tend to overlook the Scottish game - though any who say the Celtic v Rangers match on Sunday (Aug 31) may have changed their opinion - but there are still many, many clubs steeped in tradition, at the heart of their communities, who struggle to get by.
It could even be argued the smaller clubs who are in the most trouble - in this case Stranraer in the Scottish Second Division - are some of the only clubs in England and Scotland still in touch with the version of the game we used to love. The version when it was about what happened on the pitch, not in the press, and players had no other aim but to win. Yes, that game is still alive in Scotland - though perhaps not alive and well.
Yesterday, Stranraer vice-chairman Sean Niven told BBC Scotland: "We need to make difficult decisions and we need to reduce the living costs, so it's tough and painful. Mistakes have been made at the club, and we have overstretched our budget capabilities and on realising that and trying to pull things back a bit - although at a late stage - we hope it can avert any lasting damage. It's down to poor communication and poor decision-making."
His words show how serious the situation probably is - although he was keen to stress the club in not on the verge of folding, as the local press up there have apparently claimed. The sickest thing, though, with the amount of cash flowing around in England is the size of Stranraer's debt.
A staggering £250,000!
Yes, a club in Scotland, where football is still genuine and fans are still fans, is in serious trouble because they owe the (rough) equivalent of what new Manchester City signing Robinho earns in a couple of weeks. If that doesn't show what is so horribly wrong with the game, perhaps nothing will.
I'll return to Stranraer and Scottish football in general at a latter stage. But for now I'd suggest the future of the English game, with the way the money is going, can be glimpsed at by looking at the Scottish system. When football dies and is, in one way or another, resurrected in England, there may be a strong similarity.
Football fans in England tend to overlook the Scottish game - though any who say the Celtic v Rangers match on Sunday (Aug 31) may have changed their opinion - but there are still many, many clubs steeped in tradition, at the heart of their communities, who struggle to get by.
It could even be argued the smaller clubs who are in the most trouble - in this case Stranraer in the Scottish Second Division - are some of the only clubs in England and Scotland still in touch with the version of the game we used to love. The version when it was about what happened on the pitch, not in the press, and players had no other aim but to win. Yes, that game is still alive in Scotland - though perhaps not alive and well.
Yesterday, Stranraer vice-chairman Sean Niven told BBC Scotland: "We need to make difficult decisions and we need to reduce the living costs, so it's tough and painful. Mistakes have been made at the club, and we have overstretched our budget capabilities and on realising that and trying to pull things back a bit - although at a late stage - we hope it can avert any lasting damage. It's down to poor communication and poor decision-making."
His words show how serious the situation probably is - although he was keen to stress the club in not on the verge of folding, as the local press up there have apparently claimed. The sickest thing, though, with the amount of cash flowing around in England is the size of Stranraer's debt.
A staggering £250,000!
Yes, a club in Scotland, where football is still genuine and fans are still fans, is in serious trouble because they owe the (rough) equivalent of what new Manchester City signing Robinho earns in a couple of weeks. If that doesn't show what is so horribly wrong with the game, perhaps nothing will.
I'll return to Stranraer and Scottish football in general at a latter stage. But for now I'd suggest the future of the English game, with the way the money is going, can be glimpsed at by looking at the Scottish system. When football dies and is, in one way or another, resurrected in England, there may be a strong similarity.
Everton need a billionaire...don't we all?!?
Everton owner Bill Kenwright has said he is a "pauper" compared to other chairmen and would love the club "to have a billionaire" in his place. Whether a billion is worth getting out of bed for in the Premier League following Monday's (Sep 1) fun-and-games is arguable, but what he is saying should be worrying for all genuine football fans.
Everton are one of the clubs, along with Spurs, who can realistically claim they are the "best of the non-top four". Anyone but the most die-hard of Evertonians would already admit they have no real chance of reaching the top-four, but the owner throwing his hands in the air underlines the situation.
Speaking at an extraordinary general meeting of his club, Kenwright said: "I'm a pauper when it comes to other chairmen. I want Everton to have a billionaire, but it is not me. My shares have been for sale from the day I bought in.
"Now Arabs have bought Man City, making it even more difficult for Everton. I cannot go on like this, we need a new owner and we will continue to try to find one. I cannot see an alternative. This summer's transfer window has been the worst and most difficult I can remember. Every year it becomes more difficult to find the money. It is impossible to continue in the financial way we are at the moment."
The EGM was called to discuss plans for Everton's new stadium (don't do it, football will be dead soon enough!) but Kenwright's words almost look like a "come and buy us" plea to businessmen around the world - and the Middle East in particular. However, Everton may face the same problem they have for much of their existence: Liverpool Football Club.
For Liverpool are rumoured to be on the verge of being taken over by Sheikh Mohammed and Dubai International Capital. While the billionaires (or is that trillionaires?) at Man City may be happy to share the spotlight with their illustrious neighbors in red, would any investors want to attempt a similar move in Liverpool?
Everton are one of the clubs, along with Spurs, who can realistically claim they are the "best of the non-top four". Anyone but the most die-hard of Evertonians would already admit they have no real chance of reaching the top-four, but the owner throwing his hands in the air underlines the situation.
Speaking at an extraordinary general meeting of his club, Kenwright said: "I'm a pauper when it comes to other chairmen. I want Everton to have a billionaire, but it is not me. My shares have been for sale from the day I bought in.
"Now Arabs have bought Man City, making it even more difficult for Everton. I cannot go on like this, we need a new owner and we will continue to try to find one. I cannot see an alternative. This summer's transfer window has been the worst and most difficult I can remember. Every year it becomes more difficult to find the money. It is impossible to continue in the financial way we are at the moment."
The EGM was called to discuss plans for Everton's new stadium (don't do it, football will be dead soon enough!) but Kenwright's words almost look like a "come and buy us" plea to businessmen around the world - and the Middle East in particular. However, Everton may face the same problem they have for much of their existence: Liverpool Football Club.
For Liverpool are rumoured to be on the verge of being taken over by Sheikh Mohammed and Dubai International Capital. While the billionaires (or is that trillionaires?) at Man City may be happy to share the spotlight with their illustrious neighbors in red, would any investors want to attempt a similar move in Liverpool?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
