Forget Harry, Pearce is the Man

Following a series of pitiful events, the English national team faces a bit of a crisis ahead of Euro 2012. Having endured the insult of the FA undermining his managerial authority in the discipline of alleged racist John Terry, Fabio Capello swiftly decided that he would resign. It would appear that the FA were not paying attention during The Godfather: it's all about respect with the Italians. But on the bright side, the English media breathe a sigh of relief, as they won't have to grasp desperately for an excuse should "their boys" fail to meet expectations.

What makes the series of events even more pitiful is the swelling of public support for Harry Redknapp, a man who recently suffered the ignominy of a high-profile court case involving allegations of tax-evasion, to become the next England manager. Redknapp is currently the manager of a relatively successful Tottenham Hotspur team and he is well respected in English football circles, but is he really the man that England want, let alone need?

In a recent press conference, FA Chairman David Bernstein spoke with enthusiasm when he said, "I was really impressed with his attitude". He wasn't talking about Harry Redknapp, however. He was referring to Stuart Pearce, the man who will manage England in the interim period and certainly for their game against Holland. John Scales, on the BBC discussion panel, immediately ruled out Pearce as being a long-term solution to England's problems, but why?


He ticks all of the FA's boxes: They have a preference for an English man, check. They want someone who is passionate and can inspire the players, check. They want someone who knows the English game and English players, check.

Pearce is currently juggling a few different balls. He has been a coach for Fabio Capello during his tenure as England manager, he is the current manager of England under 21s, where he has guided English teams to Finals and Semi Finals of European competition and he is set to manage the British football team which will compete in the Olympics. Granted, his performance as Man City manager was uninspiring, but most will agree that international management is a completely different kettle of fish.

Forget Harry, Pearce is the man for England.

Reduced Rooney Ban an Education

Rooney lashes out.

As England fans rejoice at the news that Wayne Rooney's 3-match ban has been reduced by one game, the rest of the football world can learn an important lesson: the squeaky wheel gets the oil.

Recently, the [English] FA kicked up a massive fuss when FIFA told them not to adorn their shirts with poppies for the friendly against Spain. The result of the whining saw FIFA eventually relent and agree to a compromise which allowed the England team to wear armbands embroidered with poppies.

Today, it emerged that UEFA agreed to reduce Wayne Rooney's three-match ban on the grounds that a two match ban was "more reasonable".

The FA's legal team also pointed to the fact that Miodrag Dzudovic, the Montenegro player who was the victim of Rooney's ire, had asked Uefa to show leniency because Rooney had acted out of “desperation rather than anger”, and had allegedly been “provoked by problems his family had to face a short time before the game”.

There you have it. Victory for England once again.

However, I can't help but wonder what the reaction would have been if a lesser association, say, the Maltese FA, had appealed a similar ban? Without the clout that the [English] FA possesses, you'd probably wager that the Maltese FA's pleas would be dismissed.

On a related note it's interesting that the superiority complex of the FA has been noted in recent times by Sepp Blatter, who criticised the British media for hounding him:

"In the '60s and '70s, the major sports federations were in British hands. This is no longer the case. The English lost power and, more recently, the 2018 World Cup. They were anxious to have it - much more than they were to have the Olympics.They thought football was coming home and the World Cup was rightfully theirs: when they came here with Beckham, Prince William and Prime Minister Cameron, they were sure they'd win the rights. They got two votes. Since then, they have been looking for any means to justify their defeat."

Take from that what you will.

Don't tell British Associations what to do FIFA

Nothing political to see here

So after much consternation and brouhaha, the English and Welsh FAs have been granted a compromise by FIFA which will see them wear an armband with a poppy rather than a poppy on the front of the shirt.


Bravo, victory for the British associations. To think that FIFA were actually trying to tell the English FA what to do! Do they not know that England invented the game? The cheek!

FIFA eventually relented from their previous position when the political figures Prince William, Duke of Cambridge and British Prime Minister David Cameron wrote to FIFA, presumably telling FIFA how it was wrong to prohibit the poppy and that there was absolutely nothing political about it.

Nothing political... right.

The Royal British Legion said the dispute was not between itself and FIFA, nor even the English FA and FIFA, but the British public and FIFA. How's that, eh? Indeed, the British media has already described FIFA as having "backed down" and yielding to the "demands" of the English FA. But in reality, it's more like a tired parent granting a petulant child one sweet rather than the whole bag.

The world governing body of football expressly forbids the flaunting of political, religious or commercial messages on the shirts of their member associations. That seems fair enough to me. International sport is political enough without encouraging aggressively partisan advertisements.

Ah, but being told what to do doesn't sit right with some. The whole affair reminded me of the time when another British association, namely the Irish FA, took FIFA - and the Football Association of Ireland - to the Court of Arbitration for Sport with the complaint that FIFA were interpreting their own eligibility rules wrongly, to the detriment of the IFA. Yes, really. Read that back to yourself again.

I'm slightly disappointed with FIFA's decision. They granted a compromise after an unremitting media storm, coupled with British politicians flexing their political muscle.

But if the English FA and the British public feel like honouring members of a force whose purpose often involves murder, by creating a shameful fuss about wearing a poppy on their shirts at a football game, essentially diminishing the whole thing to a fashion statement, they can knock themselves out.