Manchester United have always been a football club that has considered young talent to be central to it's identity. Even this season, under the leadership of a Dutchman who is enduring immense pressure, 5 academy graduates have made their debuts and played in the first team. United fans love to see the shirt filled with promising youngsters from home and abroad. With January not too far away and withUnited looking to continue spending, I decided to put a top 5 list together of the brightest young talents who I think would be perfect for the club. Leave a comment below and let me know who your list would be, I'll pick out the best one and read it out live on American Radio along with your twitter handle.
1. Martin Ødegaard (Strømsgodset IF) A young player who United have already had over on trial although to be fair, so has most of Europe. Much like the previous Norwegian superstar at United, he's a Liverpool fan! This young boy has the physique of a man and unlike Freddy Adu, he isn't all hype. Watching him he looks like a young Boban, terrific balance, great feet and plays with the maturity of a player in his prime. The dilemma Utd have is, if they bought him now they'd probably have to take him and loan him out elsewhere as he's not quite ready. The danger is, when you leave a young player at a club who has already sold him, they tend not to play them. Exactly the same thing happened to Fabio and Rafael at Fluminense. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rAUls8rEYs
2. Youri Tielemans. The production line of young talent in Belgium is absolutely staggering, whatever they did 20 years ago it's working. Tielemans is a young Midfielder in the mold of Patrick Viera, he's quite physical for a 17 year old with terrific technique and a great engine. Belgian kids tend to settle well into a Northern European climate, given his age, his talent and the fact that United are crying for his type, he be well worth bringing in to support a Strootman or a Vidal. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSmHzW_txhw
3. Bernard. A brilliant young winger with skill and pace to burn. He was rated so highly at by his previous vlub in Brazil Atletico Mineiro they turned down a $9.8m bid by Spartak Moscow 6 months before selling him to Shakhtar Donetsk for a cool $22m. However with the political situation in Donetsk as it is, Bernard has made it clear he wants to leave. United have always been a club that loves wingers, with the likely departure of Ashley Young and the fact that van Gaal remains unconvinced about Valencia, they could do worse than young Bernard. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrSbfKdM5rQ
4. Eder Balanta. If there is one position United will strengthen in come January it will be the center of defence, the problem being of course, there just isn't that many top class central defenders about. The club must no doubt occasionally cast envious glances at Raphael Varane and think "what if"? So when another young exceptional central defender comes along, no doubt United will be interested. Balanta is built like a breeze block, he's quick and good in the air, physically he's perfect for England. Tim Vickery raves about him at every opportunity (although he did the same about Rafael Scheidt) at one time too. Balanta however looks the real deal. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NApExJhZwEY
5. Luka Jovic. Let me start by stating the obvious, the Balkans know how to produce footballers and nothing gets the pulse racing like a good young striker. Back in May Jovic broke Dejan Stankovic's record as the youngest goalscorer in a competitive fixture in the clubs history and lets just say Red Star have had a few talented kids. Jovic has been prolific for Serbia and Red Star at youth level. Having just turned 17 and with the fact Serbia aren't in the EU it would be hard to get him before he's 18, a problem Utd faced with Adem Ljajic so they may be faced with the same problem they would have with Ødegaard with him not being played but nobody costs more than a good young striker, everyone will want to get this kids signature before he blows up. No doubt Utd scouts will be watching him closely. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvqxKzfp8lQ
PJB NEWS
Friday, November 14, 2014
Tuesday, November 11, 2014
Time for a Director of Football at Manchester United?
There are times in everyone's life when in the midst of revelry with someone we love, a sobering thought intrudes in our mind that this won't last forever, the Germans call it a Hintergendanken. If you're a Manchester United fan you'll know exactly what I'm talking about. It occasionally sprung to mind during the Sir Alex Ferguson years, an uncomfortable thought and with Zen discipline the thought was quickly banished for another day. When that day finally came 16 months ago, most United fans expected a difficult transition but nobody expected this.
The ingredients of success are many and sustained success never happens by accident, the same is also true of sustained failure, some thing hasn't gone wrong, many things have gone wrong. When we see United as we see them today and we ask how, the truth is, there are many architects and one of them is Fergie himself. To begin you'll need to go back to 2009 for that's where I believe it began.
There have been many accolades bestowed on Ferguson and one of them has been attention to detail, he knew everything about the club and he was given complete autonomy to run this massive conglomerate as he wished. A solipsistic genius who brought success on a level that will never be seen again. He delegated but his shadow loomed over everything, nothing happened without his say so. One of the first things he overhauled at the club was the youth academy, academy graduates where central to United's identity and it was woefully underperforming. His transformation of the academy was as good as anything he achieved at the club, he had the unequivocal trust of the board and had the unique position of job security with the ability to plan for years ahead which he did with such refulgence.
Even with Sir Alex's trust in youth he was never afraid to spend big, in his early years he had an inimical relationship with the then owner Martin Edwards typically over money and how much of it he had to spend. He would routinely break transfer records for players which made his apostasy in his latter years all the more bizarre. When painting a picture of Ferguson you're talking about a winner who was in control over every aspect of the club, always looking to the future, that is until you look at his last 4 years at the club and when you do, parsimony springs to mind.
In the summer of 2009, Cristiano Ronaldo signed for Real Madrid. The deal had been agreed a year before and according to the Real Madrid president at the time Ramon Calderon, the contracts where all signed in December to ratify the deal. Looking back, I wonder if something died in Ferguson when that deal went through. 6 months after the deal was confirmed the club signed Michael Owen on a free transfer after claiming there was no value in the market. A market that United had manipulated themselves, a market that United knew they would overpay once clubs they announced they had just received 80m. It is no coincidence to me that in 2009 there was a major economical depression and the fact that United had asked for every single penny of that 80m up front in cash suggests there was an urgent need for it. Madrid would have willingly sold them Sneijder or Robben, one of whom he tried to sign before and another who would be pursued with great vigor, both would have improved United greatly, both where needed. They could have signed Karim Benzema, supposedly they where willing to go to 30m, not 35m, why not? What's 5m when you've just sold arguably the best player in the world for a world record fee? Something wasn't right.
It would be just 12 months later when Wayne Rooney questioned the clubs ambition, a position that many United fans shared at the time but viewed as the ultimate act of perfidy by Sir Alex, a deed he would never forget. Rooney would subsequently rescind his concerns when he secured a better contract, it was that which irked the ire of the fans rather than his initial concerns, he was saying everything they wanted to say, he had a point. A point that remained up until the managers retirement.
There are many incidents over the last 4 years that point towards a policy shift of dealing with the right here and right now rather than the future. I firmly believe that had Sergio Aguero put that last minute winner wide we would have been dealing with the retirement 12 months earlier. When the clubs French scout spotted Paul Pogba the message was "he's the best talent I've ever seen", he was signed and instantly impressed. Yet perhaps no more greater example of the here and now policy was Paul Scholes coming out of retirement which ironically would cost the club the services of the best young midfielder in the world, a position that United where so woefully short in. There is no way that would have happened in Fergie's prime and I refuse to believe that a man who managed to convince Cristiano Ronaldo to turn down Real Madrid for 2 years could not convince Paul Pogba to stay if he had of really wanted.
The here and now policy suited the owners, it greatly reduced spending and risk however that short term thinking and United's antiquated structure is what's costing the club today. I say structure because one of the negative side effects of having a manager so long is the fact that United's recruitment is stuck in a previous era. Since they have not had to deal with rotating mangers like other clubs have been doing for years now, recruitment has always been strictly a managers decision. This policy is exactly the reason why no replacements where brought in for Rio Ferdinand and Nemanja Vidic. Once confidence was lost in David Moyes and he was sacked then it became the responsibility of the next manager to identify who their replacements would be. Prior to Louis van Gaal going to the World Cup he had to give his final seal of approval to the Luke Shaw and Ander Herrera deals, at Bayern or Barcelona he would have been told rather than asked.
With van Gaal not even setting foot inside Manchester until mid July, then admitting that he needed a few weeks to assess what he had before making a decision, this only exasperated an already desperate situation. Well anyone with a brain and a set of eyes could have saved him the trouble with Tyler Blackett and Michael Keane, neither of whom are United standard. With slightly more than 2 weeks to go in the window United still had not signed a single central defender despite having lost 2 of the best and most experienced defenders in the game. They needed someone like a Mats Hummels, well those deals aren't done in 2 weeks. No way this would have happened at another one of Europe's top clubs. When I sat with Ed Woodward in the summer in LA, he explained to me that his job is easy, he just waits on direction from the manager on who he signs. Whilst it's obviously a gross oversimplification, the point remains.
Manchester United will never see the likes of Sir Alex Ferguson again, they have now entered the world of rotating managers and will need to adjust accordingly. Other clubs that have been doing this for years have football people inside the club recruiting whether the manager is there or not. This is exactly what United have to do, if they did, the debacle we saw last season would not have happened and in the space of 12 months we would not have gone from needing to fix a weak midfield to needing to address everywhere but a goalkeeper. As much as you may hate to admit it, Chelsea have prepared for where there are for the last few years. When they saw FFP coming, they went out and signed some terrific young talents and as a result have been able to either sell them for big money such as Lukaku or bring them back such as Courtouis and save them millions. Chelsea can now sell Peter Cech for a handsome sum, they sold David Luiz and bought Kurt Zouma 6 months before, they didn't do it the other way around.
So today we find ourselves as United fans experiencing a lot of firsts. This summer was unlike any other, 6 players where signed, none of whom where cheap. In 26 years it could be argued that Sir Alex Ferguson signed 1 player at the top of the market, a true global superstar in his prime, 2 of them came to Old Trafford in 2 weeks. The one thing we do know, this spending is not sustainable and our owners have no intentions of ever doing it again. It will be interesting to see how long before the Glazers blink, if United aren't back in the Champions League this summer we will have some very nervy owners. Lessons must be learned, least of all the improvident thinking that permeated Old Trafford upon the managers retirement. I believe not employing a Director of Football after dismissal of Moyes was an opportunity lost, van Gaal is used to them and most likely would have been fine with it. It's too late now for this manager but it must be a serious consideration when the managers reign comes to an end. Mind you, I have a Hintergedanken that if Champions League football is not back at OT by next season then a Director of Football will be the least of the Glazers problems.
The ingredients of success are many and sustained success never happens by accident, the same is also true of sustained failure, some thing hasn't gone wrong, many things have gone wrong. When we see United as we see them today and we ask how, the truth is, there are many architects and one of them is Fergie himself. To begin you'll need to go back to 2009 for that's where I believe it began.
There have been many accolades bestowed on Ferguson and one of them has been attention to detail, he knew everything about the club and he was given complete autonomy to run this massive conglomerate as he wished. A solipsistic genius who brought success on a level that will never be seen again. He delegated but his shadow loomed over everything, nothing happened without his say so. One of the first things he overhauled at the club was the youth academy, academy graduates where central to United's identity and it was woefully underperforming. His transformation of the academy was as good as anything he achieved at the club, he had the unequivocal trust of the board and had the unique position of job security with the ability to plan for years ahead which he did with such refulgence.
Even with Sir Alex's trust in youth he was never afraid to spend big, in his early years he had an inimical relationship with the then owner Martin Edwards typically over money and how much of it he had to spend. He would routinely break transfer records for players which made his apostasy in his latter years all the more bizarre. When painting a picture of Ferguson you're talking about a winner who was in control over every aspect of the club, always looking to the future, that is until you look at his last 4 years at the club and when you do, parsimony springs to mind.
In the summer of 2009, Cristiano Ronaldo signed for Real Madrid. The deal had been agreed a year before and according to the Real Madrid president at the time Ramon Calderon, the contracts where all signed in December to ratify the deal. Looking back, I wonder if something died in Ferguson when that deal went through. 6 months after the deal was confirmed the club signed Michael Owen on a free transfer after claiming there was no value in the market. A market that United had manipulated themselves, a market that United knew they would overpay once clubs they announced they had just received 80m. It is no coincidence to me that in 2009 there was a major economical depression and the fact that United had asked for every single penny of that 80m up front in cash suggests there was an urgent need for it. Madrid would have willingly sold them Sneijder or Robben, one of whom he tried to sign before and another who would be pursued with great vigor, both would have improved United greatly, both where needed. They could have signed Karim Benzema, supposedly they where willing to go to 30m, not 35m, why not? What's 5m when you've just sold arguably the best player in the world for a world record fee? Something wasn't right.
It would be just 12 months later when Wayne Rooney questioned the clubs ambition, a position that many United fans shared at the time but viewed as the ultimate act of perfidy by Sir Alex, a deed he would never forget. Rooney would subsequently rescind his concerns when he secured a better contract, it was that which irked the ire of the fans rather than his initial concerns, he was saying everything they wanted to say, he had a point. A point that remained up until the managers retirement.
There are many incidents over the last 4 years that point towards a policy shift of dealing with the right here and right now rather than the future. I firmly believe that had Sergio Aguero put that last minute winner wide we would have been dealing with the retirement 12 months earlier. When the clubs French scout spotted Paul Pogba the message was "he's the best talent I've ever seen", he was signed and instantly impressed. Yet perhaps no more greater example of the here and now policy was Paul Scholes coming out of retirement which ironically would cost the club the services of the best young midfielder in the world, a position that United where so woefully short in. There is no way that would have happened in Fergie's prime and I refuse to believe that a man who managed to convince Cristiano Ronaldo to turn down Real Madrid for 2 years could not convince Paul Pogba to stay if he had of really wanted.
The here and now policy suited the owners, it greatly reduced spending and risk however that short term thinking and United's antiquated structure is what's costing the club today. I say structure because one of the negative side effects of having a manager so long is the fact that United's recruitment is stuck in a previous era. Since they have not had to deal with rotating mangers like other clubs have been doing for years now, recruitment has always been strictly a managers decision. This policy is exactly the reason why no replacements where brought in for Rio Ferdinand and Nemanja Vidic. Once confidence was lost in David Moyes and he was sacked then it became the responsibility of the next manager to identify who their replacements would be. Prior to Louis van Gaal going to the World Cup he had to give his final seal of approval to the Luke Shaw and Ander Herrera deals, at Bayern or Barcelona he would have been told rather than asked.
With van Gaal not even setting foot inside Manchester until mid July, then admitting that he needed a few weeks to assess what he had before making a decision, this only exasperated an already desperate situation. Well anyone with a brain and a set of eyes could have saved him the trouble with Tyler Blackett and Michael Keane, neither of whom are United standard. With slightly more than 2 weeks to go in the window United still had not signed a single central defender despite having lost 2 of the best and most experienced defenders in the game. They needed someone like a Mats Hummels, well those deals aren't done in 2 weeks. No way this would have happened at another one of Europe's top clubs. When I sat with Ed Woodward in the summer in LA, he explained to me that his job is easy, he just waits on direction from the manager on who he signs. Whilst it's obviously a gross oversimplification, the point remains.
Manchester United will never see the likes of Sir Alex Ferguson again, they have now entered the world of rotating managers and will need to adjust accordingly. Other clubs that have been doing this for years have football people inside the club recruiting whether the manager is there or not. This is exactly what United have to do, if they did, the debacle we saw last season would not have happened and in the space of 12 months we would not have gone from needing to fix a weak midfield to needing to address everywhere but a goalkeeper. As much as you may hate to admit it, Chelsea have prepared for where there are for the last few years. When they saw FFP coming, they went out and signed some terrific young talents and as a result have been able to either sell them for big money such as Lukaku or bring them back such as Courtouis and save them millions. Chelsea can now sell Peter Cech for a handsome sum, they sold David Luiz and bought Kurt Zouma 6 months before, they didn't do it the other way around.
So today we find ourselves as United fans experiencing a lot of firsts. This summer was unlike any other, 6 players where signed, none of whom where cheap. In 26 years it could be argued that Sir Alex Ferguson signed 1 player at the top of the market, a true global superstar in his prime, 2 of them came to Old Trafford in 2 weeks. The one thing we do know, this spending is not sustainable and our owners have no intentions of ever doing it again. It will be interesting to see how long before the Glazers blink, if United aren't back in the Champions League this summer we will have some very nervy owners. Lessons must be learned, least of all the improvident thinking that permeated Old Trafford upon the managers retirement. I believe not employing a Director of Football after dismissal of Moyes was an opportunity lost, van Gaal is used to them and most likely would have been fine with it. It's too late now for this manager but it must be a serious consideration when the managers reign comes to an end. Mind you, I have a Hintergedanken that if Champions League football is not back at OT by next season then a Director of Football will be the least of the Glazers problems.
Sunday, November 9, 2014
What has this got to do with Football?
Every year in the British calendar they have an event called Remembrance Sunday. It's an annual ceremony to commemorate the contribution of British and Commonwealth military and civilian servicemen and women in the two World Wars and later conflicts. This is also marked by the wearing of a Poppy, the poppy was first used by the American legion to commemorate American soldiers who died in the first world war. They were then adopted by military veterans' groups in parts of the former British Empire: the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Today, they are mainly used in the UK and Canada to commemorate their servicemen and women who have been killed in all conflicts since 1914. The poppy has now become such a powerful public symbol, it has become an unwritten rule that all public figures must wear them or face opprobrium, just ask James McClean.
This event has changed dramatically since I was a child, having been born in to what we dubbed in Ireland a 'mixed marriage' with a protestant mother and a catholic father, I inevitably had family who where in the Royal British Legion and as a result sold Poppy's every year. Back in my youth it was done with a lot more tact, whilst there was most certainly public displays of respect, they where done in appropriate places such as a Cenotaph or a war memorial site and if you so choose to wear a poppy or not, you did so without duress. Sadly today the Poppy and the event of remembering has been hijacked by both right wing fascists and brand development executives looking for easy point scoring. To the degree now that any dissenting voice about the Disney-fication of this event is instantly labeled disrespectful and verbally abused.
I fail to see how forced mandated respect is respect at all, surely it's nothing more than peer pressured compliance with this tacky "look at me, look at the respect I'm paying" culture. I see it here in the US all the time, people virtually bowing down in reverence to young men and women in uniform and you wonder, who is that for? I have a friend who served 2 tours of Iraq, he just got out of the Military a year ago and we talked about this. He explained to me, "look a lot of kids who join the Military are from run down economically deprived areas, they've been looked down on their entire lives. Once they're in uniform everything changes, it's like they've just become a celebrity, they have girls fawning over them, they have people buying them their dinner, buying them beer, everybody wants to be their friend. Companies are falling over themselves to take care of these guys every whim for fear of being criticized and being accused of being unpatriotic" blah blah blah. It's not hard to see how intoxicating that is for young men and women. My friend also went on to explain how that inevitably gives a lot of these kids incredible egos, many of them specifically wear their uniform in public when there is no need because of this adulation, who can blame them? As a result of the ridiculous exaggeration of todays right wing media about the imminent threat of Muslim terrorists you now have a society that won't tolerate any form of verbal dissention related to "our troops" and shut down all logical thought and discussion surrounding "our troops". Just look at the amount of money that is made in books and movies for a modern day living John Rambo. Lone survivor, No Easy Day, it's big big business and what's the point of being John Rambo if you can't tell anyone?
Which brings me to the public spectacle of paying your respects to the deceased service men and women of the British armed forces. Maybe I've got this all wrong but since when did paying respects to the dead become one step away from a Reality TV show? Didn't we used to do this sort of thing in private or in an appropriate setting? What on earth has Premier League Football got to do with Remembrance Sunday? The Premier League chases every global unit of currency it can get it's hands on, it sells itself as a "Global League", so how did it decide that this was a good idea? This forced respect is extremely unfair on many who have different views, James McClean for example is strung up every year and publically tried for treason for his refusal to wear a poppy! You can bet your life there are more who feel the same way but just don't have the courage of James to speak up.
I know there are many who disagree but what is it you disagree with? Do you disagree that sometimes sport as a microcosm of society should be a platform for things such as this? Do you disagree that football shirts have no right to expect immunity? The problem is, if you disagree then you have to agree that ALL views must be accepted, not just the ones you agree with. Imagine if Glasgow Celtic paid homage to the IRA for fighting and dying for the liberation of Ireland from a foreign occupying army who where guilty of genocide and the deprivation of basic human rights. In fact go one step further, imagine they wanted the Easter Lilly ( a symbol that commemorates the IRA's Easter rising) sewn into everyone's shirts including Rangers what would happen? There would be outrage in the British media, this would be seen as a glorification of terrorism and an insult to the dead etc etc etc. But to many people who where subjected to the most heinous racist and murderous occupation the IRA where their liberators.
There in lies the problem, you can not have the arrogance that only your dead deserves to be commemorated, you can not have the arrogance to say that only your political views are entitled to public respect before a football match if you're not willing to accept every one else's. I was born in Belfast in the 70's, the height of the troubles. My experience of the British armed forces was not a positive one, I watched them spit on my mother when I was 7 years old and called her an 'Irish whore" , I watched them collude with unionist murderers to slaughter innocent Catholics, as a child walking to school they would routinely point their guns at us, they slaughtered unarmed innocent protestors, they illegally occupied the country I was born in, tore it to pieces and subjected the Irish to the most deprived denigrated existence, robbed them of their culture, committed genocide and deprived them of their basic human rights. Many of the people that survived this occupation are left with chronic depression through grief, they have multiple graves to visit and spend the rest of their lives suicidal or addicted to a substance to self medicate the awful mental trauma. So I'm sure you can understand how many don't hold the same reverence for the British armed forces.
The Premier League is a commercial juggernaut and there is nobody they idolize more than the Americans for how they present their sports. They are attempting to implement the American model in every capacity possible and there is no doubt about it, the Americans do an exceptional job with selling and marketing sports but they aren't perfect. One of those imperfections is the borderline xenophobia that is present in even a meaningless end of season baseball game. When I first went to a baseball game in the US, I couldn't believe my eyes. First there is the national anthem, followed by screaming F-14 Jets over head whilst on the field they have a military marching band playing to the roar of the crowd. I kept asking myself, what has any of this got to do with baseball and why are people cheering this? I've been in the US more than a decade now and I still don't have an answer to those questions.
Every once in a while I ask myself, what would be my breaking point that would cause me to start questioning my love of football, well this weekend I got my answer. I am deeply uncomfortable with forced adulation for the armed forces before a football game. Listening to commentators issue their usual plethora of clichés like "puts football into perspective" is quite frankly offensive. The only thing it puts into perspective is the double standard that exists within football and what is kosher politically and what isn't and it puts into perspective how nothing anymore is outside the remit of the Premier League's marketing machine for make no mistake about it, this is much more about being seen to be doing the right thing than actually doing it with any degree of sincerity.
Philip Brown
This event has changed dramatically since I was a child, having been born in to what we dubbed in Ireland a 'mixed marriage' with a protestant mother and a catholic father, I inevitably had family who where in the Royal British Legion and as a result sold Poppy's every year. Back in my youth it was done with a lot more tact, whilst there was most certainly public displays of respect, they where done in appropriate places such as a Cenotaph or a war memorial site and if you so choose to wear a poppy or not, you did so without duress. Sadly today the Poppy and the event of remembering has been hijacked by both right wing fascists and brand development executives looking for easy point scoring. To the degree now that any dissenting voice about the Disney-fication of this event is instantly labeled disrespectful and verbally abused.
I fail to see how forced mandated respect is respect at all, surely it's nothing more than peer pressured compliance with this tacky "look at me, look at the respect I'm paying" culture. I see it here in the US all the time, people virtually bowing down in reverence to young men and women in uniform and you wonder, who is that for? I have a friend who served 2 tours of Iraq, he just got out of the Military a year ago and we talked about this. He explained to me, "look a lot of kids who join the Military are from run down economically deprived areas, they've been looked down on their entire lives. Once they're in uniform everything changes, it's like they've just become a celebrity, they have girls fawning over them, they have people buying them their dinner, buying them beer, everybody wants to be their friend. Companies are falling over themselves to take care of these guys every whim for fear of being criticized and being accused of being unpatriotic" blah blah blah. It's not hard to see how intoxicating that is for young men and women. My friend also went on to explain how that inevitably gives a lot of these kids incredible egos, many of them specifically wear their uniform in public when there is no need because of this adulation, who can blame them? As a result of the ridiculous exaggeration of todays right wing media about the imminent threat of Muslim terrorists you now have a society that won't tolerate any form of verbal dissention related to "our troops" and shut down all logical thought and discussion surrounding "our troops". Just look at the amount of money that is made in books and movies for a modern day living John Rambo. Lone survivor, No Easy Day, it's big big business and what's the point of being John Rambo if you can't tell anyone?
Which brings me to the public spectacle of paying your respects to the deceased service men and women of the British armed forces. Maybe I've got this all wrong but since when did paying respects to the dead become one step away from a Reality TV show? Didn't we used to do this sort of thing in private or in an appropriate setting? What on earth has Premier League Football got to do with Remembrance Sunday? The Premier League chases every global unit of currency it can get it's hands on, it sells itself as a "Global League", so how did it decide that this was a good idea? This forced respect is extremely unfair on many who have different views, James McClean for example is strung up every year and publically tried for treason for his refusal to wear a poppy! You can bet your life there are more who feel the same way but just don't have the courage of James to speak up.
I know there are many who disagree but what is it you disagree with? Do you disagree that sometimes sport as a microcosm of society should be a platform for things such as this? Do you disagree that football shirts have no right to expect immunity? The problem is, if you disagree then you have to agree that ALL views must be accepted, not just the ones you agree with. Imagine if Glasgow Celtic paid homage to the IRA for fighting and dying for the liberation of Ireland from a foreign occupying army who where guilty of genocide and the deprivation of basic human rights. In fact go one step further, imagine they wanted the Easter Lilly ( a symbol that commemorates the IRA's Easter rising) sewn into everyone's shirts including Rangers what would happen? There would be outrage in the British media, this would be seen as a glorification of terrorism and an insult to the dead etc etc etc. But to many people who where subjected to the most heinous racist and murderous occupation the IRA where their liberators.
There in lies the problem, you can not have the arrogance that only your dead deserves to be commemorated, you can not have the arrogance to say that only your political views are entitled to public respect before a football match if you're not willing to accept every one else's. I was born in Belfast in the 70's, the height of the troubles. My experience of the British armed forces was not a positive one, I watched them spit on my mother when I was 7 years old and called her an 'Irish whore" , I watched them collude with unionist murderers to slaughter innocent Catholics, as a child walking to school they would routinely point their guns at us, they slaughtered unarmed innocent protestors, they illegally occupied the country I was born in, tore it to pieces and subjected the Irish to the most deprived denigrated existence, robbed them of their culture, committed genocide and deprived them of their basic human rights. Many of the people that survived this occupation are left with chronic depression through grief, they have multiple graves to visit and spend the rest of their lives suicidal or addicted to a substance to self medicate the awful mental trauma. So I'm sure you can understand how many don't hold the same reverence for the British armed forces.
The Premier League is a commercial juggernaut and there is nobody they idolize more than the Americans for how they present their sports. They are attempting to implement the American model in every capacity possible and there is no doubt about it, the Americans do an exceptional job with selling and marketing sports but they aren't perfect. One of those imperfections is the borderline xenophobia that is present in even a meaningless end of season baseball game. When I first went to a baseball game in the US, I couldn't believe my eyes. First there is the national anthem, followed by screaming F-14 Jets over head whilst on the field they have a military marching band playing to the roar of the crowd. I kept asking myself, what has any of this got to do with baseball and why are people cheering this? I've been in the US more than a decade now and I still don't have an answer to those questions.
Every once in a while I ask myself, what would be my breaking point that would cause me to start questioning my love of football, well this weekend I got my answer. I am deeply uncomfortable with forced adulation for the armed forces before a football game. Listening to commentators issue their usual plethora of clichés like "puts football into perspective" is quite frankly offensive. The only thing it puts into perspective is the double standard that exists within football and what is kosher politically and what isn't and it puts into perspective how nothing anymore is outside the remit of the Premier League's marketing machine for make no mistake about it, this is much more about being seen to be doing the right thing than actually doing it with any degree of sincerity.
Philip Brown
Monday, November 3, 2014
Brittany Maynard leaves a wonderful legacy.
I don't know why i do it but i do, i read the news several times a day. I've often wondered how a news outlet would fare if it only reported good news. I can't be the only one who has thought of that, maybe the voyeur in all of us is only interested in reading about things that perversely frighten us. Every once in a while however in this cesspit of negativity i come across a unique story that grasps my attention and that's exactly what happened about a week ago when i stumbled across the Brittany Maynard story. For those unfamiliar with what I'm talking about, it's a story about a beautiful young woman who was diagnosed with terminal brain cancer and was given about 6 months to live. Rather than add another month or two to her life by undergoing Chemotherapy she decided to die on her own terms. Had Brittany decided to undergo Chemo she would have had almost zero chance of remission however she would have lost her hair, fried her scalp and endured excruciating suffering, as would her heartbroken family.
The beautiful Californian was just 29 years old, she was happily married to her amazing husband Dan, hoping to start a family with a head full of dreams. She soon however developed migraines, after a series of tests she was given the news we all dread, terminal brain cancer. With being just 29 years old she was faced with an awful dilemma, whilst there was virtually no chance of survival from this awful affliction she was faced with the problem of a very healthy body and a not so healthy brain. The upshot being that her death would be slow and painful.
I don't know exactly what the Maynard's did next, an exact timeline isn't important but i would imagine they retreated to their home and quite quickly accepted Britt's horrific diagnosis. What happened next, make no mistake about it is the personification of bravery, faced with her own imminent mortality and the probability of surviving this, she faced it head on and left a legacy that will benefit others who sadly will find themselves with the same decision every single day, for years to come. This incredibly brave young woman decided to move from California to Oregon due to the fact they are one of only 3 states along with Washington and Vermont who allow an individual to die with dignity.
Think about that last sentence for a second, then digest the absurdity of that. We as a nation pride ourselves on separation of church and state, I believe it was Freud who said "Life itself has a very poor prognosis that always results in death". There used to be two certainties, death and taxes, well taxes I'm not sure about but there is no escaping death, we're all going to die. Given that certainty, why is it illegal to take YOUR own life? If you're a grown adult of sound mind how does a bureaucracy have the right to tell you that you MUST go on living? What human being has the right to COMMAND that of another? Especially those faced with a terminal illness that will otherwise result in inexplicable suffering. To remove an individuals right to terminate their own life is not only a deplorable deprivation of what is a fundamental human right, it is also egregious arrogance. That decision does not belong in the hands of legislators, it's the sole right of every sound minded individual of when they take their life. Perhaps the only aspect of this process that legislators have a right to interfere with is where and how but never never when.
The opprobrium the Maynard's have received from the religious community is equally inclement. I don't care what your interpretation of your scripture is, you have absolutely no right to condemn another individuals decision. A scripture that is now increasingly abstract that relies on metaphorical translation where in other areas it's literal. Let's just say, it's ah open to interpretation and it's quite possible that it's being interpreted wrong. Regardless, when the state implement laws where the motivation appears to be scripture then thats a violation of this country's constitution for our forefathers saw the carnage church and state caused in Europe and rightfully separated it.
Rather than die an anonymous death, Brittany chose to write op-eds for mainstream media, her condition was given national and international attention which was exactly the purpose. She courageously made a bucket list and with her husband Dan she saw them all, finishing off with a serene solitary moment with her husband as he gave her back to mother nature.
Despite the fact she had been given a terminal diagnosis, it is still incredibly brave to take a medication to end her own life. How do you pick that moment? How do you say "ok, give it to me now" and surely in the back of her mind she was thinking, what if a miracle happens and i improve or a cure is found? In the end there was no miracle, there was no cure, Britt decided to bravely take that next step in her journey and as devastating as it is, i still believe her family was lucky, they got to prepare for her death, they got to ask her the important questions and they got to say goodbye, a privilege that most don't get, something i know only too well.
When a life and it's legacy is evaluated, often we ask how they impacted others. The answer to that question is usually your legacy. After all the exaggerated eulogies have been espoused and the normality resumes, Brittany will have left behind an uncomfortable truth for state legislators, Americans in 49 states are enduring state sponsored torture as they're lives are cruelly maintained for no logical reason other than winning votes and assuaging the conscience of ignorant constituents who think they have a right to tell another human being that their life isn't theirs to end. Thankfully places like Oregon exists, a refuge from the madness and because of Brittany many more Americans are asking, why can't a human being die with dignity? There is no credible argument against it.
Phil Brown
www.deathwithdignity.org
www.thebrittanyfund.org
The beautiful Californian was just 29 years old, she was happily married to her amazing husband Dan, hoping to start a family with a head full of dreams. She soon however developed migraines, after a series of tests she was given the news we all dread, terminal brain cancer. With being just 29 years old she was faced with an awful dilemma, whilst there was virtually no chance of survival from this awful affliction she was faced with the problem of a very healthy body and a not so healthy brain. The upshot being that her death would be slow and painful.
I don't know exactly what the Maynard's did next, an exact timeline isn't important but i would imagine they retreated to their home and quite quickly accepted Britt's horrific diagnosis. What happened next, make no mistake about it is the personification of bravery, faced with her own imminent mortality and the probability of surviving this, she faced it head on and left a legacy that will benefit others who sadly will find themselves with the same decision every single day, for years to come. This incredibly brave young woman decided to move from California to Oregon due to the fact they are one of only 3 states along with Washington and Vermont who allow an individual to die with dignity.
Think about that last sentence for a second, then digest the absurdity of that. We as a nation pride ourselves on separation of church and state, I believe it was Freud who said "Life itself has a very poor prognosis that always results in death". There used to be two certainties, death and taxes, well taxes I'm not sure about but there is no escaping death, we're all going to die. Given that certainty, why is it illegal to take YOUR own life? If you're a grown adult of sound mind how does a bureaucracy have the right to tell you that you MUST go on living? What human being has the right to COMMAND that of another? Especially those faced with a terminal illness that will otherwise result in inexplicable suffering. To remove an individuals right to terminate their own life is not only a deplorable deprivation of what is a fundamental human right, it is also egregious arrogance. That decision does not belong in the hands of legislators, it's the sole right of every sound minded individual of when they take their life. Perhaps the only aspect of this process that legislators have a right to interfere with is where and how but never never when.
The opprobrium the Maynard's have received from the religious community is equally inclement. I don't care what your interpretation of your scripture is, you have absolutely no right to condemn another individuals decision. A scripture that is now increasingly abstract that relies on metaphorical translation where in other areas it's literal. Let's just say, it's ah open to interpretation and it's quite possible that it's being interpreted wrong. Regardless, when the state implement laws where the motivation appears to be scripture then thats a violation of this country's constitution for our forefathers saw the carnage church and state caused in Europe and rightfully separated it.
Rather than die an anonymous death, Brittany chose to write op-eds for mainstream media, her condition was given national and international attention which was exactly the purpose. She courageously made a bucket list and with her husband Dan she saw them all, finishing off with a serene solitary moment with her husband as he gave her back to mother nature.
Despite the fact she had been given a terminal diagnosis, it is still incredibly brave to take a medication to end her own life. How do you pick that moment? How do you say "ok, give it to me now" and surely in the back of her mind she was thinking, what if a miracle happens and i improve or a cure is found? In the end there was no miracle, there was no cure, Britt decided to bravely take that next step in her journey and as devastating as it is, i still believe her family was lucky, they got to prepare for her death, they got to ask her the important questions and they got to say goodbye, a privilege that most don't get, something i know only too well.
When a life and it's legacy is evaluated, often we ask how they impacted others. The answer to that question is usually your legacy. After all the exaggerated eulogies have been espoused and the normality resumes, Brittany will have left behind an uncomfortable truth for state legislators, Americans in 49 states are enduring state sponsored torture as they're lives are cruelly maintained for no logical reason other than winning votes and assuaging the conscience of ignorant constituents who think they have a right to tell another human being that their life isn't theirs to end. Thankfully places like Oregon exists, a refuge from the madness and because of Brittany many more Americans are asking, why can't a human being die with dignity? There is no credible argument against it.
Phil Brown
www.deathwithdignity.org
www.thebrittanyfund.org
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)