Thursday, August 21, 2014

Wish you WEREN'T here


The peace is about to shatter. Next Monday will see many of my French colleagues (and, it would appear, neighbours) returning from the beach, having left for les grandes vacances on the stroke of August 1, vacated desk chairs swiveling, Looney Tunes-style, in their wake.

For the record (and especially if the boss is reading) I have been busy with all the important stuff that doesn't go away. That said, the quieter environment has afforded me the opportunity to fully appreciate what I've missed by not joining the August evacuation (a term I use with apologies to the constipated).

Let's start, then, on a gloomy note: the summer holidays are one of two peak periods each year for relationships to end and marriages to dissolve (the other being Christmas). This is due to couples who only see each other for dinner and weekends throughout the rest of the year suddenly being compressed into each others' lives for a fortnight in the same hotel room or holiday apartment. Throw in azure waters and idyllic sunsets, and thoughts that there could be more to life than this, and before the first layer of skin has peeled appointments with divorce lawyers and relationship counsellors are being made.

Nothing brings out bickering better than a holiday. Travel brings out the worst in people, in general, as anyone who travels regularly will attest, but it also brings out the worst in relationships.

A recent survey by a "relationship care" website (actually, an online sex toy retailer...) found that three-quarters of couples will have a barney within the first two days of their holiday. A large percentage - 42% - of arguments are caused by overspending, while getting drunk represented a third.

Other disagreements were over what to do each day, ogling the opposite sex (or indeed any form of flirtation - e.g. with hairy-chested waiters or push-up bra-wielding receptionists), moaning about being ill, taking too long to get ready, and forgetting to pack something vital. Then there are contretemps about male partners who bloke it out for the first week and go without suntan lotion...only to turn the colour of the Polish flag and need hospital treatment for sunstroke. Or the male partners who get bladdered every night and then wonder why their partners have moved into the inflatable plastic dinghy for the remainder of the holiday. Or the male partners who chose unfamiliar-looking seafood, and spend the first week retching into the Arnitage Shanks. Do you notice a pattern here?


Other niggles include a partner talking too much, being tired, being ill, being old, being unfit, faddy eating and that old holiday dust-up favourite, map reading. Indeed, whether it is Brits clogging up the A303 for a Devon 'staycation', the Dutch clogging up France with their caravans and Volvos, or the Germans clogging up the otherwise empty Dutch roads with their Mercedes and BMWs, road rage is just as commonplace inside the car as outside.

According to different consumer research, navigation is a particular painpoint for holidaying couples. Evidently, when forced to navigate via map, as opposed to GPS, 95% of men would prefer to go with their instincts and getting lost rather than listening to their other half. And, of course, it's never their fault...

It would be all too easy to say that for a peaceful holiday, ditch the car and just go for the simple taxi-airport-bus-hotel-beach/pool operation favoured by those annoyingly smug travellers who also pack everything they need for a two-week break into a bag the size of a 7-year-old's pencil case.

Yes, it costs a bit, but you're paying for some P&Q, not to mention lower blood pressure just at the time you need to enjoy your annual "chillax", as British politicians seem to think it is cool to say (it isn't).

That said, flying is not exactly stress-free, either: security will be a nightmare, you will have that child behind you or, worse, that git in front of you, his finger hovering over the 'recline' button as you take off, and you will feel like you need another holiday as soon as you've touched down from the current one.


However, that's assuming you got away in the first place. Often the first holiday arguments kick off before the suitcase has even been closed. With airlines restricting how much luggage you can take for free, if you're one of those people who has to travel with every shade of shoe from your own, personal Imelda Marcos-style walk-in wardrobe, you're already asking for trouble. The truth is, you can probably make do with just the pair you're wearing.

Assuming you've managed to pack for everyone, the next explosion will be over what time everyone needs to be up. Somee treat airports like a McDonalds - in principle, you breeze in, check-in, and are on your way in a single sequence. But others see them for the necessary evils they are. It doesn't matter what time your flight is, you will encounter a traffic jam; the security line will resemble a biblical exodus, and if you don't check-in online, you will - I assure you - end up in the middle seat no-one wants. With aforementioned child behind, and Captain Recline in front.

Don't, however, for one minute think the ordeal is over when you get to the airport, sans traffic. Because it will only then occur to you that a passport, and not your gym membership card, is the only form of acceptable identification for commercial air travel. Luckily the Law of Averages has determined that for every dimwit traveller in a party there will be a sensible one who remembers these things. Still, that won't prevent the "I thought you had them?" stand-up row in front of that lengthening line of batey-looking easyJet "speedy boarders".


So, then. Car it is. Except that if you're travelling with kith and kin, you are almost certainly likely to have an argument with someone else in the car. Britain's AA, together with market researchers Populus, found that for a start, two out of three cars will befall a row at some point on a long journey. Those aged between 18 and 24 seemed most likely to kick off, with the over-65s learning to sit in silence or suck on a Murray Mint to keep the peace.

Inevitably, the single-biggest cause of disharmony was navigation, with a passenger complaining about the driver's speed being the second most common complaint. Parents in the 35-44 age group were most likely to get wound up by noisy kids. Other moans included the driver shouting at other drivers, driving too slowly, the temperature inside the car, arguments over where to eat and what to listen to. Sound familiar?

From all this it might be tempting to think that there is no escaping rows while travelling with those you supposedly love. Well, yes and know. Experts suggest that a little bit of planning goes a long way: decide where you want to go before you set off, if the "what are we going to do today?" question is a trigger for strife. Likewise, to avoid fights over spending, set a budget and try and limit yourself to only so much each day.

All very sensible, I'll agree. But perhaps there is only one truly sensible way to stay happy and harmonious on holiday. Well, two. One, don't go on holiday at all, although for some people the mere thought of not getting time off will lead them up the nearest clock tower with a high-powered rifle faster than you can say Benidorm; and, Two, go away on your own. I can personally guarantee that holidaying alone cures 99.9% of all known arguments.

Tuesday, August 19, 2014

Ding-ding - end of Round One

Pic: BTRSELLER/Shutterstock
If you can accept the inclusion of a Monday night into the concept, the opening weekend of Premier League season 2014-15 has come and gone and already every pundit is installing Chelsea as champions. So, shall we just go straight to 2015-16 instead?  Well, no.

Because as, literally, all managers and players are saying in disjointed, clichéd unison, "it's a long season" - and they're right: at this stage of the campaign the horizon is as distant as the wisdom is unfounded.

This time last season, don't forget, few pundits were giving Liverpool a chance, and where did they end up at season's end? Some of these same "experts" also predicted a long and fruitful World Cup for Spain...

While it is true that there is already an ominous look of purpose about José Mourinho's side, there is also a look of earnest industry about Wenger's Arsenal, a look of renewed determination about Rodgers' Liverpool, and the same look of calm composure about Pellegrini's Manchester City. You might also note how van Gaal's Manchester United look as ruffled as Moyes' Manchester United did all season long.

But let's not get carried away. As much as it is richly enjoyable for us Chelsea fans to look at the Barclays Premier League table this afternoon and feel flushed by the obscurities of goal difference putting the Blues on top and van Gaal's behemoth not even in the top 13, "Played 1, Won 1, Pts 3" is hardly ranking of any note. There are 37 more games to come.

That said, while it is true that the opening weekend's fixtures are usually never more than an extension of the pre-season friendlies - fitness is still lacking, new positions and teammates still unsure of themselves, the transfer window is still unsettlingly open... - to see everyone in competitive action for real, provides some indication of what lies in store.

Let's start with the defending champions. Manchester City's 2-0 away win against Newcastle was enough to demonstrate, even in their opening game, that their eventual claim of the Premier League title in May wasn't totally by default.

The closing stages of last season were cagey, and one could argue that City only became champions because Liverpool - and Steven Gerrard in particular - handed them the title. But while it is harder to defend a title than take one, City will gain further strength from both a second summer under Pellegrini's calm preparation, the arrival of a few new faces (including Frank Lampard on loan), and the hope that Edin Dzeko will sign a new deal and commit himself to playing in one of the Premier League's most prolific strike forces.

What, then, of last season's unlikely runners-up? Losing Luis Suarez is both a blessing and a curse, but it's something Liverpool simply have to deal with. Splashing Barcelona's cash on what seems like most of the population of Southampton is not necessarily the solution, either, but Brendan Rodgers' primary task now is blending recruits like Southampton's Rickie Lambert and...er...Southampton's Adam Lallana in with Markovic, fresh from Benfica, often referred to as Portugal's answer to Southampton. Possibly.

Despite their appearance in England's brief cameo at the World Cup, Daniel Sturridge and Raheem Sterling will relish the opportunity to ask "Luis who?". They certainly and did so on Sunday against the surprisingly spirited South Coast club, who just happened to be Liverpool's opening weekend opponents. Despite the way last season ended, Liverpool have every right to have their tails up for this campaign. To be achingly close - and with immense credit, too. was tough but shows what this same team is capable of.

And then Arsenal. There is an air of familiarity around Wenger's understated confidence, and I wouldn't necessarily say that was a good thing, as this same emotion hasn't got them very far in recent years. Ending last season with the FA Cup and starting this one with the Community Shield (albeit winning over a markedly depleted Manchester City) will have done their spirit no end of good - when was the last time Arsenal, or anyone for that matter, won back-to-back trophies in consecutive competitive matches?

However, the Gunners should hold a torch up to their performance on Saturday against a managerless Crystal Palace, who still managed to frustrate until very late in the game. The scoreline flattered to deceive. True, Arsenal were missing Theo Walcott and their World Cup-winning Germans, but the big question this season - as with previous terms - is where is their prolific, goal-scoring centre forward? Wenger may exude an almost nonchalant air at times, but history has taught us that his club's supporters are anything but when that nonchalance comes across as miserly complacency.

Which then brings me to Manchester United. I feel certain to speak for many football fans - and obviously those who don't live in Surrey or actually support United - that last season's uncharacteristic bout of sustained disaster was quite amusing.

Yes, I know, a shame to see the dear old beast struggling, but then after two decades of relentless triumphalism with the commensurate hubris thrown in, it was refreshing to see United rendered human, after all.

I didn't, however, wish the public slaying that David Moyes went through, and I wouldn't wish the same on Louis van Gaal, either. The Dutchman can be a monstrous egomaniac, but then for me - as a supporter of a club managed by Mourinho - I can hardly focus the spotlight on that particular foible as complaint.

But to open your Premier League account with a home defeat to Swansea, with more or less every commentator reaching the same conclusion that this was more of the same, could not have been any worse if you'd imagined it. Losing by a single-goal margin is not the worst thing that can befall a team, but for Manchester United, doing so at home on Day 1 to Swansea (with the greatest of respect) will have had even the Brazilians - scorched, still, from their World Cup blitzkreig - smiling sweetly at someone else's disproportionate discomfort.

It would be insane to reach out for a panic button just yet, or even ensure it could be found in the dark, but there are players lacking in Manchester United's squad at the start of this season. And that's not something you could ever say about life under its previous regime...

So, then, what about my own club, Chelsea? Last night's performance at Turf Moor may have hinted at a team boasting the perfect balance of a Romanian gymnast, with a striker (Costa) actually capable of scoring goals rather than merely attempting to, and a playmaker in Fabregas easing the pain of the departed (though not far) Lampard. But at risk of being branded a cynic (oh, go on then), Chelsea have, previously, leaped out of the traps and won the Premier League title, and leaped out of the traps only to flounder after Halloween.

Facebook/Chelsea FC

There was much talk that Chelsea failed to win any senior silverware last season because they lacked strike power. Well that is partly true. But my bigger concern last season was their mentality. Defeats at Villa Park and Selhurst Park lent more to attitude that physical failings. Mourinho also has his work cut out keeping a huge squad happy, in particular Petr Cech as Thibaut Courtois continues to be groomed to be the number one No.1. He also needs to prevent Andre Schurrle from slipping away, as well as the increasingly sulky Oscar - whose club form dipped leading into the World Cup, only to be a part of that humiliated Brazilian team. Last night he looked even sulkier when he was substituted late in the game, even though with the game won it was only sensible to bring on Mikel and short up the defensive base of midfield..

So those are the supposed contenders for Top Four places: what about the rest? Will the relegation zone be exclusively claret-and-blue as Aston Villa, West Ham, Burnley and Crystal Palace all vie with each other for the trapdoor?

You can pundit all you want about who might go down and who might stay up, who might remain in mid-table mediocrity or, to look at that another way, take a workmanlike approach to being a Premier League team. One round of fixtures is not going to determine anything.

You could say that there are 20 teams who could end up anywhere, but you could reasonably expect the likes of Burnley, QPR and Leicester - newly arrived in the top flight - to labour, while the dysfunctions of incumbents like Palace, West Brom, West Ham and even Newcastle may prove telling.

However, let's at least get Round 2 under our belts before coming to any more strident conclusions, shall we?

Monday, August 18, 2014

Do NOT add to cart

If there was one happy aspect to Robin Williams' tragic death last week, it was the excuse it provided to rewatch his work, especially the somewhat prescient performance as emotionally struggling tutor, Sean Maguire, in Good Will Hunting.

But on a more mirthful note, it was Williams' stand-up performances that provided the most gleeful memories of the comedian, including the blisteringly funny A Night At The Met, in which some of the funniest observations came from his own generous experiences as an addict: "I had to stop drinking alcohol 'cos I used to wake up nude in my car with my keys in my ass! Not a good thing: 'Hi, can I help you?' 'No it's just flooded...I'll be OK...' ".

So it is with some amusement that we hear that drink not only creates homicidal motorists, boorish after-hours kebab shop twats, and karaoke performances that should lead to legalised euthanasia, but that it also causes one-in-five of us to make ill-advised purchases with online retailers like Amazon and eBay.

As we all know, operating machinery under the influence of anything from wine gums to Night Nurse is to be avoided, but clearly no such warnings have been extended to computers and tablets. But according to research by the price comparison website Confused.com, British consumers under the influence are impulse-buying anything from holidays to washing machines after coming home from the pub.

The site's research reveals that a quarter of those who have shopped while they were literally dropping have spent anywhere between £100 and £200 online, while almost a fifth have spent upwards of £500, buying high-ticket items such as holidays, TVs and even washing machines. Amazon appears to bear the brunt (53%) of half-cut surfing, while clothing, rather worryingly, is the most popular item being purchased, along with shoes, which may explain some of the things you see in British pubs to begin with.

Bizarrely, the researchers found that people had bought obscure items as random as lobster pots (ten of), pie makers, diving equipment and folding ladders while drunkenly waving their credit cards about. Not surprisingly - and I can concur... - DVDs, Blu-ray Discs and CDs also figure amongst popular impulse purchases.

With more than three-quarters of the UK owning credit cards, and "Binge-Drink Britain" (copyright - all newspapers) at its merriest, the rather appropriately named Confused.com, says that more caution is required by those out on the lash: "Alcohol can cause people’s inhibitions to disappear," says the site's head of credit cards Nerys Lewis, "but people need to be aware of how their credit card spending when drunk could affect them in the long run."

Of course one thing the research doesn't tell us is how many people carry on buying their alcohol online while drunk, but with no shortage of wine and beer sites, not to mention alcohol price comparison sites to help, it's only a matter of time before someone develops a breathalyser app that doesn't let you use a mouse if you're over your limit.

Tuesday, August 12, 2014

Send back the clown: Robin Williams - 1951-2014

Picture courtesy of HBO

The Pink Floyd album Dark Side Of The Moon contains, amongst others, a recording of Abbey Road studio doorman Gerry O'Driscoll saying "I'm not afraid of dying....You've got to go sometime", condensing into one soundbite the fact that death is, well, a fact of life.

Which doesn't make it any easier when it happens to a loved one or, simply, someone who made you smile. Robin Williams didn't just make me smile, he made me - and I'm not embarrassed to admit this - shed tears of laughter. Yes, I convulsed so much at his Live On Broadway 2002 HBO special that there were rivulets streaming down my face.

This, of course, may not be everyone's experience of him. That's comedy for you - one man's comic genius is another's annoying clown. Comedy is ridiculously subjective that way. But let's stop and consider Williams for a moment. He was the most exhausting of comics: a chat show appearance wouldn't just be a 'bit' or a plug for the latest movie, but an eruption of inventive improvisation. Like the Pythons' Argument Clinic, you could get five minutes or the full half hour. You got what you paid for.

From his earliest TV appearance as the alien Mork (in Mork & Mindy and Happy Days), through his stand-up shows (including impromptu appearances at improv clubs) to his movies, notably Good Morning Vietnam, Williams as a comic was like the sun - a perpetual explosion of hydrogen, helium and plasma, inventing on the spot, seeing things for their intensely comic value that others might fail to address.

There was, of course, significantly more to Robin Williams than the TV specials he made for HBO, but I'll come on to those other things in a moment. Because his 1986 special A Night At The Met is possibly, probably even, the most complete 53 minutes of comedy you'll ever witness.

It is certainly the most perfect near-hour of stand-up comedy I've ever seen, embracing - in this order - alcohol, drugs, the Cold War, the Middle East, men's genitalia, what men do with their genitalia, pregnancy as a consequence, giving birth and raising the child, culminating with the realisation, that while you may have grand designs for your little one to go to Harvard, "you wake up and he's saying, 'do you want fries with that?'".

There are so many great lines packed into this one show that you have to watch it to catch them all. But let me give you two: [On gun control] "You have the right to bear arms or the right to arm bears, it's your choice!" and [on being addicted to cocaine] "Cocaine's God's way of telling you you have too much money".

16 years later, and with the wounds of 9/11 still fresh, Williams made Live On Broadway to much the same effect. Covering in two hours the zeitgeist of the day, from the potential taboo of airline security ("Why take away nail clippers? It's not like terrorists are going 'This is a hijacking - no one move or the stewardess loses a cuticle!'") to the villain of the hour ("Osama Bin Laden is a six-foot-five Arab on dialysis. Why is that so fucking hard to find?"), Williams brought levity to a country still in pain, in the very city where the pain was felt hardest.

Born in America's second city, Chicago - birthplace of the electric blues and equally electric comedy - Williams' comedy was unashamedly California-adopted liberal, applying a deliriously wicked way of cutting down pomposity and the absurdity of politics. He wasn't, though seeking revolution or even trying to offer scything commentary, Lenny Bruce-style, to the order of the day. It was, simply, straight-forward piss-taking. George W. Bush, in particular, was the richest of gifts:

"It doesn't scare me that Dubya waved at Stevie Wonder; that's OK. Stevie's only been blind since birth...! No, what scares me is that Dubya almost died from a fucking pretzel! They have billions of dollars in national defence, they want billions more, to up the stakes, and the president almost goes down from snack food!

The Secret Service are like 'Game's over man!' 'Gilligan's down! Gilligan's down! His own dogs didn't care! They were licking him for the salt!"

So the routine goes, comedian dies, comedian is declared comic genius, we all move on. Robin Williams transcended even the description "genius". His comedy was comedy on speed, an unfortunate reference, I know, given his own battles with drugs (he infamously shared a few lines of coke with John Belushi during his eventual fateful stay at the Chateau Marmont). But such was the intensity and the rapidity of his wit that it was easy to think, long after he'd become sober, that he was still on something.

Williams' unfettered comic creativity wasn't just limited to the stage of improv clubs and chat shows: most of his performance as Armed Forces Radio DJ Adrian Cronauer in Barry Levinson's Good Morning Vietnam was improvised, also drawing on his immeasurable talent for mimicry.

"Nobody else works with the inventiveness, the quickness and the zaniness of Robin Williams," producer Mark Johnson said at the time. "When he sat down in the control booth to do the scenes involving Cronauer's broadcasts, we just let the cameras roll. He managed to create something new for every single take." Cronauer - who had written the original story but envisaged something far more serious - distanced himself somewhat from Williams' portrayal. Williams, on the other hand, maintained that Cronauer was "pretty much the closest thing to me that I've ever done."

Picture: Esquire magazine

As a film actor, Williams divided opinion. His critics leaned heavily on the saccharine nature of disposable family fare like Hook, Jumanji and even Mrs. Doubtfire, suggesting that his film career drew an over-reliance on such roles. But to his proponents - and I'm one of them - there were moments of cinematic glory in Good Will Hunting, ToysDead Poet's Society, The Fisher King and Awakenings. And let's not play down the comedies - Aladdin, like Good Morning Vietnam, was Williams' film, even if he was represented by a purple cartoon genie.

It's often said that the hardest job for a straight actor is to do comic roles, but I've always argued that it's harder for a comedian to be accepted doing straight parts. Knowing what a manic comedy performer he was, the expectation of Williams making funny turns out of his appearances as creep-ahoy weirdos in Insomnia and One Hour Photo - both released in 2002, incidentally - was dashed by the intensity he applied in both parts. Indeed, the fact he was a comedian made them even creepier.

Arguably, his talent for improvisation added colour to his serious roles. In a 1979 New York Times review of his stand-up show, critic Janet Maslin noted how Williams was "at his very best when he seemed to be trying things out, measuring the audience's response, working in the most exciting way". This was at the height of Mork & Mindy's popularity, when Williams was "usually on view performing his material in a more polished form, and in neat, half-hour weekly instalments," concluding that "it's especially gratifying to watch him live dangerously."

And he did. Robin Williams' death at the age of 63 from an apparent suicide has been met by the media as the ultimate collapse of a struggle against lifelong "demons". The papers will no doubt commit think pieces to examine the rancid old 'tears of a clown' thesis underpinning all comedians.

Depression, however, isn't some convenient counter to a comic's humorous side, anymore than it is for a postman, nurse or any other profession. It just makes it harder to accept that someone who made so many people laugh until tears spouted from their eyes could, themselves, be battling an illness that literally destroyed the soul.

What a sad end to a life that gave so much fun. Shazbat.

Picture: Matt Munoz/Twitter


Wednesday, August 06, 2014

Lampard's relationship status has just changed to "It's complicated"

It seems trivial, in this week in which we commemorate the outbreak of World War I, that football rivalries should even be an issue. And they're not.

That is partly because the season hasn't properly begun (any semblance of footballing activity is the result of that annual charade of pointless but neat money-spinning pre-season "friendlies") and partly because, in the scheme of things, the slaughter of a generation between 1914 and 1918, pushes everything else into a very distant background.

But allow us some levity in a week heavied by history. Because if there is one thing football fans struggle to accept more than anything else, it's seeing a beloved, loyal, serial badge-kissing club servant playing for a rival. Any rival - and not just the cross-this-postcode-and-we-condemn-you rival.

If you don't care much for football this might seem particularly trivial and, probably, part of the reason you don't follow football to begin with. Because, yes, it really isn't that important, is it?

But let me frame it differently: you've just undergone an acrimonious split from your former significant other. The pain is still quite raw. The next thing, you see her Facebook status has gone from 'In a relationship' to 'Single' to 'Engaged' with the same sequential speed as traffic lights at a busy road junction. Yes, it's that painful.

I'll cut to the chase, then: no sooner had we Chelsea fans accepted that our 12-year marriage to Frank Lampard was over than he was pitching up in the Big Apple doing that footballery thing of talking about sharing in the vision and ambition of his new club, New York City FC. "OK," we said, "life goes on and so must Frank. Good luck to the fella."

But, then, just as we were sizing up his new club and concluding "nah, not much...", it was announced that Manchester City, New York City FC's parent club, would be taking the 36-year-old midfielder on loan "to maintain fitness" until the MLS season begins next March. This morning Lampard arrived at Carrington for his first training session with the Premier League club. In Joe Jackson's words, "If my eyes don't deceive me, there's something going wrong around here."

The loan means Chelsea will get to play their former vice-captain at least twice before he starts his new American venture properly. David Villa, also signed to New York City FC, will play his preparatory loan spell in Melbourne which, I'm sure, would have suited the Chelsea faithful as Lampard's temporary hangout.

Picture courtesy of New York City FC

Frank is, however, an intelligent player. It's unlikely he'll be tweeting pictures of his American-funded engagement stone and I'm sure we won't be enduring gushing congratulatory messages from his nearest and dearest. He knows his future value in some capacity at Chelsea - Roman Abramovich has apparently said so much - and being the supremely diligent professional that he is, he'll take the wages and get on with his job, no matter who that job is for. People, we have to get over this notion of club loyalty in the modern era - you play wherever someone is prepared to pay enough to keep you in new Bentleys and Ferraris.

So, taking spurned pride out of the equation, rank-and-file Chelsea supporters shouldn't mind, in principle: Lampard is one of the greatest players ever to wear the Chelsea shirt and will always be regarded so. Players leaving and players arriving, however, is part of life - someone has to be disappointed.

There is, though, the small matter of that quote last year when Lampard said that, after 12 years at Chelsea he couldn't imagine playing for another Premier League: "I couldn't do it".  Well, clearly he can. That shouldn't be a reason for resentment, as a chap's got to earn a living. And it won't be the first time Chelsea supporters have seen a hero pitch up in adjacent quarters: 1950s hero Roy Bentley moved to local rivals Fulham, Jimmy Greaves went further a decade later to Spurs via Milan, the King of Stamford Bridge, Peter Osgood, left for Southampton (in the days when they were a buying club...), and both Ray Wilkins and Juan Mata have moved to Manchester United which, at one point in time would have been far more difficult to countenance than a move to Manchester City.

What backlash there has been so far has been tame. Pat Nevin - who himself left Chelsea for Everton, and yet is still held in the highest esteem at Stamford Bridge - says Lampard's loan appearances for City won't be a problem: "It won't damage the way Chelsea fans feel about him long term," he told the BBC. Supporters' groups agree, noting that despite the inevitable trolling from a minority doubting past pledges of loyalty, the majority won't feel slighted. Most grown-up footballer supporters recognise that under-contract players tend to go where their parent club tells them to.

In fact, the strongest words of dissent have come from Arsenal manager Arsène Wenger. Doing nothing at all for his 'voyeuristic' reputation in José Mourinho's eyes, Wenger has questioned the legitimacy of Manchester City paying Frank Lampard's substantial wages during his loan spell (there have been murmurings that Lampard coming to Manchester - as opposed to the rumoured Melbourne where David Villa has gone on loan - was a ruse to bypass Financial Fair Play commitments).



Lampard will become one of Manchester City's minimum five homegrown players needed in their Champions League squad to comply with the UEFA rules on financial integrity, something they have bitter experience of failing at, following their fine and restrictions on wages last season under the FFP rules, and having to make do with a 21-player squad for this season's Champions League.

All this, however, is academic. Because the crux of the matter doesn't lie at UEFA headquarters in Switzerland, nor does it lie in the bills section of Lampard's wallet. The location of potential pain lies in Lampard's feet. We've been able to see Chelsea players go out on loan and not bother us - Romelu Lukaku's prolific loan spells as a striker at West Brom and Everton probably did Chelsea a few favours; but when no playing restrictions apply, and a sold player still has the potency to do some damage, then that is when things turn sour.

Lampard is, though, too smart to start kissing new badges, and we certainly won't expect any goal celebrations, should he be able to beat either Courtois or Čech in the games between Chelsea and Manchester City ahead. But that won't make it any easier.


Saturday, July 26, 2014

Lamps out


Frank Lampard has always been one of football's renaissance men, thanks mostly to a grammar school education that furnished him with the ability to string a sentence together in public without the monosyllabism of most of his peers.

That, however, hasn't prevented him from trotting out some A-grade football spin about his two-year contract with Major League Soccer arrivistes, New York City FC: "Having seen the vision of this club, I have seen a real long-term plan and I want to be involved and I want to keep on challenging myself." Isn't that what they always say?

I sound sarky and I shouldn't be. Lamps gave Chelsea 13 good years, joining as part of the 2001 West Ham fire sale that also brought in Joe Cole and Glenn Johnson. And he has, to be fair, been a genuinely brilliant servant of the club, even if his first year included that 9/11 incident at a Heathrow hotel, something New York City fans have already noted less than warmly.


Holding Chelsea's goalscoring record of 211 goals from 649 appearances should say something about Lampard, and especially for a midfielder. It's the main reason I remain, to this day, baffled by the way England supporters treated him, goaded on by moronic West Ham fans and their tiresome "fat Frank" bating (thought: you don't score over 200 club goals from midfield if you're out of shape...something Lampard has never been guilty of in any case, having been rarely injured, and possessing one of the most applied work ethics I've ever come across in a professional footballer).

He certainly leaves Chelsea with the club's goodwill, even if they weren't prepared to extend his contract and his club career to Giggs-length proportions. According to José Mourinho, his New York adventure is not seen as long-term, anyway. “I have a message for Frank: good luck and see you back at Chelsea in a couple of years.”

The Portuguese is sure that Lampard will return to Chelsea in some capacity. "The way Mr Abramovich approached the Frank Lampard situation is amazing," revealed the Chelsea coach yesterday. "'You go if you want to go, you come back if you want to come back. And you come back the way you want – to be an assistant, to be an ambassador, to be a director to be a coach, to be an assistant coach'. That is fantastic." True, though Abramovich is clearly not entraining having Lampard back at the same salary...

So, what of the new challenge which, for Lampard, "ticks all the right boxes"? There's no denying that New York City is an ambitious new club - brand new, in fact, as they won't play their first MLS season until next year. Owned by Manchester City, the New York franchise has also signed David Villa from Atletico Madrid, and has former Sunderland and City player Claudio Reyna as its sporting director.

It's certainly a sensible career stop for Lampard. He's smart enough to recognise he wouldn't get the same level of club away from Chelsea in the Premier League, or La Liga, the BundesligaSerie A or even La Ligue, and certainly wouldn't want to drop down a division in England, not that anyone could afford him. And if he was brutally honest, last season wasn't his best. Sadly, age was starting to creep up on even this diligent toiler.

© Twitter/Christine Bleakley
New York City FC are clearly putting enough money on the table to make it worth his while commuting between The Big Apple and his daughters and TV presenter fiancée, Christine Bleakley, in London.

Plus, he'll also probably 'do a Beckham' and spend the MLS close season training with or even on loan at a Premier League club (Chelsea are strong candidates, but don't rule out "Uncle" Harry Redknapp's QPR).

All that said, the question remains as to whether the US is a good footballing move for the 36-year-old, as he has so far not followed Steven Gerrard into international retirement. With Roy Hodgson's justifiable focus on youth, playing in the MLS might just take Lampard off the England selection radar.

For Lampard, however, the MLS certainly want be the footballing backwater the US league once was. Football is no longer just a hobbyist's interest by comparison to the NFL, baseball, basketball, ice hockey and the other über-franchise sports.

This year's World Cup run will have also given football the sort of exposure it rarely had when the Los Angeles Aztecs and Tampa Bay Rowdies provided career end-stage landings for George Best and Rodney Marsh, and the New York Cosmos signed up Pelé and Franz Beckenbauer, also in the twilight of their careers. The Team USA World Cup squad also included a very healthy representation from the MLS, such as Clint Dempsey (Seattle Sounders), Brad Davis (Houston Dynamo) and Kyle Beckerman (Real Salt Lake).

The MLS has long been rumoured to be Lampard's next - and final? - port of call in his playing career, though getting repeatedly papped with his fiancée in Santa Monica every time they were on holiday there only fueled speculation that he'd be following David Beckham to LA Galaxy. 

But, as he asked rhetorically on Thursday, "Why not chose New York City?". On top of the slightly better commuting difference between London, New York - like indeed Miami (where Beckham is setting up an MLS franchise) and Los Angeles - has a high catchment for football, thanks to its concentration of Hispanic communities and people of European background, which should ensure a positive and passionate playing environment.

After years of quiet derision from Europe, Lampard's arrival in the MLS coincides with the game starting to punch above its weight in America. And in joining the current crop of imported experience - Kaka will play next season for Orlando, Thierry Henry and Tim Cahill are already at the New York Red Bulls, Jermain Defoe's at Toronto FC, Nigel Reo-Coker is at Vancouver and Robbie Keane at Galaxy - this is as good a time as any for a professional like Lampard to join them.

Wednesday, July 23, 2014

Sloppy seconds. Again?


This time last year, when we were coming to terms with the prospect of José Mourinho managing Chelsea for a second spell, there were two schools of thought: 1) that Mourinho and Roman Abramovich were the Burton and Taylor of football - star-crossed lovers made for no one else but themselves; and 2) that Abramovich was failing to recognise, what anyone with bitter experience of a failed romance will tell you, that it's never the same twice.

Gareth from The Office had the right philosophy when he told colleague Rachel: "I don't usually do sloppy seconds." So, if Chelsea could do it once before with Mourinho, why not with Didier Drogba, who is strongly rumoured to be (i.e. he is) in negotiations to return for a one-year contract at the club.

Having just jettisoned Frank Lampard at the age of 36, bringing back Drogba at the same age seems somewhat contradictory. But he is Mourninho's totem: in eight years at Chelsea he scored 157 goals including that winning penalty in the Champions League Final - and I'm sure his hunger for goal is still way above that of Fernando Torres.

But with Chelsea still hanging on to youth and under-21 product like a cartoon villain holding a sack of squirming kittens over a raging river, you have to ask the question - when will this young talent that the club has invested in ever get its chance?

What was the point of fighting for Romelu Lukaku's signature at the age of 18, then sending him out on prolific goal-scoring loan spells at West Brom and Everton, if you're not prepared to develop him in the Chelsea shirt he was signed to wear? Granted, whenever I've seen him wear the shirt in early-season, pre-loan matches, he's failed to impress, but that's not the point. And if he's simply not what the club wants, why not cut the losses and just sell him?

Likewise Patrick Bamford, another forward and future England prospect. Since joining Chelsea from Nottingham Forrest in January 2012, the-now 19-year-old has been loaned out to MK Dons twice and Derby County for most of last season, racking up a decent goal tally in the process.

Understandably, Bamford is being eyed up by everyone's favourite footballing used car dealer, Harry Redknapp, for QPR, and Wolves are believed to have expressed an interest.

But what a waste if Bamford was to leave. If he's good enough to get first team action elsewhere, why is Chelsea - whose three recognised strikers scored just 18 goals between them last term - not making use of him? Especially when their squad is starting to get thin again under UEFA Fair Play compliance, and also when England needs to use the post-World Cup vacuum to sort out its longer-term pipeline.

The prospect of Drogba coming back to Chelsea is purely romantic, as much as it has practical value. We would love to seem him back at the club in some capacity, and even in coaching. But as a substitute for younger, fresher, even home-grown talent? It's time to let the youth do the talking. Chelsea needs them, England needs them.

Returning to the top of this post, the other point to make is - well, are sloppy seconds ever any good? Chelsea may have gained a good return from Graeme Le Saux coming back from Blackburn in 1997, and Nemanja Matic's return to the club last year is looking like he should never have been let go to begin with.

But a word of caution: bringing back one of your goal heroes isn't always a good idea: Peter Osgood - the King of Stamford Bridge - returned to Chelsea in 1978 for one final season at Chelsea. The club were relegated at the end of the season and Ossie - who bore an uncanny resemblance to Torres - retired from the game altogether.

Given Drogba's illustrious past, you'd hate him to have a less than polished return. At his best, he was invincible for Chelsea. There's no escaping the equestrian analogy here - he was a cross between a thoroughbred racehorse and Sir Galahad's steed bearing down on defenders. At his worst, though, he could be pathetic, negative, prone to diving and just as likely to feign injury to get taken off during an indifferent performance or frustrating game.

That's not the Drogba we'd want to see again at the Bridge, and bringing him back at the tail end of his playing career would inevitably heighten the risk of that being exactly what we'd get. I just hope both Drogba and Mourinho know what they're getting back into...