as a journalist of football. This is the daily mails chief football correspondent Matt Lawton...
'After England were so comprehensively beaten by Germany in Bloemfontein, I went against the tide of public opinion that night and urged the FA to stick with Capello. Even after such a dismal effort at the tournament and after some other serious errors of judgment: most notably the Capello Index and the bungled, last-minute attempt to lure Paul Scholes out of retirement.
When Capello reinstated Terry last year I still regarded him as the right man for the job. The team were developing well under his guidance with the emergence of young players like Jack Wilshere and I felt there was a case for allowing Capello to continue beyond the terms of his current contract and take England to Brazil in 2014. I actually made the point to him in person at the World Cup draw in Rio in the summer.
Now, however, his position looks untenable. Now the manager who felt it necessary to strip Terry of the captaincy in February 2010 for an alleged affair with a team-mate’s ex-girlfriend — but can’t see that this situation is far more serious — needs to vacate his position.'
We all agree, well most anyway that the daily mail is pretty bloody useless if not a bit dangerous in some of its views.
When it comes to football its no different. How can someone who is ment to know alot about football defend Capello as a manager when the team has failed. What was this Matt Lawton seeing in Capello that he thought warrented for an extension on Capello's already extended contract so he stays all the way to Brazil 2014? He probably agreed with the FA that Mclaren, though second in charge in Svens reign, (but had nothing, no nothing to do with the problems the England team had under Sven. Mclaren just sat on the bench, not his fault.) was a good choice to succeed Sven as England manager.
I agree that Capello is wrong in defending Terry, even if he feels ignored by the FA who went over his head with that decision. The FA love making rash knee jerk decisions without first making sure everyone understands and is happy with it. Think back to the last world cup where we played dismally all the way through the group stage. just scraping through. Then the FA give Capello a longer more lucrative contract just for getting through the group stage. We havent won anything. We dont even look close to wining anything. Then we lose to Germany. Yet Matt Lawton along with the FA are now even though it has nothing to with how the team are playing football, feel its time for Capello to go because he doesent agree about this terry captaincy thing. I thought it was all to do with how we are playing football, but obviously not. And so this prat at the Daily Mail who's opinion, which gets out to the masses and is probably listened to as he is a respected journilist, in my mind is completly worthless. alot like the FA, he and they seem to know nothing about football.
Capello out- yes, but for the wrong reasons, a hell of alot of money and 2 years to late.
0
Comments
I do agree about the press and in particular a number of chief football correspondents. Did anyone see Paul McCarthy on SSN this morning? They asked him whether a chief writer would push through his own agenda about an issue, his response was that a good journalist reports one side of the argument, the side he feels most strongly about because down the pub you don't get fans making a balanced argument.
That to me just about sums up the majority of sports journalism in this country, I want to hear about both sides of the story and make an informed decision, not have someone else's agendas or prejudices forced upon me.
As a rule, don't read it unless you plan on winding yourself up.
Don't buy it myself.
I'm not defending the Mail's headline- it was pretty dishonest, because I doubt they genuinely believed Capello was ''on the brink''. But it is a fact of life that newspaper editors have to balance two powerful imperatives - namely telling the truth and selling newspapers. And whether we like it or not, often the two are in conflict, because the truth is frequently dull and boring - which means most of us won't bother reading it.
Television is marginally better, but basically the same. Have you ever watched Dimbleby's Question Time when they have someone on the panel without a political affiliation, and they sit there saying,''well on the one hand you could argue x, and on the other you could argue y''. You end up shouting at the TV saying, 'Yes, we know that. Now tell us what you think, you useless git!'' And these admirably open-minded souls never get invited back because they make for crap TV.
What has happened, of course, is that newspapers are no longer fundamentally about news. We get that on a 24 hour rolling basis, so whatever you read at your breakfast table is usually already old hat. Therefore, we increasingly end up with comment/prejudice/taking a wild punt masquerading as news. To an extent, it was ever thus - but it's a tendency that has been magnified 100 times as newspapers have tried to adapt to the brave new world of digital and social media.
Sorry, lecture over!
Well done, Matt. You made a bold call and you were proved right. Brilliant journalism (and God, it pains me to say that about the Daily Mail!!!).
The joke is, i would of got rid of capello after the last world cup, if not a bit before. however recently he has been getting some good results even with our average squad. what does that matter.
best informed because him and the FA are two minds which think alike.
Lawson was on R4 this morning, and he made the BBC sports editor and Matt Dickinson of The Times look ridiculous. They both said today's meeting between FC and the FA was ''routine''. Lawson said no, it was far from routine, it would be a show-down and he predicted that neither FC or Bernastein would back down, so England could be looking for a new manager by this evening.
He was right and he was the only one who stuck his neck out. I hate the Daily Mail so it is painful to say it. But you have to give credit where it is due.
When it comes to knowlege on football, he was happy throughout Capello's reign till now, all because of terry. Thats the bit that gets me. Its obvious that he knew something, from what he said on the radio to what his article says. Its just i find that someone who was so supportive of Capello even when England were pulling out one shocking performance after another, he thought Capello was the right man for the job. untill now. conviently at the same time knowing that the FA could get rid Capello he then goes off on a rant about how sticking up for your captain even when he hasent been proven guilty, has completly turned his opinion around on the now ex England manager.