England awaits as Cipriani returns to action

One of English rugby’s most eagerly awaited comebacks in recent years is expected tomorrow after Wasps named Danny Cipriani in their starting line-up against Bath for their Guiness Premiership clash.

Exactly how Wasps and England rugby fans have come to invest so much hope in the 20-year-old - who was last seen being stretchered off with a fractured and dislocated right ankle only four-and-a-half months ago – is hard to explain.

Anyone who saw Cipriani’s first start for England against Ireland in the Six Nations will have a fair idea as to why there is so much hype surrounding the boy but it still seems harsh to put so much pressure on one so young.

The fact is Cipriani is a shining light of creativity during a period where England sides have repeatedly lacked spark and invention in the back division and this boy wonder is the best hope we have of turning around our fortunes in the international game.

It may sound harsh on one Jonny Wilkinson, who is after all Enlgland’s all time leading points scorer and - lest we forget - our World Cup hero, but if the side is to move forward it must be with Cipriani in the number 10 jersey.

I have the utmost respect for Wilkinson and I believe there have been few better of his type of fly half to have played the game.

He will kick his goals and tackle his heart out for the side all day long but the plain truth is he does not have the creative ability or vision of Cipriani.

In his unrivalled self-deprecating manner, Wilkinson has often hinted and occasionally admitted openly that he knows his game at times lacks that extra dimension.

It was fine when we had a dominant rumbling pack and the under-estimated creativity of Will Greenwood in midfield, but this England team is calling for a spark from number 10 and there is only one man to provide that.

It is a cruel fact that in rugby - as with many aspects of life – it is not always just about how hard you work, some people are just born with an uncoachable ability.

Some people (like myself) have to work their rear ends off for exams just to ensure a passing grade, while others do no revision, waltz into the exam hall on the day and get a top mark.

I am not suggesting Cipriani doesn’t work and it is essential he does not let his game stand still, but he has a quality that few English three-quarters – barring maybe Jason Robinson – have had in recent years.

I remember the moment when I first really thought Cipriani was the real deal and had to be in the England starting team sooner rather than later.

It was in a match against Bath a week after Cipriani had come on for his international debut and given away a try with a charged down chip kick.

As if to prove that the previous week’s effort was worth the risk, Cipriani picked the ball up in midfield, dinked it over the Bath line, then burst through a challenge before racing away to score – it was pure genius and the definition of a try out of nothing.

Before we (or I) get too excited though, for a cautionary tale we should look no further than the last naturally talented fly half to pose a realistic challenge to a fit Wilkinson.

Charlie Hodgson may not have Cipriani’s pace and ability to run with the ball but his vision and flair are comparable.

Hodgson, though still imperious on a regular basis for Sale, was soon discovered to be mentally fragile on the international scene and his defence woefully exposed.

He has now been virtually discarded in terms of international selection with the likes of Toby Flood and Olly Barkley – who spend as much time in the number 12 jersey as at fly half – ahead of the Sale man in the pecking order.

Cipriani still has the confidence of youth and his defence hasn’t been seriously tested the way it would on a summer hemisphere tour, let’s just hope he measures up to those tests because he could prove to be the saviour of English back play.

FIFA misses opportunity over Heskey taunts

Emile Heskey has kopped a lot of abuse during his career.

He has spent much of his footballing life being castigated for, among others, his lack of touch, his poor goal scoring record, his erratic finishing and his tendency – despite being a man mountain – to go to ground far too easily.

Heskey has never seemed too bothered by theses tirades of vitriol thrown in his direction, shrugging it off in his diffident manner, but the kind of abuse he received when he turned out for England against Croatia in Zagreb earlier this month was of a totally different nature.

The racial abuse directed against Heskey, unfortunately not the first time our player have been subjected to such abuse when on national service in recent years, was about the only low point of a great night for England in the Maksimir Stadium.

It was a sickening display that has no place in the game whatsoever, and how did FIFA’s bigwigs respond when the Croatian Football Federation was summoned before them for punishment this week? A measly £15,000 fine.

It makes a total farce of the situation when, for all the rhetoric dolled out by the bodies that govern football over ‘kicking racism out of football’ and such like, when a real case does present itself they deal out little more than a slap on the wrist.

Now I know the Croatian Football Federation weren’t directly responsible – it’s not as if general secretary Zorislav Srebric was one of those making monkey chants when Heskey got booked - but what sort of message does it send out to the Balkan nation’s governing body who is responsible for punishing the actual perpetrators.

If the Croatian Football Federation was hit with a truly massive fan or banned from playing games in their home stadium, surely that would encourage them to get their act together and make sure they rid their national game of this – to borrow Heskey’s diplomatic term for describing the mindsets of his abusers - ‘ignorance’.

The problem is not just with the mindless minority who chant the abuse but also the greater majority of football fans in these countries (who, by the way, I’m not accusing of being racist whatsoever).

Let me expand, earlier this season when Exeter travelled to Bournemouth for a League Two match one idiotic away ‘fan’ took it upon himself to doll out racial abuse to two of Bournemouth’s black players.

When complaints were made about this Exeter accepted the abuse had taken place and that it came from a fan using a ticket allotted to their supporters.

Yes, they said, they would accept any punishment that came their way but the fact was several of their fans, their real supporters, had identified this man and they would be prosecuting him accordingly.

Now I’m not a social expert who can say whether there are more or less racist people in England or Croatia but what I can say is English football rarely has problems with racial discrimination.

That is because non-racist fans, the vast majority, will not tolerate those that are racist and will take action against them to make sure they are prosecuted.

I know the majority of Croatian fans are not racist but what I’m saying is their levels of tolerance appear to be significantly higher – at least on the evidence of that night at the Maksimir.

Now maybe if FIFA dropped the talking shop attitude that continues to define its rule and actually took some action by banning fans or moving home ties, maybe that would soon change the average Croatian fan’s attitude towards the abusive minority who were responsible for those sanctions.

Magic of the Carling Cup?

With a lot of things in life we’re told you get out what you put in and I couldn’t help thinking of that maxim when looking at some of this week’s Carling Cup clashes.

While Arsenal’s hungry youngsters and Rotherham’s brave underdogs grabbed the opportunity others shrank back and balked at the experience.

It seems the Carling Cup has become a chameleon of a competition that almost every club looks at differently.

The top tier teams (I get bored of the phrase 'Big Four') treat it as a sideshow, a chance to boast about the depth of their squads.

Only at the latter stages of the competition do the big guns get wheeled out, particularly if the team realises it might be their only shot at a trophy.

Midtable Premiership sides tend to see it as one of the few opportunities for silverware not sewn up by their richer counterparts (although Portsmouth's triumph in last season's FA Cup somewhat muddied the waters) and is also another route into Europe.

Just look at Spurs who managed to turn a below par season in to a memorable one by claiming the trophy last term.

For the sides battling against relegation to the Championship it is simply an unwanted distraction that can only serve to deplete the resources of their threadbare squads.

Then for those lower down the league stratum, even though it lacks the (apologies in advance for the most overused cliché in football) 'magic of the FA Cup', it is still a competition that offers a money-spinning tie and a chance to prove that every dog has his day.

With all these varied permutations and attitudes it always seems to serve up excitement and drama, even if there is a kind of underlying sense of 'it doesn't really matter at the end of the day'.

It is certainly the least predictable of all the major competitions top flight teams take part in these days.

It seems some teams relish in the lack of pressure and relaxed attitude towards the Carling Cup, such as Arsenal's youngsters, while others see it purely as another opportunity for embarrassment and damage to moral between two league fixtures.

In a cup competition there is a sense almost that none of it matters except who walks away with the trophy - you might as well lose in the third round as much as the semi-final.

But try telling that to fans of Rotherham, who beat Southampton, and Watford, who pipped Premiership West Ham, after last night - even if they don't stand a hope in hell of winning the
cup.

Do we have to put so much emphasis on the final destination? In the Carling Cup at least why
shouldn't we just try and enjoy the journey?

Capello converts nation of doubters

It's amazing what can be done in ninety minutes.

In just an hour and a half the English football team managed to convert a nation of football fans from cynics to ardent followers.

In the same period a 19-year-old prodigy was elevated to the status of national hero and a moody Italian became the next messiah.

The national side was at a low ebb before last night's tie in Zagreb and the impact of the result cannot be underestimated.

The scoreline will reverberate around the country so too will a few of the individual performances.

Of course it was - first and foremost - all about Theo, it was a seminal moment in the young man's career but the context in which it will be remembered will be determined over the next couple of years.

Will we look back a few years down the line and recall how this was the night the boy became a man, the prospect became a star?

Or will we be looking at a still unfulfilled talent and wondering what could have been?

There is no doubt Walcott has the ability to go to the highest level, it is a simple fact that even the best defender in the world is troubled by pace and that is something the Arsenal youngster has in spades.

I remember when he first came onto the scene at Southampton, Walcott's boss at the time Harry Redknapp said he looks like if he ran over water wouldn't make a splash.

He simply glides effortlessly at a deceptively searing pace in a manner that reminds me of (apologies to the non-egg chasers) Jeremy Guscott in his prime for England.

Walcott has skill to but his all round game is a work in progress.

His touch is erratic to say the least and his finishing, although deadly last night, still needs work.

Walcott is also a forward by inclination and tracking back will never come naturally if he stays on the wing.

The two buzz words that Capello and others have come to associate with Theo's performances in the last two internationals are freedom and fearlessness.

The youngster has played with his intuition rather than be trapped by the enormity and pressure of the situation much like a young Wayne Rooney.

Could it be that Sven was onto something when he picked Walcott as a 17-year-old for the World Cup in Germany?

It's a shame the Swede never saw fit to trust his own instinct and allow him onto the pitch.

But it wasn't just Walcott who shone in the Maksimir Stadium, Rooney was imperious in the second half and Emile Heskey was a brute up front.

Heskey has always been a footballer with an astounding capability for polarising opinion.

But there is nothing debatable about what he does - he works tirelessly, wins balls and provides a target for teammates.

What people are endlessly debating is not Heskey himself but his type striker he represents - the non-goalscoring forward who plays for the team.

There was of course luck involved in last night’s triumph, not least the debatable decision to send off Robert Kovac with the score at 1-0.

The starting line up was also picked for Capello during a ten minute period against Andorra and ended up being just about the most balanced side England have ever put out.

But it is one thing having all the luck and quite another making the most of it.

England did so in the most emphatic fashion and it will now be interesting to see how Capello copes with the return to fitness of the likes of Steven Gerrard and Michael Owen for next month’s ties against Kazakhstan and Belarus.

Rawalpindi Express pulls into London

As cricket’s County Championship tries to build to a climax in the brief passages of play between rain delays there was no doubt a special buzz of excitement at the Oval yesterday as a newcomer made a belated entry to the competition.

The cricketer in question was fast bowler Shoaib Akhtar, who has agreed to join strugglers Surrey for their remaining handful of games.

The Rawalpindi Express has had a remarkable career, with no shortage of ups and downs.

The latest high profile incident saw Shoaib banned for five years by the Pakistan Cricket Board for publicly criticising the body after he was axed from its list of centrally contracted players.

The ban was reduced to 18-months by an appeal committee, but Shoaib is due to challenge that as well as the seven million rupee fine imposed.

He is a man who has never shirked controversy, with a history involving drug scandals and walk-outs, but he will always pull in the crowds.

At 33, injuries have taken their toll and there is little doubt that greater focus on his game may have seen him perform to an even higher level, but he has one massive draw that thrills spectators and coaches alike – raw speed.

Cricket is, like most sports, essentially a very simple game and the greatest pleasures from the watching it is derived from seeing the ball move as fast as it can – whether out of the hand of the bowler or flying off the blade of a big hitting batsman.

Devotees of crafty spinners like Muttiah Muralitharan and Shane Warne may disagree with this view but rarely has the imagination of cricket followers around the world been captured in the way the Rawalpindi Express burst onto the stage, announcing his ambition to bowl a 100mph ball.

He first caught my imagination at the 1999 World Cup.

I remember him charging in to bowl his first ball from that ridiculously long run up and hurling the ball at West Indian opener Sherwin Campbell.

The left-hander barely saw the ball as it pitched short then flicked off his bat and flew over the boundary rope at third man for six.

Yes it may have been a six but this was what Shoaib was all about – entertainment and showmanship.

Shoaib knocked out Campbell’s stumps in his next over and went on to become a star of the tournament.

A couple of years later he achieved his aim of breaking the 100mph barrier and was even feared by the Australians in his pomp.

But for all his talent, his career has always been one of fits and starts, it seems the pace at which he operated simply could not be sustained either by his body or his mind.

He has given us though, in those short bursts, some of the most spectacular cricket of the modern era and up there with the most memorable.

Averages of 25 with the ball in test cricket and 23 at One Day are impressive but nowadays a cricketer of his ability should play more than 48 tests.

But not all players should be judged by their statistics and should be remembered in a different way, as the entertainers they are.

When does a manager become a coach?

We Brits are always somewhat resistant to change and new ideas, particularly when those ideas come in from the continent.

In football there is a general feeling that, just like our breakfasts, British is best.

The latest bastion of Britishness being forthrightly defended on terraces up and down the land is the old school British manager.

Already this season the Premier League has seen two managerial departures and in both Alan Curbishley and Kevin Keegan’s cases the general consensus among football fans is that the two men were put in impossible positions.

The West Ham and Newcastle bosses are experienced top flight managers, used to the traditional role of a manager which includes picking the team, training the players and, crucially player recruitment.

Both men left under a cloud as it emerged they had become disillusioned with the way in which their control over the players who came in and out of their clubs had been taken out of their hands.

This may seem to many a completely unworkable situation, the thought of a manager being given a squad and then simply being told to get the best out of it, but this has been the system adopted by European clubs for decades.

In Gianluca Vialli’s book ‘The Italian Job’ he muses on the differing roles of Italian and English managers.

The Italian boss is simply there to coach the team, a sporting director or director of football liases with the owner over which players to bring into the club and the manager simply works with it.

He compares this system to the example given by David Platt, who claimed he was so busy during his brief spell as manager of Nottingham Forest with contract talks and trying to sign players that on some days he was unable to make it onto the training pitch to work with his team.

The anecdote is endorsed by no less a manager than Arsene Wenger, who says he is perfectly happy to leave an assistant to take care of training and sees his role principally as building a squad.

Perhaps this is why there is such an emphasis on the tactical approach in the Italian game, managers simply have more time to work on this side of the game.

This approach may be different but it can work, the key is the fans understanding the respective roles.

We are used to blaming managers for everything, they are easy targets as they stand there on the touch line and face the media (usually) after every game.

But in Italy when something goes wrong it isn’t always a case of blame the manager, if a loss or bad run is due to tactical decisions maybe, but fans also question the club hierarchy if they feel poor decisions have been made regarding the club’s resources.

In some cases this would be an ideal route for English managers, they are normally ex-players and football is all they know so to leave them to that side of the game makes sense, just as long as they are only accountable for these areas in the eyes of the press and supporters.

If an owner has invested buckets of cash into a club, why shouldn’t he also then have an influence on where the cash is spent.

In some cases, such as with the likes of Alex Ferguson and Arsene Wenger who are so used to having complete control and have completely built their squads themselves, this continental model is a non starter but I believe it can work in the English game.

I think the big problem in Keegan and Curbishley’s cases were they were simply not used to this approach and it led them to feel that there had been a breach of trust when matters they assumed they would control were taken out of their hands.

Carra admits putting club before country

When a serialisation of Jamie Carragher’s autobiography revealed that playing for his club meant more to the Liverpool defender than turning out for England it caused relatively little fuss.

A few years ago fans would have been up in arms at the idea that an English footballer doesn’t put representing his country at the top of his footballing ambitions.

But none of us were really surprised by Carragher’s revelation.

He never looked as comfortable in an England shirt and certainly was not treated by England fans with the same adulation he receives from the Kopites at Anfield.

He also seemed resentful at the fact he was rarely played in his favoured position of centre half and it was no great shock when the Liverpudlian announced his retirement from the international game last year at the age of 29.

It also follows the modern trend of players increasingly prioritising the club who pay their wages over pride at turning out in the national jersey.

A clear indication of this is seen by the number of players who pull out of international fixtures through injury, only to then appear for their clubs just days later.

Carragher, who made 34 appearances for England, is not the first to turn his back on his national side to extend his club career.

Paul Scholes and Alan Shearer took the same decision and, while Carragher was always a somewhat peripheral figure in the national set up, the pair both could surely have had at least one more major tournament in the starting line up.

All players would have to agree that there is nothing quite like taking part in a major international tournament, it is the ultimate in terms of playing ambition.

But footballers it seems are becoming increasingly apathetic towards the effort it takes to get there, with a two-year qualification process and trips to the likes of Kazakhstan and Belarus.

The annual riches of the Champions League offer a much more accessible reward for the modern player.

While the status of the international game is losing significance in English football in the face of increasing power of club sides, the country’s cricket and rugby teams are seemingly moving in the opposite direction.

In both cricket and rugby England players are on central contracts with the clubs paid compensation for losing players serving their country.

Imagine a situation if England football tried something similar to the England cricket set up, which has recently ordered a number of players to sit out the climax of the county season to rest up for the forthcoming winter tours.

The difference is in other sports the domestic game is set up to serve the national team, in football it appears the clubs view internationals purely as an inconvenient distraction.

City flash the cash as new billionaire comes to the party

Manchester City fans woke up this morning to find they were suddenly a force to be reckoned with in the Premiership.

One swallow doesn’t make a summer but, as statement signings go, the capture of Brazil forward Robinho – who was courted by Chelsea all summer – for a record British transfer fee certainly sends out a pretty clear message.

It seems there are two categories of foreign owners in the Premier League: The mega rich, such as Randy Lerner or Malcolm Glazier who can get their cheque books out whenever there is a pretty convincing case; and the super-mega-stupidly rich, of whom there are just two - Roman Abramovich and (you’ll soon be familiar with the name) Dr Sulaiman Al Fahim.

These men take ‘investment’ (can it be called investment - they’re not getting a return are they?) to a whole new level by simply throwing a blank cheque book at the manager and saying ‘help yourself’.

In fact, Al Fahim seems determined to out-Abramovich Abramovich with his threats to spend whatever it takes to ‘bulldoze’ his way into the top four.

Now if I was a Man City fan part of me would be jumping with joy as I envisage the prospect of enjoying a level of football unprecedented in the Blue half of Manchester and seeing the types of players fans could previously only dream of donning the sky blue shirt.

But in all the excitement part of me would be slightly concerned.

As the most honest Chelsea fans will admit, this billionaire backing is not always all it’s cracked up to be.

I know they can put up with the accusations that they ‘bought silverware’ and the fact that they now rival Manchester United for unpopularity among neutrals.

The real downside can be summed up in two words… Andriy Shevchenko.

Jose Mourinho’s departure was the first sign that the dream could turn sour as he could not abide by letting Abramovich make decisions – Shevchenko was an Abramovich acquisition not a
Mourinho one.

One has to wonder how much input Mark Hughes has had, or will have, into the transfer policy at City and whether, as a more demure character than Mourinho, he will stand up to boardroom interference in on the field issues.

But at the end of the day, why shouldn’t these investors ‘interfere’ with playing matters?
They bought the club, bankrolled it and made this dream possible, how can the manager (who is no doubt paid a ridiculous salary by the billionaire) then be in a position to say ‘butt out, I’m the boss’?

Whether the Arab consortium will seek to influence the playing side is yet to be seen, what is a concern is that Hughes – although a top young manager - is not ‘their man’ and it is only natural for someone making such a massive investment to appoint someone they trust to oversee the most important area of the business.

I hope Man City fans enjoy the ride – they deserve it after the ups and downs over the last couple of decades – but I just hope they head into the future with their eyes open.

Cherries chat: Bond out in Dean Court shake up

While some fans were busy scouring airports, training grounds or fans forums to see which multi-million pounds imports were arriving at their clubs on transfer deadline day, Bournemouth fans were digesting the news that manager Kevin Bond has been sacked.

For many fans the news will have come as something of a relief, sections of our support have been calling for Bond’s head since early last season and this season’s indifferent start – with just two points in four games when we started on minus 17 - gave them further cause for rancour.

But I don’t agree with our new board on this one.

Regardless of whether it was Bond or our financial problems that got us relegated from League One last season (we would have stayed up had it not been for our ten point deduction for going into administration) the new board gave Bond their backing over the summer so their patience has ostensibly lasted just four league games.

The collective effort from the team during Saturday’s defeat at Port Vale was unacceptable but, as I have already said, this cannot be purely the fault of Bond and some blame must be attached to the players.

I hope they realise they were partly responsible for the decision to dismiss Bond, as well as his assistant Rob Newman and reserve team coach Eddie Howe.

Another issue I have is with the timing. Bond was given a matter of days to build a squad between the lifting of our transfer embargo and the transfer deadline but he had brought players in, now the new boss is simply going to be working with another man’s team.

I feel Bond did a respectable job in indescribably difficult circumstances, he always held his head high and remained professional to the end.

I will reserve judgement on his replacement Jimmy Quinn, whose recent managerial experience has mainly been in the Conference (could be handy next season) and whose record in recent years is not exactly spectacular.

By all accounts (it was a bit before my time on the terraces) he was a decent and popular player during a spell at Dean Court in the early 90s but every football fan knows that isn’t a guarantee of managerial success.

Meanwhile, the appointment of former Cherries defender Jason Tindall has been received by most fans with all the warmth of a Siberian winter.

The general perception is that he bombed while in charge of south coast neighbours Weymouth and is only in the equation to attract investment from his wealthy father-in-law, music promoter Mel Bush.

But I know some people who feel Tindall came off far worse than he deserved during his time in charge at the Wessex Stadium.

He was limited by a small budget and uncertain times at the club and did his best to create a young side that played attractive football.

This ultimately proved to be his downfall as the youngsters struggled in the hurly-burly atmosphere of the Conference and as soon as the Terras began to flirt with relegation Tindall was given short shrift.

Tindall himself is still only 30 (a recurring knee injury forced a premature end to his playing career) and he should be given another chance to prove himself as a coach.

New owners, new management, this is definitely a new era for AFC Bournemouth and I just hope we’re looking forward come next April and not looking back wondering what might have been.