Fuzzy Birds

The Mirror continues to be rubbish. Here's an excerpt from their match report:

And sure enough, Fergie - serving a touchline ban for defamatory remarks about a referee’s fitness - found another victim to hector.

This time linesman Richard West, who flagged for a penalty as Nemanja Vidic helped himself to a handful of Frederic Piquionne’s shirt, was the target from Ferguson’s lectern for putting referee Mike Dean under “incredible pressure“ to award the home side a penalty and “changing the whole course of normal decision-making.”

But who needs grumbling from the Groucho Club when you can still enjoy Giggs topping the bill at the Palladium?

In an age when it has become compulsory to fawn over United’s headline acts, whether they are spouting tosh about trawlers and sardines or pouting jugglers who fall over too readily, Giggs has transcended animosity.

Even if you hate Manchester United, it is impossible to hate Ryan Giggs. He was 36 yesterday and, wearing unfeasibly white boots the shade of a Hollywood actor’s teeth, he decorated the occasion with his 100th Premier League goal.

The oh-so-predictable mention of Sir Alex and referees and then into illogic: a contradiction, on the one hand everyone fawns over all our players, on the other Ryan Giggs is the one player everyone can fawn over. Senseless.

But not as senseless as Stan Collymore in the same rag:

But when I saw the champions’ team-sheet I couldn’t help but feel that Michael Carrick, Paul Scholes, Darren Fletcher and Ryan Giggs wouldn’t get a sniff of action regularly for title rivals Chelsea.

I take on board the trophies won by United’s midfield four but I want to discuss the here and now, and with nearly half a season gone, I wish to discuss the two engine rooms.

If you compare Carrick with Chelsea’s Frank Lampard, I’d have Frank all day long.

He is more mobile than Carrick and is a 20-goal a season midfielder and a better all round footballer than the United man, so I’d give Lamps the nod by nine points to six out of ten.

Attacking midfielder-wise, Scholes or Michael Ballack is too close to call so I score this contest even.

They are two fantastic players that have bags of experience and I’d give them both six points each.

But Michael Essien is clearly a far superior player to United’s Fletcher.

It is no contest, as the Ghana international is stronger in the tackle, more mobile, and possibly the world’s best defensive midfielder at the moment.

Add to that a knack for regular goals, and Essien is a clear winner by nine points to six.

Giggs was man-of-the-match at Pompey and United fans will tell you he’s playing better than ever, but Joe Cole looks sharp again, can unlock the door in tight games and has more impact in the crucial central midfield area.

Now he is fit, Cole is often at the heart of everything for Chelsea so I’d give him eight points to Giggs’ seven.

Of course everyone can have their opinion, and I'm not so blind that I can't see some merit in Chelsea's midfield, but the form of this argument is ridiculous - he gives a nice write up of a Chelsea player and then says "this makes him better than the Man United equivalent," no discussion of the Man United player, just the bald "Darren Fletcher 6" meaningless in its stupidity - a phrase which sums up The Mirror well...

Not a lot in the other reports, which concentrate on Portsmouth's plight mainly, though there is some praise of Giggs from all corners as he gets his 100th Premier League goal. The Daily Star report here, Guardian here, Telegraph here, and Independent here.

Transona Five

Since I started my boycott of The Daily Mail I really haven't missed it. It's a blessed relief not having to read through that rag on any level. It's possibly a bit of a disadvantage when doing a paper round up that I really hate most of the papers I have to read. I really am tempted to just boycott the lot of them until one of them prints something worth reading. Top of the list for stopping reading has to be The Mirror. Has a paper ever been so shit? It's not shit in the Mail way, it's just so dull, so pointless. When was the last time The Mirror actually had some sort of exclusive? Brian Reade, whose a columnist on The Mirror (he's "at the heart of football" apparently...) takes the pointlessness of the paper to its extreme today though, using his column to say that Sir Alex should stop criticising referees:

There he was again this week, desperately trying to divert attention away from another lame performance by claiming the ref had denied United a "stonewall penalty" against Besiktas. Adding that it was the second time in this year's competition.

And that was the most interesting bit I could find. Correct me if I'm wrong but Sir Alex is contractually obliged to talk to the press after games of football. Is Brian Reade aware of that? Or is he so much in "the heart of football" that he doesn't know? Either way. Why is he so pointless? He doesn't look at the facts or write humourously, he may as well have written "that Sir Alex, eh, likes having a go at refs, eh, pah!" Twat.
Elsewhere, Mark Ogden in The Telegraph is unaware of the meaning of the word "languish":

United may find themselves languishing five points behind Chelsea in the Premier League title race...

Check out the definitions here and tell me which one he's using. Really, none of them are even close to fitting.
Not a lot about from yesterday's press conference, some quotes here, and here.

Futureworld

Just some quotes coming from the Besiktas game today. Gary Neville on Liverpool:

the defender put his own's team disappointment into perspective yesterday when he compared it to the intense frustrations being felt at Anfield.

"Well, you get what you deserve as a team, don't you?" the former England international replied when it was pointed out to him that Benítez's team would not be joining United, Chelsea and Arsenal in the knockout phase.

"We are where we are because we deserve to be there. And it is the same with Liverpool. We went out of the competition ourselves after the group stage a few years back [2005]. They haven't performed well enough in the Champions League this season to get the results, as simple as that."

And on the game itself:

"It was disappointing but we just didn't do enough in the last third," he said. "Usually we would expect to score a goal in something like the 96th or 97th minute, and we didn't do that.

"Their goalkeeper [Rustu Recber] made a couple of great saves and our final pass maybe wasn't good enough at times. Maybe the decision-making at times wasn't good enough. And some of the crossing, including mine, wasn't good enough.

Good that he takes some of the responsibility for lack of quality crossing on himself.

Obertan, despite the good press from Wednesday night, keeps his feet on the ground:

"It was a disappointing night against Besiktas. I really wanted to put in a good performance. I wanted to score and to lay on an assist and be efficient.

"I think I will have another chance and I will take it. I just want to be in the squad every game. Even a few minutes on the pitch is a bonus.

"I want to do more. I have not scored yet. I have not made an assist. I have put in some good performances but they've only been short appearances when I came on as a substitute. I want to do more than that. I think I could do more. That's what I am wishing for. I want to score and lay on goals. That is my target."

Vidic tries to stop the speculation surrounding his future:

"I don't want to rush and I don't want to speak about my future in the media," he said. "I will speak about it to the club. But I don't want to push them. I don't want to push anyone.

"We will see what happens. I am here and I am happy. I have shown in the games that I want to be part of the team and to play every game 100 per cent for this club."

Which works well...

Don't let our youth go to waste

Given the disappointing result last night, the wisest words come from The Times report:

Football is a results business and United have had enough of them so far this season to be able to approach last night’s game as if it was a Carling Cup third-round tie and to shrug off the rare home defeat that followed for Sir Alex Ferguson’s young team.

They may be struggling to hit anything like top form, but United’s position is a source of envy not only to Liverpool, but to AC Milan, Real Madrid, Barcelona, Inter Milan, Bayern Munich and Juventus, all of whom go into the final round of group matches with their prospects in the balance.

And it's fair to say that the observation that had we not already qualified Sir Alex "would have been more than “agitated”, as he put it, at the French referee’s baffling refusal to award United a penalty with four minutes left" is also very true.

A lot of the reports seem to unfairly criticise Foster for the goal, not that he couldn't have done better perhaps but Rafael has to take the lion's share of the blame for allowing the shot in the first place, another example of the way football journalists seem to like taking the path of least resistance when it comes to writing match reports.

Like the ever ridiculous David McDonnell in The Mirror (although I assume he doesn't write the headlines but the stuff he does write is generally ridiculous...) whose bit of quotes is headlines with a "Surprise, Surprise, Manchester United lose and Sir Alex blames the ref," while in it he says:

Patrice Evra looked to be cynically body-checked in the 86th-minute but French ref Stephane Lannoy refused to be swayed by United's vociferous claims

Back to Foster and this Telegraph report looks at the way Foster looks when he makes a mistake:

When Schmeichel made a mistake, though, he blamed somebody else. Always. No matter whether he was 100 per cent at fault, it was Steve Bruce or Gary Pallister, Jaap Stam or Ronny Johnsen who were subjected to the goalkeeper’s fury.

Foster is the polar opposite. When he commits an error that results in a goal, he just stares blankly into space, his eyes betraying the fear of a dressing down in the changing room.

Perhaps Foster needs to develop the Dane’s nasty streak before he can seriously contemplate becoming first choice for United and England.

Not sure what that means, in the game last night whatever way he reacted to the goal he still played well for the rest of the game, it didn't seem to affect his game, so what is the point of this except to have a go at someone for the sake of it?

Henry Winter's report is good as ever, he sings the praises of Obertan, perhaps overmuch:

Ferguson will take pleasure from the performance of Obertan, whose pace and trickery down the right delighted Old Trafford.

The Frenchman eats up the ground, certainly loves a step-over when faced with a back-pedalling defender and never neglected his defensive duties, helping out Gary Neville. There is also a confidence to the 20-year-old winger, a refusal to be fazed whatever the stage, however distinguished the company, that bodes well for his future at Old Trafford.

Obertan arrived in the summer from Bordeaux, having had English scouts enthusing over the French Under-21 international’s potential when he took apart Stuart Pearce’s tyros at the City Ground last March, even scoring.

Another impressive advertisement for the Clairefontaine finishing school outside Paris, Obertan shone on the right here but has also been used by Ferguson on the left. His ease on either foot inevitably causes problems for defenders unsure which side he will attempt to pass them.

Obertan can largely be exempted from the criticism deservedly directed at United last night for their failure to retain the ball, and their inability to finish.

Yes, he was good, but he was as wasteful as others.

Having said that Daniel Taylor in The Guardian is overcritical:

Gabriel Obertan, the new signing from Bordeaux, can frustrate with his habit of misplacing crosses or running the ball into touch, but the Frenchman did at least provide some width and penetration.

And also from The Guardian some optimism:

The result may have gone against them, but United's next generation seem to have the general idea. "The young players were a bit anxious when we needed more composure in the final third, but that's understandable, it's not the biggest fault in the world," Ferguson concluded. "Playing in that game tells them how highly we regard them as players, and shows the trust we have in them. They have shown they have the speed and the physical prowess to make it, the one thing you can't always give players of 18, 19 and 20 is experience, and that's why it is nice to have the opportunity."

Credit in the Straight World

Not much in the papers, already qualified for the knockout stages of the Champions League so no need for huge articles.
The Sun reports that Sir Alex wants more credit:

Bayern Munich are struggling and Liverpool could be another big team out.

"It shows how tough it is to retain the cup as we nearly did and maybe our achievement has been underestimated because you see how difficult the others are finding it."

The Times takes a scattergun approach reporting on Vidic's future in their Champions League preview:

Sir Alex Ferguson, the Manchester United manager, fears that he will lose Nemanja Vidic next summer.

Barcelona and Real Madrid want to take Vidic to Spain while the Serbia defender is also being tracked by AC Milan in Italy.

Ferguson will try to talk Vidic out of leaving, but he is understood to be genuinely concerned that the player may have had his head turned by the idea of a move to the Continent and is unsure that even the offer of a lucrative new contract would be enough to persuade the 27-year-old to stay.

Vidic denied reports in August that his wife, Ana, is unhappy in Manchester amid speculation about his future, but it is thought that the wishes of his family will have a significant bearing on any decision.

Given this is The Times, which is meant to have standards, I'd also like to be picky about their headlines use of the word "and" instead of "or" - "Sir Alex fears he could lose Vidic to Barcelona and Real Madrid" - what's he going to do, play for Barcelona one weekend, Real the next, alternate midweek fixtures?

And The Telegraph links us with Marek Hamsik, along with others:

Slovakia international Hamsik, rated at £25 million by Napoli, has been the subject of intensive scouting since the turn of the year and the 22 year-old has been credited as the driving force behind his country’s World Cup qualification.

Ferguson, who is set to turn to his young players in Wednesday’s Champions League Group B clash with Besiktas at Old Trafford, has also instructed his scouting network to monitor the progress of Palermo defender Simon Kjaer and Bolton centre-half Gary Cahill.

The Greedy Ugly People

I'm back, hooray! I am well enough to actually manage to sit at my computer and read things and then comment on them which, after more than a week of being able to do pretty much nothing, feels like quite an achievement.
First up today is this, which was posted on Monday but I've just noticed, chief executive of the Premier League Richard Scudamore on piracy, or as he likes to call it, "Digital theft" - which is not only a spurious comparison, but also a downright lie, you'd have to imagine ,because if he did call it "digital theft" everyone he said it to would be like, "you mean piracy?" or "what? stealing money from banks using internet banking?" and he'd be endlessly looking like a twat.
He doesn't really mention football streaming too much - he bigs up the product and says no one would want to stream it if it wasn't any good - but his argument is really stupid elsewhere - take these two bits:

We are leaders in film, music, publishing, TV production and sports rights – British popular culture, sport and production values are viewed as among the best in the world.

and

The bill is a start, but it needs to stay in good shape as it progresses because digital theft is reaching epidemic proportions and shows no signs of abating. Currently, it is estimated that more than 6 million people illegally fileshare regularly, and the UK leads the world in illegal downloads of TV programmes, with up to 25% of all online TV piracy taking place here. This is a statistic that should fill us with little pride.

If we're leaders in TV why are so many TV shows downloaded illegally? This is not a premium thing, the TV shows are not downloaded because people begrudge paying for them - they are downloaded because they are shown first in the US (where they are made) and to see them first people download them before they come on TV. So he ruins his first point (we're at the forefront of TV production) with his second point (people like to watch US TV).
To bring it back to football, isn't the comparison here quite good, the Premier League should look for ways to make all games broadcastable rather than simply jealously guarding their rights, in the same way that TV should find ways to standardize release times so people don't need to download shows illegally - if your not providing a satisfactory service don't complain if people try to improve the service themselves.
And of course there's the obvious point that the Premier League is raking in record money so why doesn't he just shut his mouth anyway?

The Home Secretary Briefs The Forces Of Law And Order

Good article on The Guardian blog in which Jeff Winter gets some of the criticism he so richly deserves and someone points out the obvious truth that referees aren't giving us shit after "Wileygate":

arguably the real punishment is being enacted on the pitch. Indeed the former referee Jeff Winter came tantalisingly close to justifying his continued presence in the public eye when he predicted as much in the aftermath of Ferguson's comments about Wiley. "I think Sir Alex may have overstepped the line this time and he may be about to get his comeuppance," Winter said. "Human nature's a funny thing. Sir Alex might just find a few refereeing decisions going against him." ...

What is arguably more disconcerting than these dubious decisions is the manner in which former referees, most notably Winter and Dermot Gallagher, have defended them after the event. Some of their arguments have been woolly in the extreme; Winter even said Didier Drogba should not necessarily have been penalised for fouling Wes Brown because such things happen all the time, an argument so spectacularly moronic that we feel slightly unclean even mentioning it.

While our lawyers can't stress enough that there is no suggestion of foul play in the recent treatment of United, there is enough past evidence in sport to at least invite the perception that officials do not always judge incidents on merit. To suggest otherwise would almost redefine naivety.

And I really can't believe this, the fact that Alan Leighton isn't satisfied I can believe, frankly who cares what he thinks, why the papers keep quoting him I don't know - Referees Union? Thought Thatcher killed union power, don't see unions being invited to give their opinion on many other subjects... No, the thing I don't believe is this:

Peter Griffiths QC, who chaired the FA regulatory commission, revealed last night that Ferguson had been discriminated against – and handed a stiffer penalty – because of who he is.

"Each member of the commission recognised Sir Alex Ferguson's achievements and stature within the game," he said. "Having said that, it was made clear to Sir Alex that with such stature comes increased responsibilities. The commission considered his admitted remarks, in the context in which they were made, were not just improper but were grossly improper and wholly inappropriate. He should never have said what he did."

Does that even need comment? Sir Alex is treated more harshly than any other manager would have been because he is so good at it? Is this the real world?
Alan fucking Leighton says:

"This is not a personal vendetta against Sir Alex, but he has a particular stature within the game and if he is seen to be getting off lightly, other managers may think what he said was not beyond the pale. "

So it is a personal vendetta then? And what type of patronising shit is this? These are grown men, not children, professionals, not kids, other managers may be influenced by the bad man. Fuck off Alan Leighton.
Henry Winter is as ever very good on it. The whole thing is well worth reading, even some fairly long quotes can't sum it up, though here they are:

The case against Ferguson lacks perspective. It is like hounding Barack Obama for double-parking outside the White House. The FA must see the bigger picture with Ferguson. ...

I can't remember the last time the FA acknowledged Ferguson's role in shaping England's present or future.

Crassly imitating a scene from Swift, Lilliputian no-names attempt to bring down a giant of the game. The cast of pygmies includes Alan Leighton, a rep from referees' union Prospect, an unknown organisation in football until its pushy principal began piggybacking on Ferguson's fame.

Apparently, Prospect represents referees. So Leighton will know that Ferguson was the first manager to inquire after Mark Halsey's health.

It is the inconsistency of individuals such as Leighton that is particularly galling. Ferguson makes a mistake and gets pilloried. Leighton's members make shocking errors, ignoring beach-balls and bad challenges, yet the Prospect chief stays silent.

The FA seems to have been swayed by a union man stamping his feet and spouting off on the airwaves. Football would be better place if a wise owl such as Ferguson, for all his acerbic outbursts, was advising the FA and its hordes of amateurs on how to run the game.

Ferguson should show more respect to referees – and football should show more respect to Ferguson.

The Sun deserve absolutely no respect for having a story entirely made up of the opinions of Alan Leighton and Jeff Winter... I'm not even going to link to it, so shit is it...

Interview with Rooney here (England context so I won't quote from it).

And he apologises for mouthing "12 men" at the end of the Chelsea game. I hope, after the FA and referees demonstrate just how many men are against us, he's changed his mind and retracts his apology:

The striker was furious, along with boss Sir Alex Ferguson, at the performance of ref Martin Atkinson, who booked Rooney for protesting about John Terry’s goal. “To be honest I have looked back and I probably should not have said it,” added Rooney, who escaped with a warning from the FA.

There's a Traitor in This Room

Sir Alex faces a disciplinary thing for the Wiley comments today which gives the papers a chance to go over the whole thing yet again, here, here, and here, and elsewhere as well... And, as they replay the comments and the beautifully stage managed press hysteria which followed the comments in great detail, we have, without irony, the bald statement:

Ferguson, though, believes that there has been a witch-hunt against him by the media and figures from the refereeing world, and has questioned privately whether he will receive a fair hearing.

Given the way that the papers love to have a go at us, even without reason, it is disappointing to see that Nani seems to have broken ranks with some comments about Sir Alex which are widely reported today. Quotes from here:

"Ferguson is a very complicated man," he told Portuguese newspaper 'I' in an interview published in The Sun.

"He's tough. If things are all right, then they are all right. But when he thinks something is wrong, everything is screwed.

"He can go from complimenting you to just plain trashing you in a matter of minutes. Has it happened to me? Hell, yes. He'll say 'Nani, how could you miss this or this'?

"He shouts at players in front of everyone. No one escapes, everybody is the same. (Ryan) Giggs and (Gary) Neville suffer most, because they have more experience." ...

"I can have a spectacular game but nobody guarantees me I will be starting the next match. It shatters your confidence.

"I did not play the important matches, against Liverpool, Manchester City or Tottenham.

"Not playing these games, I am a bit sad. But for now I am not considering leaving."

Not considering but trying to engineer a move by the sounds of it...
Finally the Daily Star considers the famous hater Alan Shearer's opinion on Michael Owen's England chances newsworthy.

John Wayne was a Nazi

Yet another international break means another quiet day. 2 stories "worth" mentioning. This from The Manchester Evening News is a straight report on Sir Alex's FA hearing into his Alan Wiley comments.
The other "story" is Oliver Holt taking us to task for not having poppies on our shirts for Sunday's game, presumably using the fact that it's Armistice Day to justify being so late on it (bizarrely the column is titled "Oliver Holt in Abu Dhabi..." why he had to go there to give such a bullshit opinion I'm not entirely sure...):

was it too much to expect them to embroider a poppy on to the black sash around their home shirt?

At a time when the nation is appalled by the horrors that are befalling our soldiers daily in Iraq and Afghanistan, was it really too much to ask?

Sadly, for our best-supported club, United have still not lost the habit of putting their foot in their mouth when it comes to public relations.

Yes, it was too much to ask. Why? Because as far as I can make out the driving force behind the campaign to get clubs to wear poppies are those assholes at The Daily Mail. Take this (I provide link for references sake, I wouldn't recommend or condone clicking on it...):

That makes a total of six clubs who have changed their plans this week on the back of Sportsmail’s campaign that began by pointing out that only 12 of the 20 teams in the top flight had informed the Premier League about their intention to put a poppy on their match kit.

Why we would dance to the tune of The Daily Mail is absolutely beyond me.
If we did everything they suggested we'd end up limiting the number of foreigners who we let in to Old Trafford, have a points system to decide which of the foreigners we could let in,
and ban gay people from coming to games unless they could prove their morals were of a sound nature... The mere fact that the Daily Mail support it suggests that its a bad idea. Twats.

Idiot Joy Showland

Why do people still listen to Jeff Winter? He's an absolute joke. I know I often have a go at Graham Poll for his bland and generally pretty rubbish column, but Winter is just a complete buffoon. He was a shit ref and an even shitter "pundit," if that's what he actually is... In today's Telegraph he claims that Terry's challenge on Valencia was probably a penalty but:

there is no way that the officials could have spotted the infringement in the heat of battle with the naked eye. It was only after the incident in the television studios that the foul became apparent.

as an ex-referee he's probably going to be on their side, but, really? I remember jumping up shouting penalty and fully expecting one to be given. The linesman was on the right to see it close up, it was a penalty. He also ruins his point by elsewhere in the same article claiming that referees are likely to be more biased against us given Sir Alex's criticisms of referees. He wants us to believe that refs are unbiased and that "mistakes" are made with clear conscience, yet he also tells us that we'll get less decisions because of Sir Alex:

"I'm not a psychologist so I don't know how that has affected referees' performances in the past or what impact it will have in the future when it comes to debatable decisions. But it is fair to say that it can't be a healthy situation when he gives referees so much stick and human nature is bound to be a factor so his criticism could rebound on him."

You Lie, You Cheat

The picture above shouldn't really need much comment. What cries out for comment is the reaction of the papers to it. There isn't a lot of dissent from the view that it is a dive, how could there be? But take a look at the headlines:

"Liverpool ride their luck but remain stuck in the mire - Steven Gerrard inspired a recovery..."

"Benitez hoping luck has changed"

"Liverpool saved from humiliation by Gerrard"

And my personal favourite, the most ill-timed article ever in The Times:

"David Ngog qualities can help win over doubters"

And the article goes on at great length about him, praises his performance against Birmingham and then, almost as an afterthought it would seem, a final paragraph which mentions the dive without mentioning the word "dive" or the word "cheat."
I'm not even sure I need to point out the difference in reaction between that and what would happen if a Man Utd player did something similar. Ngog dives, and the headlines tell us how inspirational Gerrard was? Ngog dives and Liverpool are "lucky" not "cheats?" And considering the amount of luck Liverpool, even this season, get, to have a headline hoping for a change in their luck without irony is an absolute joke.

Get A Knife Between Your Teeth

You take a week off and come back and everything's... exactly the same. Chelsea match reports - The Guardian's Kevin McCarra is surely taking the piss when he says:

Chelsea had a plan and it delivered the required victory.

Yep. Chelsea's plan was to be out-played for the entire game and let the referee conjure them up a victory. Continuing the awfulness these sentences are equally stupid:

Ferguson did not have the trust to pitch Michael Owen on from the start and, until the final moments, Rooney worked alone in attack.Chelsea are expert at checking even the outstanding footballers and when Rooney had broken clear, in the sixth minute, he was wrongly given off-side.

First point - wtf?! second point - what is the point - Chelsea are expert at checking outstanding footballers... even resorting to getting the linesman to make dubious off side decisions?!
Elsewhere on The Guardian website this sums up the decisions while also summing up the ridiculous conclusions the papers manage to come to:

United should have been awarded a penalty when John Terry shouldered Antonio Valencia aside in the 14th minute, and the free-kick that led to the only goal, awarded against Darren Fletcher for a perceived foul on Ashley Cole in the 76th minute, might well not have been given, while the goal itself should have been annulled as Didier Drogba, in an offside position after dragging down Wes Brown, strayed into Edwin van der Sar's eyeline. But a rough match will often be decided by rough justice.

The Independent's report is pretty dull, though it contains understatement of the year:

On the balance of decisions, United could perhaps feel hard done by

The Mirror at least recognise the truth:

Chelsea boss Ancelotti will know that his team were lucky as Manchester United certainly did not deserve to lose...

For 76 minutes yesterday, United looked the better team and Rooney ran himself into the ground while Darren Fletcher bossed the midfield.

Jeremy Wilson in The Telegraph makes an absolutely insane comparison:

As Rooney left the field, he mouthed the words "12 men" into the TV camera. Although he did not swear, Rooney's outburst will evoke comparisons with Didier Drogba's infamous rant after the Champions League semi-final against Barcelona that prompted a three-match Uefa ban.

I'm not sure that it will "evoke comparisons" - perhaps only to absolute idiots like Jeremy Wilson...
Kevin Garside in The Telegraph reports on our game, but seems to have allowed the popular pastime of masturbating over Arsenal to spill over into the report, rendering it messy and frankly worthless.
Final word to Sir Alex:

"Clearly Darren Fletcher has won the ball," said Ferguson. "He's never touched Ashley Cole who just jumped up in the air, and then Drogba has pulled Brown to the ground at the goal. The referee's position to make a decision there was absolutely ridiculous. He can't see it. There was a Chelsea player standing right in front of him and he doesn't even move.

"It was a bad decision, but what can you do? You lose faith in the refereeing sometimes. That's the way the players are talking in there. It was a bad one. That goal should not have been allowed. We've dominated the game and had great chances to win the match. And that's our fault. Some of the football we played getting up to the box, and some of the chances in and around the box, was excellent and we should have finished it off. But you do need a break. We never got the break we needed."

Facedown In Shit

I seem to have lost my routine. Hence the sporadic nature of the posts recently. Was planning on restarting today, settling back into the routine and posting the daily round-up. Then I turned to the 1st report, which just happened to be this, from the Observer, which begins:

Perhaps it's the swine flu, but Blackburn continue to make a pig's ear of defending, and Manchester United were able to win with something to spare and without ever playing as well as they can. Two high-class goals, from Dimitar Berbatov and Wayne Rooney, were gems amid more dross than Old Trafford is prepared to tolerate, and the crowd were voicing their disapproval by the time the stalemate was broken, 10 minutes into the second half.

Berbatov's stunning goal out of nothing came with a rider. The Bulgarian had spurned straightforward chances before he scored, and the home crowd were starting to get on the back of the £30m man, tempted to join in the visitors' cries of "What a waste of money", until his fourth of the season went in.

Earlier results had given United little cause for satisfaction. ...

And it occurred to me that I really need a break from reading all this rubbish everyday. For the last couple of weeks I'd noticed that I was beginning to grow short of patience with most of the things written on us. It really is a job of infinite tedium having to trawl through the shit that generally passes for football writing in the papers looking for anything that might be worth mentioning. Will one of these people ever have an original thought? Will they ever write something worthwhile? Half of them I'm not even sure why they're football writers - the way they write you'd think they hated the game. (I should exonerate Henry Winter from these charges, but I can't think of anyone else worth naming as an exception...) It's just the same joyless rubbish day in, day out.

So I'm treating myself to a week off. Come back refreshed and raring to go again hopefully. If I spot anything worth writing about over the week I'll still post, but reading everything - I need a break.