Archive for the ‘Sport’ Category

Hopes and Fears on the dawn of the new season

Saturday, August 15th, 2009

Liverpool’s premiership season gets underway tomorrow. I’m filled with more fears than I can remember in recent years, but only because my hopes are greater than ever before.

My only wish for last season was to be involved in a title race: at first by Christmas and then by Easter. I got all I wanted and more. After the win against Villa I really believed we would win the title.

Now, we need to win it. Rafa needs to win it to prove to his doubters that he is the right man to take the club forward. He needs it to instil further confidence in his project for root and branch reform of the club.

Winning the title is tough. The margins are fine and the variables significant. We go into the new season with a machine with some key parts changed, not just small upgrades on the edges. The loss of Alonso may lead to a better team but it really changes the way the team will play. The notion that his replacement, Aquilani, plays between Mascherano and Gerrard is a threat to the balance of the team. No transfer is certain to be a success.

Glen Johnson looks like a good signing but around him the defence is quite uncertain. Carragher is a year older – and currently injured. Agger is out (again) and Skrtel had some injury problems pre-season. The idea of Ayala or San Jose starting against Crouch and Defoe doesn’t inspire me with confidence. And it places more pressure on young left-back Insua, who often had Carra in his ear last season.

I love watching Liverpool play as a unit. But it is a well-drilled unit. And that’s why the change to midfield could be as tricky to manage as the attempt to introduce Keane was last season: and that experiment didn’t work out.

It doesn’t help that we play Spurs again – in consecutive premiership games. Spurs away is always tough and often a draw. Yet a draw will put pressure on the team early on and the media will not mention that Man United drew at the start of last season. The talk will be of the draws last season that cost us the league.

And for another year, the Premiership is weaker, less competitive. Manchester City’s millions is not ‘good for the game’ as so many suggest. It’s just a different badge on players who have been bought in to buy success. City the team may as well be a franchise. The future for Wolves and Burnley fans will be defeats followed by relegation – with heroic battles along the way whilst fans of Portsmouth and other big spending small clubs desperately hoping that financial meltdown will be kept at bay another year.

I hope that we can do it, I really do. And yet if we don’t (presuming we make a good fist of it) I probably won’t be disappointed. But I will be nervous. Nervous that it will threaten the rebuilding of Liverpool. Nervous of the threat of a Man City or another newly-wealthy club usurping our place. Nervous of what the debt piled on Liverpool will mean for its future. Nervous that it’s getting easier for players to be mercenary. But hopeful that 18/5 will become 19/5 or even 18/6.

Journalism matters but so do big news organisations

Thursday, July 23rd, 2009

The Media Standards Trust* is organising a series of events: ‘Why Journalism Matters’. The keynote speakers, Lionel Barber and Alan Rusbridger have both argued that journalism does matter and that it is being practised by more people than ever before.

Both speakers pointed to innovations such as blogs, Twitter, Google docs and Wikileaks as the means by which so many more people can engage in – and with – journalism than ever before. The Guardian’s technology desk has 900,000 followers on Twitter – more than double the print circulation of the whole newspaper.

Neither were particularly gloomy about their newspaper’s prospects of survival although both predicted problems: a shrinking of the “mediocre middle” (Barber) and the shrinking of the regional press (Rusbridger). Neither had any viable solutions to the financial crisis facing big news organisations.

Lionel Barber predicted that “almost all” news organisations would be charging for online content in 12 months. Alan Rusbridger said that the commercial aspect of The Guardian was not really his job but speculated that they could monetise Twitter followers by charging for access to high profile people (which sounded dangerously like becoming a lobbyist).

The lack of clarity and innovation was also apparent at News Innovation, an unconference the MST hosted earlier this month. At a session on the future of news the audience discussed how newspapers could finding new revenue streams or apply their journalistic skills to more lucrative sources of income. As someone who has run a sometimes struggling business, such solutions were eerily familiar – and destined to fail.

But without big news organisations, journalism will not succeed. It’s the difference between busking on the street and being on the X Factor.

In some regards, news organisations have been truly radical. The Guardian’s open platform, the Daily Mail’s comment sections (with the up and down ratings) Sun Talk, Comment is Free et al. But the core product remains remarkably unchanged. Newspapers are still predicated on the notion that they need to give ‘a little bit of everything’ as if it were the only source of news for that reader. There isn’t much price differential. The USPs are unclear.

Big news organisations need more thought, more innovation and more focus. If some are to survive it will be because others have tried to be different and failed. That requires a courage apparently lacking. But big news organisations aren’t short of options. Of the 9 national daily newspapers why doesn’t anyone try:

  • A cover price that reflects the cost (and value) of the content?
  • Specialising in a particular aspect of journalism (investigation, celebrity, whatever)?
  • Targetting a particular demographic (why no newspaper for older people?)

I’ve picked these examples because they aren’t radical and because newspapers are doing bits of all of them. But not enough and not to the logical conclusion. Tabloid editors are convinced that only the News of the World would have broken the Max Mosley story. But the others all reported it after it had broke. New outlets are succeeding (Heat magazine, Saga, Guido) but not sufficiently to fill the gap left by mass circulation daily newspapers.

I read Red and White Kop for Liverpool news (and make a small donation). I pay for LFC TV. I subscribe to The Economist because it’s delivered to my door and covers the world in more depth, and with more analysis, than I can get elsewhere. I would pay for the PoliticsHome top 100 feed. I don’t buy a national newspaper.

Big news organisations need to survive. But it appears they would rather hang together to hang together.

* declaration of interest: The Media Standards Trust pay my wages.

Beware the ghost of 2005

Friday, July 17th, 2009

The ghost of 2005 hangs over the Ashes series between England and Australia. The media and fans keep recalling the ‘greatest ever series’ and draw parallels with today.

  1. There are some interesting parallels. Australia’s premier strike bowler (Brett Lee) was injured on the eve of the first Test just like Glen McGrath was on the eve of the Edgbaston Test.
  2. Panesar and Anderson’s last wicket stand in Cardiff was reminiscent of Australia’s last wicket stand to draw the Test at Old Trafford.
  3. England’s first wicket stand yesterday was similar to Trescothick and Strauss’ at Edgbaston and, indeed, the scoring rate for the whole day was pretty similar.
  4. And of course, Ricky Ponting’s increasingly frequent Gary Pratt moments

I can understand the temptation. The summer of 2005 was the best of my life. I don’t think it will ever be surpassed (married 2007, fatherhood, 2008). There was Istanbul, Edgbaston, Old Trafford, Trent Bridge, the Oval and the agony of Gerrard leaving to Gerrard staying.

But it is a huge mistake for a number of reasons. I learnt this the hard way in Athens as Liverpool reached the champions league final in 2007. We turned up expecting to win. When we went one nil down at half time, we sang YNWA to recreate those stories of Istanbul. When we went 2-0 I still thought we won and briefly, when Kuyt pulled one back, I thought we’d do it again.

  1. Looking back devalues the achievement of now. Repeating the achievements of previous years is a far greater achievement in sport than it is doing it for the first time.
  2. The novelty of 2005 was that it was unexpected. England hadn’t won the Ashes in England for a generation. Likening ‘09 to ‘05 will just mean that winning it again won’t feel as special.
  3. 2005 was special because of the innocence of the new; the unexpectedness of it. Anticipating that same sensation misses the specialness of now.

2005 was special. 2009 can also be special. And if we win the Ashes it will be a greater achievement. But it will only feel better if we ignore the ghost of 2005.