Kidknapped!

If what I was about to discuss happened in Britain, there would be wall-to-wall TV coverage, TalkSPORT's Jon Gaunt's apoplectic voice would get even more high-pitched and the Daily Mail would reduce it's carrier bag campaign from nine pages a day to eight so they could report it.

The question is: Should it be any less of a news story just because the incident ha staken place in Honduras rather than Hartlepool?

Here goes: Wigan's Wilson Palacios is playing Premier League football despit the kidnapping of his 15-year-old brother Edwin Rene.

The kinknappers are holding Edwin in the hope of getting money out of Palacios, 23.

It's a shocker, but as Wigan boss Steve Bruce says: "His brother is still kidnapped -it apparently happens quite often in Honduras ñ but the family are in contact with him. And one thing is for certain they are tough people.

"We're hoping it can be resolved quickly, but it shows you everything about the kid that he can still produce a performance like the one he had against City. It is a delight to work with people like him- I wish I had a few more like him."

I'm sure Edwin Rene's kidnappers are hoping the same. Sounds like it's a lucrative business in Honduras.

Steve Coppell and the England job – when your face doesn’t fit.

By Garry Cook

In the 1990/91 season Crystal Palace finished third in the league, behind champions Arsenal and runners-up Liverpool.

Do you find this inspiring? Palace had only won promotion to England’s top flight two season’s previously.

They had taken the league by storm – and Steve Coppell was the man inspiring them.

He built a super-fast young side, spearheaded by Ian Wright, which caught the rest of the football establishment off-side. I remember thinking at the time, just months after Graham Taylor succeeded Bobby Robson as manager of England, that Steve Coppell should be the next England manager. What a good idea.

Truly inspirational

That was 15 years ago. Football has changed a lot since then. Many of Steve Coppell’s contemporaries of that time have long since retired. But he is still around. And he is still pretty good.

Now with Reading, he has achieved much the same with his current club as he did with Palace a decade-and-a-half ago.

The days of winning promotion and then hitting the top three in the Premiership are long gone in British football, but Coppell’s achievements in keeping John Madejski’s club in decent Premiership fettle, not to mention last season’s record-breaking points haul in the Championship, should not be undervalued. Inspired enough yet?

He clearly knows his football, probably more so now than he did twenty-two years ago when he first began his managerial career.

So the question is: An Englishman, fantastic experience as a boss, motivational ability to get the best out of his squad, uncontroversial and (seemingly) no skeletons in the closet – why was Steve Coppell not considered for the England job?

If you don’t find Steve Coppell inspirational, perhaps that’s the problem.

I agree that he is not the most inspiring choice – but is that the point. The point is: he can do the job and he is infinitely better than those who were considered as Sven Goran Eriksson’s replacement.

Steve McClaren got it. Awful season with Middlesbrough rescued by UEFA Cup run.

Sam Allardyce was in the running. Kept Bolton in the Premiership. One promotion via play-offs (inherited a team that was already Championship-winning standard).

Stuart Pearce was being touted. Manchester City boss had less than 12 months experience. Who in their right mind would tout him? Even Pearce agrees.

In my opinion, it all comes down to your face fitting. Coppell’s face clearly does not fit with the media. The British press have never heralded Coppell and the FA, however much they deny it, will not consider someone who does not have a high enough media profile.

So that means that inexperienced guys like McClaren and Pearce are considered for the role of England manager.

What problems would Coppell bring to England?

He does not come across as a talismanic, charismatic speaker and leader. But so what? He can clearly handle players. He has them playing for him, he inspires them somehow.

His experience would surely mean that he was unlikely to f*** it up, produce weird formations when the pressure is gets too much or pick inexperienced 16-year-olds for World Cup squads.

No, people, Steve Coppell would do a good job, not create inappropriate headlines and get the best out of the players he has at his disposal. And how long is it since we had an England boss who could do that?

I don’t believe it - Coppell’s history.

Coppell managed Palace for nine years (1984-1993, winning the Zenith Data Systems Cup, reaching the FA Cup Final) and returned to the club for eight months (1995-96), then again for a season (1997-98, winning promotion via the play-offs). Then he made a fourth appearance as manager over 18 months from 1999-2000.

His many unhappy returns to Selhurst Park never quite equaled his glory-filled first 442-game stint. In fact, sandwiched in between his four spells at the club was a bizarre six game run at Manchester City which was most memorable for the broken-man look Coppell displayed when he quit.

But the former England striker dusted himself down and gradually rebuilt his reputation as Brentford (54 games) Brighton (49 games) and eventually Reading, where he remains today having guided the club into the Premiership for the first time in their history.

The Amazing Mike Newell of Luton Town

Mike Newell, female officials and an apology to die for.

By Garry Cook

I have just been watching TV Gold that was Mike Newell live from Luton Town's training ground apologising for his sexist comments at the weekend.

Newell, if you remember, gave female official Amy Rayner a bashing after his side lost 3-2 at home to QPR on Saturday (November 11, 2006).

The former Everton and Blackburn Rovers striker was incensed over some of Rayner's decisions as a linesman in the match.

This is what he said in full: "She should not be here. I know that sounds sexist, but I am sexist, so I am not going to be anything other than that.

"We have a problem in this country with political correctness, and bringing women into the game is not the way to improve refereeing and officialdom.

"It is absolutely beyond belief. When do we reach a stage when all officials are women, because then we are in trouble?

"It is bad enough with the incapable referees and linesmen we have, but if you start bringing in women, you have big problems.

"This is Championship football. This is not park football, so what are women doing here? It is tokenism, for the politically-correct idiots."

'I know that sounds sexist, I am sexist'! It's great stuff if you like a laugh, but Newell has been hit hard for his comments.

Not only did his Luton board call an emergency meeting on Monday to discuss his comments but every paper and news channel has had a field day.

Hence the decision by Newell to do a live interview on Sky Sports News to publicly apologise.

Problem was, Sky Sports had done their research and what followed was the type of cringing hatchet job which Jeremy Paxman would have been proud of.

Basically, Newell was apologising for his comments, but when pressed he admitted that he still believed in what he had said. In journalistic terms, this is a weakness and the interviewer kept pushing the point, repeatedly asking the same question (just using different words).

And when Newell had become over-irritated with those questions he was then given the opportunity to become over-irritated with questions about his other comments criticising the Luton board.

He had said things like the club had gone backwards, the chairman's decisions had been awful and he had been promised funds that did not materialise. The Sky man had it all written down. "You might hit me for this question, but will you still be in a job by Saturday?" asked the Sky man. The questions came at Newell like a flurry of Amir Khan jabs.

And Newell was all over the place. His eyes were rolling, he was stuttering. He was laughing in frustration. "I'm only here to apologise about what I said, not discuss the ins and outs of it," he kept repeating.

What we learned about Newell, apart from the fact that him and his chairman obviously can't stand the sight of each other, is that Newell is someone to respect.

Not only does he tell it like he see it, his views are also considered - even if you disagree with him about female officials in men's football.

Newell has impressed me down the years. He's done a fabulous job at Luton Town. He was doing great at Hartlepool.

He is obviously a determined man. He worked for several years as a scout for Blackpool Football Club. I have seen him not only at League matches, but also at Premiership reserve matches and non-League grounds - at UniBond League games - quietly watching players, doing the groundwork. Hardwork.

And then there was the bung comments. Seemingly a quiet man who would not actively court the limelight, Newell was the first manager to speak openly about bungs in football. For that alone I see him as a pioneer.

To criticise the sport when many clubs, chairman, managers and agents are indulging in illegal practices was quiet incredible. In this area football is something of a closed shop and his chances of getting a job at the highest level could yet be restricted because of his honesty.

Newell has spoken out against bad practices in football, had a go at his own bosses whne they gone back on their word and voiced his opinions on women officials in professional football.

But it is honesty which resonates with me. Clearly he has decent values. He must be applauded.

I salute the bloke.

Martin O'Neill Mystery Man. How did he turn around Aston Villa?

By Garry Cook

Martin O’Neill can, it seems, do nothing wrong. His reputation as a manager was pretty high before he came to Aston Villa on the eve of the 2005-06 season.

Trophy successes at Leicester, who fell faster than an eastern European after O’Neill’s departure, and then Celtic, where a seemingly dominant Rangers were humbled, won the zany Irishman as much critical acclaim as football can give.

But, my god, the job he’s doing at Aston Villa is quite extraordinary.

Where last season Villa were totally miserable under David O’Leary they are now mesmerising.

And it’s not because the style of football has transformed from hapless to pure class – Villa’s play is far from beautiful – it is because O’Neill has proved beyond doubt a fact that the rest of us had thought wrong: managers can make a difference.

Football teams rise and fall, they inconceivably stutter then they shockingly astound. And throughout a side’s natural cycle the manager can switch from brilliant to buffoon almost effortlessly.

You are left wondering are they any good? Did they just strike lucky?

But O’Neill, who attracts success like Peter Crouch attracts attention-seeking women, has taught us all that not only can managers hugely influence a team, they can also do it when they’re as mad as a hatter.

It is difficult to reconcile O’Neill’s punditry sessions on the BBC over the past few years, where he embarrasses Gary Lineker by frequently heading off-tangent, with the manager who commands respect and demands success.

But these are the facts: Martin O’Neill waltzed into Villa park just days before the season started. For the unenviable task of visiting the new Emirates Stadium for Arsenal’s first-ever Premiership match there, O’Neill picked a team almost identical to the one which drew 2-2 at home to Bolton Wanderers 12 months earlier.

Out of the squad of 16 players which O’Neill picked for his first match, there was only one new name – the young Gabriel Agbonlahor replacing Nolberto Solano who decided he fancied a move back to Newcastle United last January. It’s worth pondering on that fact for a moment. One change. They finished fifth bottom last season. O’Leary’s constant, constant moaning.

Villa’s draw against Arsenal was a far better result than a draw against Bolton a year earlier – but that was just a wake-up call. It is what has happened since that has enthralled.

Seven games played and no defeats. Villa fans can’t believe it. Birmingham fans can’t believe it. I can’t believe it. No one can believe it. Randy Lerner must be the luckiest multi-millionaire ever to buy a football club. O’Neill had already been appointed by the time his £62million take-over went through.

O’Neill is short on bluff and big on tactics. It appears that every player has been given unique instructions, a specific job to stick to.

Away from home O’Neill has largely stuck to a tight 4-3-3 formation. Olof Mellberg, Aaron Hughes, Liam Ridgewell and Gareth Barry have created a wall across the back, denying space to attackers.

And they have been backed up by a tough three-man midfield of Steve Davis, a revitalised Gavin McCann and, lately, Stilyian Petrov. These three, with McCann putting in the kind of holding role performances which should England boss Steve McClaren twitching, are as good as any unit in the Premiership so far this season.

Unlike McClaren, O’Neill is playing to his team’s strengths rather than shoehorning one or two men into places they clearly don’t fit. (Steven Gerrard wrong, Michael Carrick very wrong – take note Macca).

The only obvious weakness for Villa is in attack where the exciting duo of Luke Moore – until his injury – and Agbonlahor have been racing in from the wings to support Juan Pablo Angel. Goals have not been easy to come by. Villa drawing all of their first four away games tells its own story.

Part of the problem has been the spoiling tactics of using the two supporting attackers to nullify the creativity of the opposition’s full-backs.

At home this is less of a problem, with O’Neill refining his orders to allow his team to create genuine chances – a balancing act he will have to perfect if Villa are to become genuine diners at the Premiership’s top table (or until Randy asks Martin what he wants for Christmas)

Still, Villa fans will happily accept a season of away-day nail-biting after the endless whining Irish lilt of O’Leary they’ve had to endure in recent seasons. Their new zany Irishman is already a Villa king.

Special K. The 2006 Ryder Cup.

by Garry Cook

Not much to say about the Ryder Cup. The pictures of Darren Clarke said it all, really.

Like last time, the European team demolished the Americans in a way that they should never be able to. The Yanks are better, stronger and win more trophies. But when it comes to team play they've fallen well short over the past few years.

At the K Club in Ireland the Yanks never got going. Scot Colin Montgomerie further enhanced his image as a phenomenal Ryder Cupper who can do it for the team on the big occasion but can't quite do it for himself (the exact opposite to Tiger Woods).

There is a danger now that the Yanks, having lost the Ryder Cup three times in a row, will lose interest in the competition and give up on it completely. Their interest seemed to be waning a few years back, although Tom Lehman's team did put a bit more effort into preparations this time.

But in the end the Yanks abroad were about as organised as the US army in Baghdad. They came, they saw, they floundered. Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, the K Club. This lot don't travel well.

It was 'well done' with a few 'to be sures' all round to the Europeans from the seniors like Clarke and Monty to Swedish rookies Robert Karlsson and Henrik Stenson, the latter sinking the putt which won the tournament.

But special mention needs to be made of European captain Ian Woosnam', who sounds less and less Welsh every time he speaks.

While I appreciate his leadership and organisational skills, I can't see how the £10,000 he spent on players' clothing can be justified when the squad are forced to line up in hideous pink jackets with white round-neck t-shirts to receive the trophy.

While Sky proudly broadcast the win live, it was left to everyone's favourite old granny Beeb to shrink the day into a Sunday evening delights package, all the action and aftermath into one bitesized condensed lump.

Golf doesn't work too well in a highlights package - as David Howell taking three shots in succession proved.

But the Beeb stepped into its own class when victory was secured. Its determination to bring everyone to tears by asking Clarke questions about his recent bereavement, or asking everyone else questions about Clarke's recent bereavement was ruthless.

And it worked a treat. Hazel Irving got to Clarke first and she asked all the obvious questions. Minutes later Gary Lineker stepped in. He asked all Hazel's obvious questions, too.

The rest of the players got the same treatment. Everyone was choking up. I was just about managing to keep a lid on myself when the floodgates opened. The sight of twelve pink jackets tipped me over. I was a mess.

As they say in Ireland, they were a fecking disgrace.

What a drama with BBC Panorama. Sam Allardyce and football bungs.

I want to make things crystal clear before we again. The following article in relation to the BBC's Panorama documentary on bungs in football contains circumstantial evidence. They are allegations only and no person, football agent, manager or otherwise, has been found guilty of any illegal activities.

You should not necessarily believe anything I say here.

That said, there is not a single person involved in football, from chairmen down to the fans, who does not believe bungs - illegal payments to agents and managers - are a major part of the game.

I feel that has excused me enough from sanction. If I am a liar, prove it. Show me the evidence. If half the managers in the Premiership can stick together in silence over allegations of bung taking then why can't I, as someone who wants to discuss the issue openly, be equally obtuse.

Their motto has always been: Say sod all.

Their silence is damning. They carry on raking in the money and devouring the fringe benefits while ignoring rumour and supposition because they are making too much dosh out of it.

Basically a bung goes like this. A player moves from one club to another. An agent is paid £150,000 by the buying club for his good work - and £50,000 of that goes back to the buying club's manager. A kind of thank-you for buying my player.
I have no doubt that there are far more complicated ways of players, agents, managers and chairman receiving far greater sums of money.

Who am I to say that past and present managers like Sam Allardyce, Harry Redknapp, Graeme Souness, Peter Reid, John Gregory and David O'Leary have taken bungs at some time? I am no one to say it, so I won't.

But it makes me sick when managers who are suspected of underhand behaviour fail to come forward with an offer to help rid the game of its shady dealings. If you're not part of the solution, you are part of the problem.

For example, imagine you’re an experienced Premiership manager who has been one step ahead of bung allegations for years - let's call you Barry Headclap. Something fishy went on a few months ago when you met a couple of agents. Now you've heard that the BBC has got something on you. You're under a bit of pressure.

You decide the best thing to do is deny any wrongdoing until the show comes out. You don't think the revelations will be all that bad, but you're not sure. When the BBC air their documentary one of your mates has got it in the neck more than you.

You got off lightly - the evidence isn't hard enough. You come out and say, 'I'm not guilty' and carry on as normal (except you’ll be a bit more weary in future of reporters wearing cameras).

The problem is that Barry, now believing he is in the clear, at no point will feel the need to come out and say, 'I want to work with the FA and the police to rid the game of its shady dealings'.

There's no chance our Barry will say at all. All he thinks is: You've got nothing on me, up yours.

That is not how it should be. But these managers will never hold their hands up because they know if they don't, they will get away with it.

George Graham, the ex-Arsenal boss, was the only manager to lose his job over bung allegations - and that was only because he admitted taking £400,000 from an agent. The rest learned their lesson from that one.

Even Bolton boss Allardyce, who was essentially crucified by his own son in the Panorama documentary, will have to be dragged out of his job rather than willingly walk the plank.

And that brings us to the FA. In many respects, the documentary has put all the pressure on to English football's governing body.

It is now up to the FA to take the BBC's evidence, examine it and (possibly) charge someone. And they will hate that. The FA have failed in the past to weed out the dirty side of the game.

In the past they had a dedicated 'bung-busting' man, FA compliance officer Graham Bean, who uncovered absolutely nothing. Before his post was discontinued he was deafened by a wall of silence wherever he turned.

Now they have the BBC's evidence, the FA have been handed their best opportunity of making something stick. But even that might not be enough to prosecute managers or agents. And if they don't now, they never will.

Even before the BBC show had aired, all those caught up in the show had issued statements.

Proving that these guys have no sense or remorse they shamelessly contradicted what they said on camera.

Craig Allardyce denied any wrongdoing.
Agent Peter Harrison denied he was corrupt.
Agent Teni Yerima claimed he made it all up.
Ex-Portsmouth coach Kevin Bond said he did not want to take a bung.
Agent Charles Collymore also claimed he made up what he said on camera.

Made it up? Is this guy for real?

It's quite pathetic. Along with Allardyce and Redknapp, this lot will now wait and see if they are charged with anything. They will fret and stew a bit, but they none really believe they will be punished.

Yes, British law states you are innocent until proven guilty, but stubborn non-co-operation in dealing with a serious issue is hardly the behaviour of a saint.

It was midway through the 2006/06 season when Luton manager Mike Newell first spoke in public about being offered a bung and complained about the way agents work. It was a brave move. It was also incredibly honest and I admire him for that. Ex-QPR boss Ian Holloway was the one manager to publicly back him up.

But I find it equally unadmirable that the rest of his fellow football managers united in silence, effectively leaving him out in the cold. To me, that says almost every manager in the game is partial to a little sweetener.

Until they all start being pro-active - and that includes players agents chairman, chief executives, coaches and scouts - the finger of suspicion will always be flicking around.

And with so much money being bandied around, this lot are unlikely to come clean.

Come on then, the FA - it's over to you.

Roy Keane watches Penguins. He's a wildlife lover.

by Garry Cook

It's not often a story in the paper brings me to tears, but this one did. Nearly.

Sunderland manager Roy Keane, the snarling, vindictive, uncompromising, win-at-all costs former Manchester United midfielder, has vowed to be kinder to others after watching a movie on... wait for it... you won't believe this... here it comes... the mating rituals of p-p-p-p-penguins.

While sitting alone in a Glasgow cinema watching The March of the Penguins, Keane reflected on his life and career - how he come to England from Ireland as an 18-year-old and how hard he had been on his team-mates down the years.

And Keane, who had just joined Celtic while his family stayed in Manchester when he came over all funny at the cinema, began to weep uncontrollably when he realised his attitude towards his ex-United colleagues was unjust.*

Just give me a moment to wipe my eyes and compose myself.

Keane said: "It made me think about when I first came to England, the 18-year-old who went to the pictures in the afternoon.

"Here I was 16 years on, back at the pictures. My life had come full circle. It was a lonely life and I wish I had been a wee bit easier on some of the foreign stars at United."

Apart from that fact that Keane had an 18-year career which largely consisted of him segregating himself from his team-mates, at Nottingham Forest, United and particularly with the Republic of Ireland, does this not sound a bit soft?

I'm all for Keane being a bit more talkative as Sunderland manager, his new chatty persona is far more appealing than the death stare and occasional explosive rant at his team-mates which had previously been the norm.

But isn't he exploding his greatest asset - the fear which he breathes into others - with his confessionals?

Though no longer a player, Keane still needs his aura of nastiness to frighten both his own team and the opposition.

But by admitting, say, that his furious persona was nothing more than an act will surely make opponents less weary of upsetting him of his team.

He was even a pundit on Sky Sports on Sunday for United's home defeat to Arsenal. It's good to talk and all that, but Keane is in danger of coming across all Michael Palin.

He says he is trying to curb his anger as a manager, and now this. Getting soppy, feeling remorse. Penguins. He'll be having Mick McCarthy round for a stopover next.

Come on Keane quit the lovey-dovey bollocks. Bawl into Neil Collins, give Jon Stead the hairdryer treatment. Tell Tommy Miller to fri**ing get his foot in.

Either that or keep your gob shut. Mean and moody, that's how we like it. How about this - imagine the entire Sunderland squad are FAI officials and they've just organised an away trip to Brighton via boat.

Get in there and start kicking off. Be the bastard we know you are. Call Niall Quinn a muppet again. Put Bobby Saxton on a diet. Anything. Just no more penguins.

* Roy Keane did not actually admit to crying while watching The March of the Penguins.