High Brow English Journalism

If the recent media circus around the re-instatement of John Terry as captain of England proved anything, if highlighted the most glaring and latest example of hypocrisy of the British tabloids, and the fickle environment in which they work. Sensational writing is part and parcel of the job, but one would have thought a degree of consistency would be the least you could expect in their reporting.

The issue of the captaincy was always going to be a bigger event than in reality it was, primarily due to the fact that he was stripped of the honour so publicly after allegations of an affair with a team-mates ex-girlfriend. Rightly or wrongly, Capello decided he was not a good role model, and stated Terry “would never captain England again” under his reign. That decision in itself raises a number of issues. Firstly, is Capello opening a can of worms by basing a football decision on morals? Where does he draw the line? Wayne Rooney and Ashley Cole have faced similar allegations, and despite not having been captains, they have worn the armband on occasions. Also, Terry has denied the accusations, so do the tabloids have an undue influence on decisions?

Capello (or the FA depending on what you believe) will live and die by the sword of those decisions, but there is little doubt that that the media will take any angle to highlight displeasure at a team or individual. Since the “Capello Index” came to light, where Capello rated players on a blog to highlight how he felt they were performing in the Premier League, the media have slowly turned against him. For a man with one of the most decorated CV’s in football, his reputation has become more tarnished. The Terry affair (if you pardon the pun), poor performances leading up to the World Cup, a disastrous showing   in South Africa with top players not performing, and apparent dissent within the squad, the Italian, in the eyes of Fleet Street, is on a slippery slope. That England have only ever been to semi-finals in major tournaments twice seems irrelevant.

The re-instatement of Terry of captain at the expense of Rio Ferdinand is a case in point of the bias apparent. The papers were dismayed that the Chelsea captain was brought back in, and that Rio was being treated very poorly. Rio was the shining example of English football, and deserved better than this. Rumours that he found out via the media are still neither confirmed nor denied. The fact that Rio has been unavailable for 75% of games since he was made captain was barely given lip service. Ferdinand is, and has been for two years, highly injury prone, and cannot be relied upon to be England’s or indeed Man. Utd’s regular centre-half. What is fascinating is that the accusations thrown at Capello for his handling of the captaincy. Headlines of “No Class” were rife, and were also a dig at Terry’s public perception, conceding himself that he “is not everyone’s cup of tea”. It would be interesting to understand the term “class”, and what exactly it entails.  Ferdinand’s chequered past includes:

·         Missing out on the chance to become England’s youngest cap since Duncan Edwards in 1997 due to a drink-driving arrest

·         Recorded in a sexually explicit video with Premier League players Kieran Dyer and Frank Lampard in Ayia Napa in 2000

·         Four driving bans. The final ban in 2006 led to the magistrate to declare that Ferdinand was a “poor role model for children”

·         A nine month ban for failing to take a drugs test in 2003.

Whether Ferdinand is the appropriate role model as England captain is a judgement call, but for the media to question Capello’s class in relation to his removal of England skipper merely illustrates that fact goes out the window where there is an agenda in place.