McClaren may win by default with no rival first past the post
McClaren may win by default with no rival first past the postRichard Williams
Tuesday April 18, 2006
The Guardian
Every now and then a novel emerges as the winner of the Booker Prize without
having been the first choice of any member of the judging panel, but through
being the second choice of all, or nearly all, of the judges. A couple of
years ago DBC Pierre was said to owe the success of Vernon God Little to
just such a phenomenon, a variation on the single transferable vote by which
the leaders of certain political parties are elected. During the next few
days something similar seems likely to happen over the selection of the head
coach of the England football team.
Five men are charged with appointing the successor to Sven-Goran Eriksson
and it appears, as things stand, that they may be in possession of five
different opinions. Because one of them is Sir Trevor Brooking, a
distinguished former international and currently the FA's technical
director, while another is Dave Richards, a controversial chairman of
Sheffield Wednesday before re-emerging in a similar role at the Premier
League, it can be seen that not all these opinions have the same intrinsic
value. In terms of voting, however, the views of Brooking and Richards carry
the same weight, which means that the successful candidate may turn out to
be the beneficiary of a compromise, particularly since none of the
short-listed candidates ticks all the required boxes in terms of nationality
and experience.
Brooking is said to favour Alan Curbishley, a fellow alumnus of Upton Park.
David Dein, the vice-chairman of the FA and the man who took Arsene Wenger
to Highbury, wants to appoint Luiz Felipe Scolari, England's nemesis at the
last two international tournaments. Rumours persist that Brian Barwick, the
FA's chief executive, is pressing the claim of Martin O'Neill. The
preferences of Richards and Noel White, the chairman of the FA's
international committee, are not known.
Alone among the short-listed candidates, Steve McClaren is said to have no
outright opponents among the judges. Combined with Middlesbrough's recent
revival, this may be enough to secure him the job. The desire for continuity
could also tip the scales in favour of Eriksson's chief assistant, even
outweighing the memory of his part in England's more abject performances
under the Swede, notably against Brazil in 2002 and Northern Ireland last
year. McClaren may have been able to convince the committee that, had he
been in sole charge, the outcome would have been different.
Nobody has ever been quite sure whether the Yorkshireman's perma-smile is
the outward display of an open and optimistic nature or the sign of a man
altogether too concerned with his media image. Likewise his record as a club
manager: is the glass half-full or half-empty? It could be argued that,
given the resources provided by a loyal and generous chairman, he should
have made more progress during his five seasons at the Riverside. The recent
upturn may be a reward for careful long-term planning, or it may be a fluke.
In the cold light of day, was that Uefa Cup victory over Basle really such
an outstanding achievement? On the other hand, the club's academy has
produced a clutch of talented young English players. But if England were to
perform poorly in Germany this summer, what effect would that have on
McClaren's standing as manager-in-waiting?
These are some of the questions the five FA men must ponder, multiplied by
the number of candidates, which is why it seems strange to keep being told,
by a variety of commentators, that a selection procedure involving two
rounds of interviews is "interminable". Alan Hansen wrote in yesterday's
Daily Telegraph that "the process should have been far quicker and more
decisive" and that "the man who the FA unveil should be the clearly
identifiable choice of one man, Barwick, who should go with his gut instinct
and who will stand or fall by that decision". In any other industry, Hansen
claimed, "that is what chief executives are paid to do".
But football is not an industry. The England team is the emotional property
of all its fans, and a duty of trust requires the committee to consider the
full range of alternatives. Even assuming Barwick had the prerogative, he
would have been irresponsible to make a choice in isolation.
Given the necessity for proper evaluation and the heightened level of media
interest, he seems to have run the procedure as efficiently as could have
been expected. It is six weeks since the announcement of Eriksson's
departure after the World Cup, but there is no validity to the claim that
making the candidates wait is unfair; any manager who allowed the temporary
uncertainty to affect his concentration on club matters would not deserve to
be taken seriously.
Even at this advanced stage, however, only one thing is certain: the
announcement of the committee's choice is when the recriminations begin.
Guardian
頁:
[1]