It's That Time Again

England will face Montenegro, Ukraine, Poland, Moldova and San Marino in Group H when they bid to qualify for the 2014 World Cup finals in Brazil. Scotland and Wales were drawn together in Group A, and will play Croatia, Serbia, Belgium, and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Northern Ireland are up against Portugal, Russia, Israel, Azerbaijan and Luxembourg in a tough-looking Group F. Only the nine group winners are guaranteed a place at the tournament. With thirteen places available in Brazil for European teams, the eight-best second-placed teams will play-off against each other to go through. The Republic of Ireland were drawn against Germany, Sweden, Austria, Faroe Islands and Kazakhstan in Group C, while France and world champions Spain are in a Group I - the only European group without six teams - along with Belarus, Georgia and Finland. 'Three years is a long time and 2014 isn't now,' said France coach Laurent Blanc. 'Spain are currently the best team there is but we don't know if that will be the case in two or three years' time. You have to go up against the best if you want to achieve something at a World Cup.' In the qualifying process for the 2014 World Cup, two hundred and three teams will play an eventual eight hundred and twenty four matches across the globe. The draws for the Africa, Asia, Oceania and the North, Central America and Caribbean regions also took place in Rio de Janeiro on Saturday, although no draw was made for South America as its nine teams qualify through a one-group championship. The finals will take place between 12 June and 13 July 2014, and a decision on whether to introduce goal-line technology will be taken at next March's meeting of the International FA Board, the game's lawmakers. England manager Fabio Capello was present at the draw, although he is set to move on next summer after the conclusion of the European Championships. Montenegro drew 0-0 with England at Wembley in October in their qualifier for Euro 2012 in Poland and Ukraine. 'It is not an easy draw,' said Capello. 'You have to be really, really focused and play every game like a final - but that will be another manager's job. We know Montenegro very well and we have to play against them again. Poland are improving and will be really focused and will be tough opponents. With Ukraine I remember the game we lost against them in the last match during the qualification for South Africa. Moldova are not so strong, and San Marino the same.' Wales manager Gary Speed said: 'It's obviously a tough draw. It's a really tough group, but it could have been worse. There are no weak teams in the group. It's one of those groups where everyone can beat anyone.' Scotland boss Craig Levein admitted he had hoped to miss Speed's side in the draw, saying: 'I would have rather avoided Wales because obviously it brings in that home international rivalry, which we probably could have done without. We have recent good experience of playing Wales, when we won against them over in Dublin recently, but also not so long ago we lost 3-0 to Wales, so it's a bit of a mixed bag.' Northern Ireland manager Nigel Worthington said of Group F: 'It looks a reasonably tough group, but it could have been worse. There is a fair bit of travelling but you have to deal with that.' The total of two hundred and three teams vying for one of thirty one World Cup spots in Brazil surpasses the two hundred who participated four years ago. The only associations not to have signed up to compete for 2014 qualification are Bhutan, Brunei Darussalam, Guam and Mauritania. FIFA would not draw Azerbaijan and Armenia together, nor Russia and Georgia, because of political conflicts which they said could lead to fan violence during matches.

Rio Ferdinand reportedly sparked a White House security alert after a series of posts on Twitter. The plank! The Manchester United footballer was at the White House with his teammates as part of their pre-season US tour. Ferdinand posted pictures of the president's security guards and the state dining room. He tweeted: 'The security needs beefing up here at the White House!' before secret service agents removed the pictures from his phone and Twitter account. 'Whoa, someone has got into my phone and taken down my pics off Twitter. This is deep,' wrote the inarticulate glake. Only, his spelling was worse. 'Is Jack Bauer in Washington? [sic],' he concluded. 'What an experience having the opportunity to go into the White House, thank you. Now where are my pics? My pic of the security was removed quick, rapido, sharpish, fast. They don't play here in DC. I feel like I'm on 24 right now.' Yeah. It's called 'national security' you daft pillock, they do not let any old Tom, Dick or Rio waltz around the White House taking photos that terrorists could use to case the joint. Haven't you ever watched The West Wing? No, stupid question, it hasn't got Cheryl Cole or a voting element in it so you wouldn't understand it. Also, they use words of more than one syllable. Man United, eh? Think they bloody own the gaff. A team meeting with Barack Obama was apparently cancelled at the last minute as he had to deal with the ongoing US debt crisis. At least, that was the 'official' reason given. Maybe, like all right thinking individuals, President Obama simply hates The Scum.

Crisis? What Crisis?

FIFA has provisionally suspended executive committee members Mohamed Bin Hammam and the odious Jack Warner after a meeting of its ethics committee on Sunday. Football's governing body will now open a full investigation into allegations that financial incentives were offered to members of the Caribbean Football Union. CFU officials Debbie Minguell and Jason Sylvester have also been suspended. But FIFA president and slimy turd Sepp Blatter was found to have no case to answer. Which is, of course, a surprise because one would have thought he'd at least have the case of being a slimy turd to answer. Petrus Damaseb, deputy chairman of the ethics committee, said of Bin Hammam and Warner: 'We are satisfied that there is a case to be answered.' However, FIFA insists that they are both innocent until proven guilty. If found guilty, they could be expelled from the organisation and banned from all football activity. Bin Hammam was the only candidate due to oppose Blatter in the forthcoming election for the FIFA presidency - which will go ahead as planned on Wednesday - but he withdrew in the early hours of Sunday morning. The Qatari and his colleague, vice-president Warner, were forced to answer charges of bribery over allegations from executive committee member Chuck Blazer in Zurich on Sunday. It was alleged that they offered bribes at a meeting of the CFU on 10 and 11 May. A file of evidence claimed bundles of cash of up to forty thousand dollars were handed over to members of the CFU at the meeting in Trinidad. The payments were allegedly made to secure votes for Bin Hammam in his campaign to challenge Blatter for the presidency. In turn, Bin Hammam effectively claimed that Blatter was aware of some wrongdoing but did not report it, in itself a breach of FIFA's ethics code. Meanwhile, executive committee members Ricardo Teixeira and Worawi Makudi have been formally cleared by the Football Association of any wrongdoing following allegations of bribery made by former FA chairman Lord Triesman in relation to England's failed 2018 World Cup bid. Warner has made public an e-mail which claims that Mohamed Bin Hammam 'bought' the 2022 World Cup finals for Qatar. FIFA general secretary Jerome Valcke admitted he sent the e-mail, which also questioned why Asian football boss Bin Hammam was running for FIFA president. Valcke wrote: '[Hammam] thought you can buy FIFA as they bought the World Cup.' However, Bin Hammam responded by telling BBC Sport on Monday: 'I don't know why he [Valcke] has said that.' Possibly because he believed it to be true? Just, you know, a wild stab in the dark there. The Qatari added: 'If I was paying money for Qatar you also have to ask the thirteen people who voted for Qatar.' To which the obvious reply is 'oh, I'm sure they will now.' Asked whether Valcke's allegation was true he said: 'What do you think?' Valcke stressed that his e-mail to Warner was intended to remain 'private' and pointed out that Warner had only published selected parts of it. 'He [Warner] sent me an e-mail asking if I want that [Bin Hammam to run for FIFA president], he said that I should ask Bin Hammam to pull out,' Valcke added. Valcke also denied that he had influenced FIFA's ethics committee, which suspended Warner and Bin Hammam on Sunday over separate allegations of bribery, pending further investigation. He stated: 'The first time I met the chairman of the ethics committee was yesterday at 1700 before we went to the press conference. I had no contact at all with anyone.' Bin Hammam was suspended a matter of hours after withdrawing from the FIFA presidential race on Sunday morning. His decision leaves seventy five-year-old incumbent Blatter, who is seeking a fourth term in charge of the organisation he has run unopposed since 1998, as the only man running for the office. FIFA has said its election will go ahead, as scheduled, on Wednesday. The thoroughly odious Warner, who is president of the North, Central American and Caribbean confederation, has reacted angrily to the allegations of bribery and the FIFA ethics committee's decision to suspend him. The Trinidad and Tobago government minister raged: 'I look on the suspension as the worst form of justice by any sporting organisation. They came premeditated, they weren't prepared to listen, they were hand-picked to do a task and they did just that. The guys were hand-picked by Blatter. A kangaroo court would be a decent thing to say.' Warner, who also turned on Valcke, stated: 'I wrote to Valcke telling him, among other things, that the outcome of the elections may cause some fracture in the Arab world which we can ill afford now and that I will like to ask Bin Hammam to withdraw from the race. To which Jerome replied to me and I quote: "For [Bin Hammam] I never understood why he was running. If really he thought he had a chance or just being an extreme way to express how much he does not like anymore [Blatter]. Or he thought you can buy FIFA as they [Qatar] bought the [World Cup]."' Warner showed the e-mail to television crews and added: 'You don't have to believe me, you don't have to like me, nobody has to eat with me, drink with me or sleep with me but Jesus Christ, take the truth when you see it.' Warner has also accused Blatter of making a gift of computers and an unauthorised one million dollars to Concacaf officials. 'I indicated that at the Miami Concacaf Congress on 3 May Mr Blatter made a gift of one million dollars to Concacaf to spend as it deems fit,' Warner said in a statement. 'This annoyed [UEFA] president Michel Platini who was present and he approached secretary general Jerome Valcke complaining that Mr Blatter had no permission from the finance committee to make this gift to which Jerome replied that he will find the money for Mr Blatter. I also indicated FIFA, through Mr Blatter, organised gifts of laptops and projectors to all members of the Caribbean and no objections have been made today of this to date.' However, Platini said on Monday that he was 'having a joke' with Swiss Blatter. The Frenchman said: '[Blatter] can give [to] the projects that he wants to give. I joke, I said "but Sepp, this was not accepted by the committee" - but he can give many projects to many national associations and we will confirm in the GOAL project after. In many Congresses for many, many years the president can give one or two projects to national associations - he has his own budget and he can give to one confederation and then it has to be approved of course by the executive committee next time.' Blatter has denied any wrong-doing as have Warner and Hammam, who are accused of offering financial incentives to members of the Caribbean Football Union. In a file of evidence it was claimed bundles of cash were handed over to members of the CFU. The payments were allegedly made to secure votes for Bin Hammam in his campaign to challenge Blatter for the presidency. Last week, Qatar 2022 World Cup officials denied allegations, published in the Sunday Times, that they paid bribes in return for votes. Meanwhile, independent Australian senator Nick Xenophon has demanded that FIFA refunds the Aus$45.6m they spent on their unsuccessful bid to host the 2022 World Cup. Xenophon said: 'It appears corrupt and highly questionable behaviour goes to the core of FIFA. Australia spent almost forty six million dollars on a bid we were never in the running for. Now we hear that bribes may have been made to fix the result for who will head up FIFA.' According to Reuters, China's Zhang Jilong will take charge of the Asian Football Confederation in the absence of Hammam. In a press conference on Monday, Blatter said that the organisation is 'not in crisis,' merely 'in some difficulties.' Which is a bit like says Barcelona are merely a decent footballing side.

Offside?

FIFA has long sullied its reputation, with one corruption charge after the other against its top executives. The recent cash for vote scandal is not the first one to hit the organisation and nor will it be the last, at least according to football journalist Brian Glanville in a devastating attack on FIFA at the Sportstar website. 'The lunatics, you might say, are taking over the asylum. Or purporting to,' Glanville begins. 'FIFA President Sepp Blatter, seemingly desperate to be imminently re-elected for a fourth term, has suddenly insisted on a three-week investigation by his flaccid so-called ethics committee into the dirty work at the World Cup crossroads. This hot-on-the-heels of the revelations made by the former main-man at the Football Association, Lord Triesman. Who had nothing to say on the scandalous subject while being unimpressively in charge; save telling his young lady friend an unconvincing tale about Spain and Russia getting together to bribe referees, which she promptly and treacherously made public. Goodness knows that after that undercover investigation by the Sunday Times, we already knew far too well that several members of the World Cup selection committee had elicited huge bribes. To which the ineffably feeble and evasive response of the FA's World Cup bid committee was to impugne the BBC Panorama television programme for having made further alarming revelations on the chicanery that was going on. Killing the messenger, indeed. It soon transpired that the nineteen million pounds allegedly spent by the English World Cup bidding committee was money down a drain which would have been usefully  - if deceitfully - deployed only by making bribery approaches to those biddable World Cup representatives. Russia and Qatar, the ultimate sheer parody of a host country decision, had long since bought and paid for. There was, in fact, a beautiful recent irony when Mike Lee, the Englishman advising Qatar on what seemed a wholly incongruous bid, criticised the Football Association for running an inadequate campaign. Just a day or so before it was revealed that Qatar had paid millions in bribes to two members of the World Cup selection committee. For all you know, Mr Lee might well have been as white as snow. He was even in England's bid for the 2012 Olympics, but it is surely legitimate to suggest that in the Qatar affair - a tiny country with no football legion and a roasting hot summer climate - he was either very naïve or very cynical. Especially ludicrous was the typically flagrant response of the outrageous Jack Warner of Trinidad who, having promised England his vote and, most humiliatingly, been invited into the 10, Downing Street residence of Prime Minister David Cameron and in the Zurich preamble, being courted not only by Cameron but by Prince William, the heir to the throne, duly voted elsewhere. But the shameless Warner has a long record, chronicled in detail in Andrew Jennings' devastating book, Foul! Time and again Warner, in his role as President of CONCACAF, whose votes had been vital to Blatter, and head of the Trinidad Federation, has grabbed huge sums of money out of FIFA, by no means always repaid, while for years on end he failed to pay the members of the gallant Trinidad team which surpassed itself in the 2006 World Cup, the money they were due. That Triesman and company should have initially courted this shameless man was horrible to see. In this regard Triesman revealed that Warner had demanded for his vote two and a half million pounds to build a so-called education centre in Trinidad. Predictably and vociferously, Warner denied this only for Dave Richards, the head of the FA Premier League, to confirm the story. Round up the usual suspects, you might say. Not least the former son-in-law of Joao Havelange, with whose FIFA presidency the rot set in, Ricardo Teixeira, an old foe of Pele. He asked Triesman, in Qatar, "Tell me what you've got for me?" To put it politely, Teixeira is no stranger to controversy in his own country; yet he survives.' All of this comes on the day that FIFA presidential candidate Mohamed bin Hammam has denied bribery allegations made against him by FIFA executive committee member Chuck Blazer. The American claims that FIFA's ethics code was violated at a meeting 'organised' by Bin Hammam and Jack Warner. Four officials, including Bin Hammam and Warner, will face a FIFA ethics hearing on 29 May, ahead of the presidential vote. Bin Hammam said that he is 'confident that there is no charge to answer.' The Press Association says that a file has been sent to FIFA which includes sworn affidavits by several Caribbean Football Union members, who claim they were offered thousands of dollars in cash for 'development projects' at the meeting earlier this month. The file, which includes photographs, says some of the cash was accepted, but some of those who refused to take any money approached Blazer. The Caribbean meeting, on 10 and 11 May, was in relation to the FIFA presidential election which takes place on 1 June. The other two officials to face the hearing are Debbie Minguell and Jason Sylvester from the CFU, which represents twenty five FIFA member nations as well as five territories not affiliated to FIFA. Bin Hammam - the sixty two-year-old president of the Asian Football Confederation - is running against current FIFA president Sepp Blatter to be the new head of football's world governing body. Bin Hammam released a statement on his website, which continued: 'This has been a difficult and painful day for me today. But, if there is even the slightest justice in the world, these allegations will vanish in the wind. This move is little more than a tactic being used by those who have no confidence in their own ability to emerge successfully from the FIFA presidential election. I remain deeply indebted to Mr Warner for his sense of fair play because without his support and understanding I would not have been able to meet with several important member associations of FIFA to discuss my election manifesto. Here I completely deny any allegations of wrongdoing either intentionally or unknowingly while I was in the Caribbean. I will offer Mr Warner my full support in ensuring we are discharged honourably by the FIFA ethics committee, a body which I hold in the highest esteem. I am confident that there is no charge to answer and that I will be free to stand in the FIFA presidential election on 1 June as originally planned.' FIFA has announced that Claudio Sulser, the head of the ethics committee, will not take charge of the hearing as he shares Swiss nationality with Bin Hammam's presidential rival Blatter. The committee's deputy chairman Petrus Damaseb of Namibia will instead chair proceedings. The FIFA statement read: 'On 24 May 2011, FIFA executive committee member and Concacaf general secretary Chuck Blazer reported to FIFA secretary general Jerome Valcke possible violations of the FIFA code of ethics allegedly committed by officials. In particular, the report referred to a special meeting of the Caribbean Football Union, apparently organised jointly by FIFA vice-president Jack A Warner and FIFA executive committee member Mohamed Bin Hammam, which took place on 10 and 11 May 2011. This meeting was linked to the upcoming FIFA presidential election. In view of the facts alleged in this report, which include bribery allegations, FIFA secretary general Jerome Valcke, in compliance with art. Sixteen of the FIFA code of ethics, yesterday requested the FIFA ethics committee to open ethics proceedings.' The allegations - levelled by Warner's longtime Concacaf ally Blazer - are likely to wreck Bin Hammam's already fading hopes of defeating Blatter in the vote by FIFA's 208 national members. 'The intriguing part of this is the person who has brought the complaints, Chuck Blazer,' former Sports Minister Richard Caborn told the BBC. 'He obviously has been on the inside track in FIFA for many, many years. He's very close to Jack Warner. What his motives are, we will have to wait and see. It could well be the start of a total look at how FIFA is run in the future. Whether the pressure is now telling and that people are saying: "We have now got to make this organisation fit for purpose."' MP Damian Collins, who named Confederation of African Football president Issa Hayatou and executive committee member Jacques Anouma in Parliament as allegedly receiving bribes from Qatar 2022, called on FIFA to abandon next week's presidential election. 'FIFA needs to have a proper independent investigation and the timetable does not allow this to happen before next week,' said Collins. 'If Bin Hammam is suspended it would be unacceptable for the election to simply become a shoe-in for Sepp Blatter. There must be a new election with new candidates allowed to come forward.' Both Hayatou and Anouma have denied the claims while Qatar 2022 World Cup officials described allegations they paid bribes in return for votes as 'distressing, insulting and incomprehensible.' News of the FIFA inquiry comes soon after FIFA launched a separate investigation into claims made by former Football Association and England 2018 World Cup bid chairman Lord Triesman. Triesman alleged that four FIFA members - the odious Warner, Nicolas Leoz, Ricardo Teixeira and Worawi Makudi - sought 'bribes' in return for backing England's failed 2018 World Cup bid. Warner said the allegations made against him by Triesman were 'a piece of nonsense.' On Sunday, Blatter angrily denied that FIFA is totally corrupt and added there is no evidence to support recent accusations of wrongdoing. Blatter's campaign adviser Brian Alexander said the FIFA president would not comment on the case. Of course, it's worth pointing out that the FA's recent decision to abstain from voting in the upcoming FIFA presidential election may seem like a principled stance, but in reality it is a step away from one of the biggest issues ever to face football at just the moment a breakthrough seemed to be on the horizon. After the Panorama and Sunday Times investigations, after Lord Triesman making allegations in front of a Parliamentary commission and after the widespread condemnation at awarding of the 2022 World Cup to Qatar, it felt as though a tipping point was approaching. A perfect storm was brewing, with conditions in place which could have seen a new president with an open agenda for reforming the game's governing body. The net seems to be closing on the Executive Committee members who allegedly sold, or at least tried to sell, their votes on who should host the World Cup for money or honours. Removing one vote from the process still leaves two hundred and seven in it. Nominating and actively supporting a third candidate would have at least given the dissenting voices a platform within FIFA's cavernous headquarters, bringing those accused to task in their own back yard.

Anyone Know If There's A Frivolous Fraud Office?

The Serious Fraud Office is examining a con that allegedly took in Sven-Göran Eriksson and the North Korean government, the BBC's Panorama has claimed. Investigators are also looking at how the same conman 'stole a football club' and broke a bank. Convicted fraudster Russell King persuaded the former England manager to join Notts County FC as director of football and to visit North Korea. King denies any fraud and said he was just a consultant on the deals. Eriksson was appointed at Notts County in July 2009 following a takeover of the League Two club that promised to bring millions of pounds of Middle Eastern investment. 'For me as a football man it was fantastic, building a club from the bottom of League Two and having the funding to do it, to be a Premier League club. It's like a dream, so I signed. Big mistake,' Sven said of the deal. The promised money never arrived and the club was left seven million smackers in debt. Eriksson says there were early signs that all was not as it seemed. 'I started to have doubts when they came and told me the milk bill has not been paid,' he said. King claimed that his Swiss-based mining company had assets worth almost two trillion dollars because it had the rights to North Korea's gold, coal and iron ore. He told Eriksson the Notts County's promised cash would come from that mining deal. He then persuaded Sven to join a delegation visiting Pyongyang in October 2009. 'I was in the palace and they were handing over to the North Korean government so-called shares,' Eriksson told Panorama. 'I asked them how much that was and what they told me was not millions, it was billions of dollars. They used my name. Of course they did. At the end it became a big, big mistake.' Russell King's business deals had credibility, the programme alleges, because they appeared to have the backing of First London plc, an investment bank with advisers including Conservative MP Tim Yeo and Air Marshal Sir John Walker, a former British spymaster. The bank sent Sir John, a former head of defence intelligence, to check out King and the Korean deal, but he was also, apparently, taken in. Walker said of the deal: 'What do I think of Russell King? Not a lot. He was good at chat, but that was his business. He was a con man. I was taken the same way Sven was taken. They just wanted names.' King also managed to get control of almost half of First London plc without paying a penny for the shares, after he convinced its bankers he was managing billions of dollars for the Bahraini royal family. But Fawaz Al Khalifa, President of the Bahraini Information Affairs Authority, says that King was lying about his royal connections: 'He might have met members of the family here or there, but we have no financial connection to him or his company.' First London PLC went into administration last year with debts of almost nine million pounds and the Financial Services Authority has been examining the deal that gave King control of forty nine per cent of its shares. The FSA has now passed its finding to the Serious Fraud Office. 'In this case the acquisition of control occurred without the FSA having been given the prior notice which the law requires it to be given,' said an FSA spokesman. First London plc's parent company, First London Group plc, is still in business. In a statement, its lawyers said that the failure to notify the FSA about the change in ownership was a mistake that had been rectified: 'This was simply an error and not done for any ulterior or questionable motive. As far as our client is aware the FSA were satisfied that the information provided was in compliance with all legal and regulatory requirements. Our client is unaware of any investigation by the FSA or SFO.' King, who was jailed for insurance fraud in 1991, denies any involvement in the running of Notts County or First London plc. But Panorama has obtained dozens of e-mails and numerous testimonies which seem to show that he was secretly pulling the strings at Notts County. King even referred to himself as Lord Voldemort, the character from the Harry Potter novels who 'can never be named.' The club had been owned by a supporters' trust, but King persuaded the fans to sell it for just one pound after they met one of his supposedly wealthy benefactors in Bahrain. Abid Hyat Khan was introduced as a Middle Eastern prince, but Panorama has discovered he is actually on the run from British police. He absconded from the UK in 2008, when he was due to stand trial for allegedly stealing almost one million pounds. Khan denies posing as a prince. Peter Trembling who was appointed as Executive Chairman at Notts County told the Nottingham Post how he became involved with King. He said that he was introduced to King, who was then based in Jersey, by his friend Nathan Willett in 2005. Trembling said he had become close friends with Willett after meeting him through work in Dubai in 2000. He said: 'Russell King wanted to get involved in my business at the time, Affinity Partnerships, which worked with lots of banks as a credit card consultant. He said he had contacts all over the world and I'd make a lot of money.' Trembling added that, in the following year, King and Willett left Jersey for Bahrain. He said that he stayed in touch with them and, in early 2009, they contacted him asking his advice about investing in an English football club. 'They had tried to buy Newcastle United,' he said. 'I told them they were better off going for a smaller club and building it up. At one stage, they were looking at all sorts of clubs. Liverpool was on the radar. Then they said they had the money to buy Notts County.'

Los Angeles Galaxy midfielder David Beckham has reportedly been given special permission to fly to London for the royal wedding on Friday 29 April before returning to the United States a day later in time for his side's Major League match at FC Dallas. Of course, what would be really hilarious is if Becks gets to the Abbey and finds out that his invite had all been a big mistake.

There's Only One Greedy Bastard

A somewhat off-colour Scumchester United missed the chance to open up a nine-point gap at the top of the Premier League as they were held to a draw by yer actual Keith Telly Topping's beloved (though still seemingly unsellable) Newcastle United. The visitors were guilty of poor passing throughout, though Wayne Rooney and Ryan Giggs both missed good chances. And striker Javier Hernandez felt he was fouled in the box by Danny Simpson late on, only to be booked for a dive. The Magpies thoroughly deserved a point, though, and might have had a penalty of their own when Anderson appeared to fell Peter Lovenkrands. Both decisions could have gone either way, with contact seeming to be made on each occasion, but the referee Lee Probert - who otherwise had a very good game - waved the appeals away to ensure an absorbing clash ended goalless at St James' Park. It is a result which could prove valuable for Newcastle, taking them as it does to the forty-point mark teams often cite as necessary to guarantee safety from relegation. While much of the media may put the result down to the leaders suffering an off night, that fails to reflect the effort and application that Alan Pardew's side demonstrated. Once again the Magpies star man was Cheik Tioté the Ivorian central midfielder whose three million pound transfer from FC Twente is starting to look like the bargain of the season. And, how nice it was to hear the home fans showing their genuine appreciation of the four years of constant shirking and malingering that their club received from Michael Owen when he came on as substitute for The Scum to several rousing choruses of 'There's Only One Greedy Bastard'!

The Enemy Of My Enemy Is My Friend?

Sepp Blatter will this week meet the new Football Association chairman, David Bernstein, to try and secure England's vote for the FIFA presidency. Ironic, you may think, considering how reluctant he was to give England anything the last time FIFA were voting on something. Which, as it happens, is interesting. Because, his visit has come at the worst time in terms of his allegedly efforts to clean up the game. This weekend, fresh claims emerged over the controversial FIFA vice-president the vile and odious Warner's alleged involvement in a World Cup ticket scandal. You may remember that just before the World Cup bid for 2018 took place, in December, the BBC's Panorama programme in an episode about various alleged dodgy dealings within FIFA had claim that the vile and odious Warner was involved in the resale of World Cup tickets to touts as recently as the summer of 2010. The programme brought howls on indignation from England 2018 bid team and from the prime minister who would subsequently attempt to blame the failure of the bid on the programme. And, after the vote, in which Russia was awarded the hosting rights to the tournament, the vile and odious Warner took apparent pleasure in stating that the British media's less than servile and fawning attitude to FIFA was why the rest of the world would never vote for and England-hosted tournament. Well, perhaps now Panorama and the Sunday Times and all of the other parts of the British media which claimed the FIFA was a bent as a David Beckham free-kick might be vindicated. The Norwegian newspaper Dagbladet says it has proof that Warner, whose support is key to Blatter's hopes of re-election, attempted to sell tickets on the black market, in direct contravention of FIFA rules. The paper, which has long been investigating Warner's activities, quoted a black-market ticket dealer as saying a deal was set up with Warner to provide tickets for South Africa. According to the paper, the Caribbean Football Union ordered tickets for several matches including the final. Dagbladet said it was in possession of the receipt for that order and claimed Warner's cut was sixty per cent, even though the deal eventually broke down. Essentially exactly the same claims which were made by Andrew Jennings in the Panorama programmes but, with additional, alleged, documentary evidence. The revelations will heap pressure on Blatter as he bids for a fourth term of office. Warner was publicly reprimanded by FIFA over a 2006 World Cup ticketing scandal involving his family but nevertheless kept his place on the FIFA executive committee. These claims will renew calls for action against the controversial Trinidadian who is one of the most powerful men in the world game - and one of the least liked in many quarters, particularly Britian. (The Daily Scum Mail's Martin Samuels memorably described Warner as 'the duplicitous, odious FIFA vice-president who has been allowed to rule the world from Trinidad and Tobago.') Blatter, who is taking on Asia's Mohamed bin Hammam in a fight for world football's top job on 1 June, will discuss his manifesto with Bernstein in a lunchtime meeting at Wembley. Bernstein has made it an aim of his chairmanship to rebuild bridges with FIFA and distanced himself from reports that the FA are keen to back any Blatter opponent in one of those 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend' type of alliances that always produce good results. As the Western world's support of and arming of Sadam Hussain during the Iran-Iraq war, of course, proves. A number of influential figures in the English game favour Bin Hammam, who must convince FIFA's two hundred and eight nations that it is time to unseat Blatter after thirteen years in charge, and to elect a ninth FFIFA president. Warner was recently returned for a sixth time as head of Concacaf and he will determine where the thirty seven votes of the region will go. The support of Warner and of UEFA dead that oily little twat Michel Platini is seen as vital to both presidential candidates. Both have spoken recently of the need to rid the game's governing body of corruption.

Showing all of the tact and diplomacy for which he is, rightly, famous Fulham chairman Mohammed Al Fayed has told fans that they can 'go to hell' if they do not appreciate a new Michael Jackson statue at Craven Cottage stadium. Al Fayed unveiled the statue on Sunday prior to the west London Premier League team's match against Blackpool which the Cottagers won 3-0. The statue was commissioned following Jackson's death in June 2009 and was due to be erected at Harrods before Al Fayed sold the Knightsbridge store. 'Why is it bizarre? Football fans love it,' he said after the unveiling having, presumably, taken a poll on the subject. Outside the stadium, Fulham fan Michael Tune said: 'We're a laughing stock. It has nothing to do with football.' Another Fulham fan, who wanted to remain anonymous (presumably because he's a Fulham fan), said: 'It makes the club look silly. I thought it was an April Fools joke.' But Al Fayed said: 'If some stupid fans don't understand and appreciate such a gift they can go to hell. I don't want them to be fans.' That's a really good idea, mate, piss off your own supporters. That always works when a Chairman tries it. Doesn't it Mr Ashley? 'If they don't understand and don't believe in things I believe in they can go to Chelsea, they can go to anywhere else,' he added. Al Fayed's decision to relocate the statue of Jackson to Fulham's stadium is likely to divide opinion. The singer was a friend of Al Fayed's but his only known link to the football club is that he attended one game as a guest of the chairman, against Wigan Athletic in 1999. Where he gave a stunning rendition of 'come and have a go if you think you're hard enough' at half time. But Al Fayed said: 'People will queue to come and visit it from all over the UK and it is something that I and everybody else should be proud of.' What, and stick around to watch a game afterwards? I very much doubt it, pal. Kit Symons, who played in the match Jackson attended in 1999 and is now under-eighteens manager at the Cottagers said: 'It is great. The big thing is it is obviously something that the chairman feels very, very passionately about and he has decided to erect this statue and fair dos to him.' Reflecting on the time of Jackson's visit, he added: 'It was just happy times. The chairman obviously used to bring high profile people down the games. Tony Curtis was here a few weeks after and it was just fantastic times.' Central defender Brede Hangeland said the decision to erect the statue was backed by the club's players. He said: 'Some of our players are Michael Jackson fans, some aren't, and that's the same in the general population. His music has been on in the dressing room a couple of times. I'm sure we won when his music was played! We have the deepest respect for everything about the chairman. If he wants to do this then it is all good.' Perhaps inspired by the statue, Fulham beat Blackpool 3-0 in the match which followed the unveiling. It was a thriller.

The Greed Roadshow

The European General Court has ruled that UK football fans can continue to watch major events on free-to-air TV in future. Both FIFA and UEFA - pound signs flashing in their eyes as they worked themselves into a tool-stiffening orgy of debased greed - had challenged a decision allowing the UK government to designate the World Cup and European Championship finals as free-to-watch events. Both are on the UK list of 'protected events' of national sporting importance. The EGC now says that an EU member state can prohibit the exclusive broadcast of games at these two events on pay-TV. The court also dismissed FIFA's action against Belgium for showing all World Cup matches on free-to-air TV in that country. FIFA and UEFA had argued the current set-up interfered with their ability to sell television rights at the best price. And to make vast wads of cash that could then be used in sleazy behind-the-scenes deals and backhanded activities and vote rigging when it comes to who hosts major competitions. Allegedly. They had said there was no reason why all games at tournaments should be shown free on UK television, as part of a list the national sporting 'crown jewels' which have to be made available to everyone to watch. The court disagreed. Which was funny. The EGC said 'the court holds that the [European] Commission did not err in finding that the United Kingdom's categorisation of all World Cup and Euro matches as "events of major importance" for their societies are compatible with European Union law. Consequently, FIFA's and UEFA's actions are dismissed.' They then added 'and the greedy, corrupt bastards can go screw themselves.' Only, they did it quietly whilst no one was listening. Apparently. The EGC, formerly the Court of First Instance, is the first European court where a decision is made. Appeals about its rulings are taken to the European Court of Justice. FIFA and UEFA now have two months to launch any appeal. The two football bodies had argued that any games featuring England, Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland would have still been shown on TV for free, as would have the finals and semi-finals of the tournaments. But the rest of the sixty four World Cup matches and thirty one European Championship matches would not have been free in the UK. UEFA had said the listing infringed its property rights, as it resulted 'in a restriction of the way in which the applicant may market the television rights to the Euro [championships].' It had also said that showing the entire tournament on free-to-air in the UK had led to 'a disproportionate and unjustified distortion of competition on the relevant market.' An EU directive gives all member states the right to designate sporting and cultural events of national interest for broadcast on free-to-air TV stations. Hence, the Broadcasting Act 1996 gives the British government the power to designate key sporting and other events as 'listed events.' The purpose of the list is to ensure that such events are made available to all television viewers, particularly those who do not have subscription television. 'This obviously is a bad day for rights holders,' said Daniel Geey, competition and EU regulatory expert at Field Fisher Waterhouse law firm. But, a good day for everyone else, it should be noted in the interests of balance. 'FIFA and UEFA argued that the listing legislation constrained their ability to sell the broadcasts at the maximum commercial level to the widest possible selection of broadcasters.' Geey said that the two football bodies had emphasised to the court they only wished to sell the rights to games that did not include the relevant member state's teams. 'The General Court ruling however stated that the World Cup and European Championships are to be regarded as single events rather than individual games and that individual matches should not be divided up into "prime" or "non-prime" matches,' Geey added. And he said that the ruling would have the knock-on effect of insulating free-to-air broadcasters from pay-TV competition. In December 2008, the Labour government announced a review of the list, carried out by an independent advisory panel headed by former FA chief executive David Davies. The panel reported in November 2009 with its recommendations. 'I have read with great interest the summary of the findings of the European court,' Davies told BBC News. 'It's remarkable how they reflect the debate and conclusions that our own panel on listed events came to eighteen months ago. Personally, they don't alter my view that for the UK at least, the best solution in the future would be a voluntary agreement on the broadcasting of events of national resonance. If the will is there among the broadcasters and the sporting governing bodies, this is achievable, and maybe today's judgement could bring that agreement nearer ' In July last year, the Coalition government said that any decision on the future of the list would be deferred until 2013 - after the conclusion of digital switchover in 2012. The UK Department of Culture, Media and Sport said they were pleased with the result. 'We welcome the decision from the EU and continue to support the principle of protecting sports events for free-to-air coverage,' a spokesman said. Emma McClarkin MEP, the Conservative sports spokesman in the European Parliament, added: 'We need to ensure that the crown jewels of our national sports are accessible to everyone. I hope that FIFA and UEFA will not appeal this ruling.'

The Day The World Went Mad!

On a quite remarkable day in the Premier League, forty one goals were scored in eight games. Yer actual Keith Telly Topping's beloved (though still unsellable) Newcastle United produced a quite stunning comeback from 4-0 down at half-time to earn a draw which shocked title hopefuls Arsenal to their very core. Theo Walcott, with a smug grin on his face that was jolly satisfying to see wiped off come the final whistle, had scored after just forty four seconds before a Johan Djourou header and a shot from Robin van Persie put Arsenal 3-0 ahead inside ten minutes. Van Persie headed his second and Arsenal's fourth before half-time as Arsenal threatened to treat the whole thing like a training ground match. Most of the crowd and, apparently, most of the United players were simply hoping it wasn't going to end in a cricket score. However, Abou Diaby was given a straight red card after the break for pushing both Joey Barton and Kevin Nolan. Barton, having a superb game in midfield for United, then scored two penalties either side of a strike from Leon Best (who also had another, seemingly legitimate, goal disallowed). Finally, the best player on the pitch, Côte d'Ivoire international Cheik Tioté score his first Premier League goal when he hit a stunning long-range equaliser for the Magpies with three minutes left. Deep into injury time, United even had the chance to win the game but Kevin Nolan's shot from the edge of the box from Nile Ranger's knock-down rolled agonisingly inches wide of the post. To be fair, the second penalty, when Mike Williamson found himself sort-of sandwiched between Koscielny and Rosicky, did appear to be more than a bit soft but, other than that, this genuinely seemed to be a case of one team simply wanting it more in the second half than the other. Needless to say, well-known faceache (and drag) Arsène Wenger didn't see it that way - in an interview with BBC 5Live he managed to blame pretty much everyone and everything apart from his own defence for Arsenal being the first Premiership side ever to surrender a four goal lead. He also broke his usual habit of 'not actually seeing' incidents in which his players are sent off to suggest that, yes, Diaby has been 'a bit rash' but then, quite disgracefully, implied that Barton should have also been dismissed for the initial - robust but perfectly fair - challenge. Which wasn't even a foul, let alone something warranting dismissal as Match of the Day footage subsequently proved. That's Arsenal and their manager down to the ground, I'm afraid. Let them play football against you and they'll tear you to bits with a smile on their face but stand up to them and show them a bit of fight and they do not like it. It was noticeable that after the sending off Febregas, basically, man-marked the referee for the rest of the match instead of, you know, getting stuck in and trying to win the ball and do something with it. It had been a miserable week for Newcastle up to that point following the departure of Andy Carroll to Liverpool on Monday and then a serious facial injury to Shola Ameobi during Wednesday's defeat at Fulham. Magpies manager Alan Pardew had his arms crossed and a curious look of 'Oh no! Here we go again!' on his face for long periods of the opening half as he watched in horror from his technical area. Pardew later suggested that his side had, perhaps, not been mentally right before the game and were, like some of the fans, feeling a bit sorry for themselves after a few days of adversity. His team were seemingly blown away during the opening half hour, but they won a most unlikely point - which must feel like a victory - after playing with incredible drive, pace and determination after the interval. All the while roared on by a passionate and fifty one thousand crowd at St James' Park. As the nufc.com website put it, this was 'One hundred and thirty years of Newcastle United's history encapsulated in ninety five minutes. Unbelievable and difficult to digest at the same time. Just when you thought things couldn't get any dafter...' As previously noted, there's one thing about being Newcastle fan, it's never, ever dull. Arsenal could have kept the pressure on Premier League leaders Manchester United, at least temporarily reducing the deficit at the top to just two points, but they crumbled following the dismissal of Diaby. The confidence and attacking flair which had characterised their play in the opening half totally vanished, replaced by a shaky and unsure side prone to panic which could not defend a handsome lead and often struggled for long periods to get the ball off a team which had not won in their previous four games. As it happened, two hours later, Arsenal were probably looking at it more as a point gained rather than two dropped as Manchester United, improbably, lost their first game of the season, 2-1 at bottom club Wolves. The Scum had led after three minutes when Nani drilled home inside the near post after turning George Olokobi. But Olokobi made amends by heading in an equaliser soon after with United's defence sleeping as Matt Jarvis executed a short-corner routine. Kevin Doyle then glanced the winner just before the break, after which the visitors failed to carve out any clear chances. Elsewhere, there was also a remarkable game at Goodison Park where Louis Saha grabbed four goals as Everton broke Blackpool's spirited resistance. The hosts dominated before the break and Saha stroked them ahead but Alex Baptiste's six-yard shot levelled it. A neat near-post Saha effort made it 2-1 but Jason Puncheon's sidefooted finish and Charlie Adam's measured header put the Tangerines ahead. Saha headed home to level at 3-3 and he added his fourth on the break after substitute Jermaine Beckford's fizzing volley. James McCarthy struck twice as Wigan clawed their way out of the relegation zone with a thrilling win over Blackburn Rovers at the DW Stadium by the odd goal in seven. Jason Roberts put the visitors ahead, only for Wigan to race into a 3-1 lead through McCarthy's double and an opportunistic goal by Hugo Rodallega. Chris Samba made it 3-2, before Ben Watson's penalty made the game safe for the Latics. Blackburn's David Dunn scored a late penalty but Wigan held on for the win. Carlos Tevez's first-half hat-trick helped Manchester City see off West Bromwich and end a three-game winless run. The Argentine had already hit the post from Aleksandar Kolarov's cross when he slotted home from the spot after Steven Reid hauled Kolarov down in the box. David Silva set Tevez up to make it 2-0 and he celebrated his twenty seventh birthday with a third goal, converting another penalty after Jerome Thomas handled. Marc-Antoine Fortune wasted Albion's best chance when he fired wide. City could have been further ahead at the break but for Baggies keeper Boaz Myhill tipping a Kolarov thunderbolt on to the bar and also denying Silva when he was clean through. Clint Dempsey headed a late equaliser at Villa Park to earn stubborn Fulham a draw against the Villains. John Pantsil had gifted the home side the lead when he nodded a Stewart Downing cross into his own net. The visitors hauled themselves level when Andrew Johnson headed in after Steve Sidwell's strike was parried by Villa keeper Brad Friedel. Kyle Walker's stunning thirty-yard drive restored Villa's lead only for Dempsey to equalise in the seventy eighth minute. It was Dempsey's tenth goal of the season and, although both teams had to settle for a point apiece from a finely balanced game, they provided an entertaining spectacle. Substitute Niko Kranjcar's injury-time blockbuster gave Tottenham Hotshots a dramatic win over Bolton. Rafael van der Vaart put the hosts ahead from the the penalty spot after a Kevin Davies handball. The Dutchman then missed a retaken second spot-kick, before the Notlob Trotters hit back when Daniel Sturridge's shot squirmed under Heurelho Gomes. Jermaine Jenas's free-kick hit the post as Spurs pressed and Kranjcar sealed the win with a fearsome twenty five-yard strike. It was a vital and timely contribution from the Croatian midfielder, who struck just as the game, and with it Tottenham's Champions League aspirations, seemed to be slipping from their grasp. In the day's early kick-off, Robert Huth scored two late goals as Stoke fought back to stun Sunderland. Kieran Richardson rifled in Phil Bardsley's low cross for the visitors on two minutes, only for John Carew to score from a possible offside position. Sunderland edged ahead when Asamoah Gyan fired in after the break but the match turned on its head on eighty three minutes. Two Jermaine Pennant free-kicks caused the damage, first swinging in for Huth to bundle home and then teeing up the German to stab in the winner in injury time. It was an astonishing conclusion to a match which had ugly goals, controversial goals and a beautifully created goal. That will be no consolation for Sunderland boss miserable faceache Steve Bruce who will be furious after his sloppy team gave leads away twice having dominated the game, and seeing the officials fail to flag offside for the first equaliser. So, that'll be funny if nothing else.

And, speaking of Blunderland, Niall Quinn has said that he 'despises' fans who choose to watch Sunderland's 3pm Saturday kick-offs in pubs, while listening to 'some overseas commentator.' Sunderland's chairman was reacting to a legal opinion that was delivered by an advocate of the European court of justice yesterday. By concluding that the sale of exclusive rights to televise football on a country-by-country basis was contrary to the principle of the European single market, Juliane Kokott suggested that a Portsmouth landlady, Karen Murphy, should not have to pay a fine and costs totalling eight thousand pounds, after the Premier League took her to court for using a Greek decoder to show Premier League games in her pub, the Red White and Blue. Although Kokott's opinion is not yet binding, it could be made so by European judges. Pubs in the North‑East often show what have been regarded as illegal foreign broadcasts – usually from the Middle East, southern Europe or Scandinavia – of 3pm Saturday Premier League games which are not transmitted by British broadcasters. Quinn feels this is an 'easy option' which is reducing crowds at the Stadium of Light. Well, you could try lowing your prices a bit, mate. The Sunderland chairman said: 'Contrary to the opinion of the advocate general, the illegal showing of Saturday 3pm fixtures involving Sunderland has an extremely detrimental effect on our attendances. I can point to the evidence uncovered by an agency who covertly visited pubs and clubs in our catchment area and witnessed thousands watching the illegal broadcasts. My belief is a significant number of these people are taking the easy option of spending their money in the pub, watching their team, as opposed to supporting their team and helping to create a better atmosphere at the stadium. Our attendances are down for a couple of reasons and I would never criticise anyone who doesn't come to the stadium because of financial constraints but I despise those who spend far more than the price of a ticket watching some overseas commentator describing the action. All clubs thrive on full stadiums. Loud, passionate support is the backbone of football and when our stadium is full we are a force to be reckoned with. I know this first hand – when I was a player we could beat teams from the second they walked out of the tunnel, the atmosphere was so intimidating. To anyone watching the game illegally in the pub I will continue to say: "By doing so you're not supporting your team, you're actually damaging the progress of the club." We have a real chance here to make this club feel great again but to do it we need everyone behind us. I would urge these people in the pubs and clubs to come back to the Stadium of Light. And I reiterate, despite this opinion yesterday, it is still illegal to show games in this fashion.' It is. But, probably not for too much longer. Thanks for your contribution to the debate, Niall.

Oh Carroll! I Am But A Fool ...

There's a joke currently doing the rounds on the Internet. No, this one's clean and doesn't involve Richard Keys, don't worry. 'Shell-suits, trainers, Andy Carroll,' it begins. 'Mike Ashley has a long history of selling utter crap to Scousers.' It's not quite as good as the one about Fernando Torres's move from Liverpool to Chelsea collapsing after Torres's wife failed to agree personal terms with John Terry. But it does, undeniably, give a bit of brief light amusement to the situation. Actually, though, as with many football-related jokes, it's more than a bit unfair to both Scousers and to Andy Carroll himself - the lad is already a fine player with the potential to be so much more than that. At twenty one he can, if handled right and if he manages to keep himself out of nightclub fights and, you know, jail, go on to become the best Premiership striker of his generation and England's centre forward for the next decade. He certainly has the ability to. Liverpool have taken a colossal gamble paying thirty five million quid for a very young lad with raw talent but also with experience of just over forty premiership games (and a mere seventy minutes in an England shirt). But it's a gamble which could pay off massively. For Newcastle, Mike Ashley has taken an equally big gamble. If not bigger. It's virtually impossible to argue with the fact that thirty five million pounds for Carroll is too good a price to turn down. Hell, he's a good player, he might even be a great player in a few years, but he is not, by any stretch of the imagination, the eighth most expensive footballer ever to walk the planet. If the eighteen million quid Villa paid Sunderland for Darren Bent looked daft money (and it did), then this is positively obscene. Especially in the middle of a recession. But, for all that, as you'll find repeated in all the bars and clubs around Tyneside this week, 'you can't play a big bag of money up front and expect to get twenty goals a season off it.' Ashley has, quite literally, tossed a coin in the air and speculated that a Newcastle side which has, frankly, somewhat over-achieved thus far this season still has enough about them not to get relegated. It's a calculated risk. The club are currently in ninth place in the Premiership and sit nine points above a relegation place with thirty points for twenty three games. Even without Carroll, they can score goals but they also have an unfortunate habit of letting them in at the other end in increasingly ludicrous ways. It's almost certainly a far better position than most United fans expected them to be in at this time of the season when it started back in August. Is it false? Some results suggest not, others that it is. But, still, realistically four more wins and maybe a couple of draws from their last fifteen games, in theory, should be more than enough to keep them up. It might take less than that - particularly with one or two clubs apparently in free-fall at the moment. Although this has been a very strange year in the Premiership in terms of everybody beating everybody else. In the past, several clubs have certainly found themselves in apparently 'nothing to worry about' positions such as this during the first week in February, only to find a quick run of four or five defeats in a row and, suddenly, they're back down struggling for their lives among the dead men at the wrong end of the table. Ashley's gamble, if it comes off, is that United survive this season with the (weakened) squad they have. If they do and, in the summer, they spend every single penny of that thirty five million knicker (plus a bit more from their next chunk of TV money and next year's season ticket sales) and bring in let's say three or four real quality eight to ten million pound signings (a striker, a right winger and a centre half are three positions they need filling, along with cover at left back) then selling Carroll is, perhaps, going to look like one of the best bits of business in the club's history. Or any club's history, come to that. Regardless of how he actually gets on at Anfield (and, I think it's fair to say as far as most Newcastle fans are concerned - aside from two games each year - we genuinely wish him all the very best for the future after what he did for us in the last eighteen months). As with so many things in football, the trick is to try to predict the future. If it comes off, you look like a genius. If it doesn't, you're a plank. For better or worse, the next three months are going to define Mike Ashley's entire ownership of Newcastle - everything that's gone before is the mere prelude. Two points about the Carroll transfer really trouble me, however. Firstly, it spectacularly undermines Alan Pardew's position as manager at Newcastle just at the point where most Toon fans were kind of coming around to a grudging acceptance of the bloke and even a mild warmth that he seemed to be making all of the right noises and producing some decent results - albeit, with Chris Hughton's team. For the last month Pardew has said, repeatedly, whenever asked by the press, that Carroll was going absolutely nowhere. That Carroll was one of a handful of players (Joey Barton, Tiote, Enrique, Nolan, Steven Taylor, Ben Arfa) around whom Pardew wanted to build a side. Never once did he say 'Andy Carroll's not for sale ... unless we get stupid money offered, of course, in which case every man has his price.' Which I think most fans would have, with a heavy heart, accepted as the way of the world these days. Yesterday, Pardew was having to field some pretty awkward questions at his first post-transfer deadline day press conference. It was put to him that if fans can't trust him on this matter then why should they believe anything he has to say in the future. 'What can I say?' he replied meekly. 'We didn't force anybody to leave.' And that brings us to the second troublesome question. Did Carroll jump or was he pushed? A series of text messages between Carroll and the North East fanzine editor Steve Wraith on Monday afternoon, published in the national press yesterday, suggest that Carroll himself wanted to stay at Newcastle until the club made it clear they'd prefer the money. That's certainly the stance that Carroll himself has taken in his post-signing interviews. The club - through Pardew - have hotly denied this. Carroll claims that Derek Llambias asked him to hand in a written transfer request. The club deny this and say that it was Carroll himself who handed in the request without any prompting from them. (Interestingly, the text of the actual transfer request has not yet been made public.) So, essentially, either Andy Carroll is lying or Mike Ashley (via his various spokesmen, including Llambias and Pardew himself) is lying. Given the previous track record of Ashley, who has form infamously saying one thing to the fans and then doing exactly the opposite and claiming his original statements were mere 'public relations' (an entire industrial tribunal case was fought, and lost, over exactly that) lead many observers to know which side they believe. Watching the saga unfold on Sky Sports News on Monday afternoon was certianly a classic example of that curious modern TV-rolling-news phenomena, information and disinformation colliding head on and producing only confusion in their wake. For two hours mid-afternoon the broadcaster, in the guise of their North East correspondent David Craig, was confidently telling their viewers from a vantage point somewhere outside St James' Park that Craig's understanding was Newcastle had rejected Liverpool's overnight bid of thirty million pounds for Carroll. But they had let it be known to the Reds that an increased off of thirty five million would be acceptable to them. Andy Carroll was, by all accounts, already on his way to Liverpool at that time (around 2pm) to discuss terms claimed Craig. When, actually, Carroll was in Alan Pardew's office just a couple of hundred yards from where Craig and his camera crew were standing, discussing whether he'd get a new contract or not. On that much, pretty much everyone agrees. So who was telling Craig all this other stuff? Who told Sky that it had been 'intimated' Newcastle would accept a thirty five million pound bid? Somebody, somewhere, was sending out highly mixed signals. Within twenty minutes of it being announced that Newcastle had turned down Liverpool's 'increased' offer (which was described as 'thirty five million plus add-ons' and which happened at around about 4pm), Carroll's handing in of a transfer request was also announced - live on Sky - as was the statement that the club had, 'reluctantly', agreed to sell. If all of that doesn't sound like 'public relations' and - not unusually for Newcastle - particularly banal and unbelievable public relations at that, then nothing does. For what it's worth, despite their being a Tiding of Magpies involved, there are no black and white areas in this particular example of football gone mad. Newcastle, if they manage to keep themselves up, could - could, mark you - emerge a stronger better, more balanced side. Liverpool have signed a player with huge potential which might, long term, prove to be the start of something really special for them. Or, it could be the 2011 version of Peter Marinello. (That's a reference for all you fortysomethings out there!) Time will tell. In football, as in life, it usually does. Moscow Chelski FC have spent fifty million quid on Fernando Torres, a World Cup winner with astonishing natural goalscoring ability but someone who can be even more of a sulking child than the two they've got already, Anelka and Drogba. Only Happy Harry and Tottenham Hotshots appear to have lost out, but they've already got Steven Piennar so what they hell are they complaining about? The Andy Carroll transfer saga suggests that, on a day when football quite simply suffered from a manic overdose of ego-driven insanity, there remain only three proper certainties in life. Death, the rent man and the fact that being a Newcastle United fan is never, ever, dull!

Sky Smash!

Andy Gray has reportedly complained to 'friends' - well, the four friends that he had left, anyway - about feeling 'stitched up' after being sacked by Sky Sports. All following publicity surrounding a series of apparently sexist comments which he made. The presenter got the old tin-tack from the broadcaster after suggesting on Saturday that assistant referee Sian Massey would not know the offside rule due to her sex and then when previous lewd comments he made to his colleague Charlotte Jackson appeared on YouTube on Monday. According to the Mirra - who for some reason seem to be taking on the role of Gray apologists at the moment, which is probably wholly unconnected to the fact that Gray is currently suing their rivals the News of the World over phone-hacking allegations - Gray believes that his superiors have used the issue to allow them to promote younger staff. 'He feels like he has been stitched up and people working against him at Sky have set all this up to get him the boot,' a 'source' allegedly claimed. Oh, this is really good. Apparently Andy Gray believes that he is the innocent victim of a Miriam O'Reilly-style bit of ageism in the area! Brilliant - I shall look forward to theforthcoming Industrial Tribunal with great interest to see what happens next. Let's be fair, you've really got to admire bare-faced crass denial like that. 'He loved doing that job,' the nameless - and, probably fictional - 'source' allegedly told the Mirra. 'And didn't get much of a chance to get his point of view across. But it feels like a changing of the guard at Sky and this will give bosses a chance to promote Ben Shephard and Jamie Redknapp quicker.' Conspiracy theories that Gray was, indeed, the victim of deliberate leaks by someone - or several someones - within Sky as a direct consequence of his forthcoming legal action against another part of the Rupert Murdoch News Corp empire have been doing the rounds since the Mail on Sunday first got hold of the off-air sound clip from an 'anonymous source' late on Saturday night. They may even be true, far stranger things happen in the TV industry. The excellent Jim White, for instance, makes a highly persuasive argument in this article concerning the 'real' reasons that Gray was sacked. 'The reaction of his employer is far more to do with Sky's anxiety to end a series of damaging headlines at a time of a highly sensitive takeover. This was corporate public relations. He was embarrassing them, full stop. Yet part of that embarrassment came from within. If Sky's own employees had not leaked so prodigiously, no-one would have been any the wiser, the headlines would not have been generated and the corporation would not have been compromised. Gray was, quite simply, knifed by those he had patronised down the years.' But, Gray might like to consider the fact that if he hadn't said what he did, there would have been nothing for any naughty troublemaker to leak in the first place. So, you know, sorry Andy old chap but I've got no sympathy for you whatsoever. You broke the eleventh commandment and got caught. The latest footage to have entered the public domain, let us remember, showed an off-air incident in December, when Gray asked Jackson to 'tuck this in,' gesturing towards the microphone near his groinal area. Jackson can be briefly seen looking a touch embarrassed and turning away, whilst Gray and his co-presenter Richard Keys - who has also been disciplined for his role in the discussion about Massey - burst out guffawing like a pair of ignorant overgrown school bullies. The law firm Schillings have confirmed to the press that they have been instructed by Gray regarding his dismissal. Gray's fiancée Rachel Lewis added yesterday: 'He's wanted to apologise for the last few days, desperately. He was told not to by Sky.' The Gruniad's Richard Williams had a slightly different take on matters: 'The alacrity with which the Sky Sports bosses dispatched Andy Gray to the knackers' yard suggests that they saw no merit in flogging more life out of a dead workhorse. To a channel whose public image is established by the cast of interchangeable junior estate agents and blonde autocuties reading out the bulletins on Sky Sports News, the old centre-forward had passed his sell-by date some time ago. In the estimation of pretty well everyone, except Gray himself, the one-time penalty-area bully has long since lost the aura of authority created by his playing career with Aston Villa, Wolves, Everton and Scotland. When the world – ie the Premier League in Sky's terms – was new, he embodied a certain gritty outspokenness that lent an air of authenticity to the channel's glossy coverage, with its fanfares and fireworks. But YouTube, that deadliest of witnesses, harbours a whole series of occasions on which Gray could be expressing opinions on football matters that entitled him to be seen as the voice of the people only if the people concerned yearned for the days of leather balls, dubbinned boots and casual prejudice. Perhaps Barney Francis, Sky's managing director, feels that Keys is too valuable to sack. If that is what he thinks, much of the nation would disagree. The emergence of another clip seemed to provide a further illustration of his unreconstructed view of womanhood. It is hard to imagine a Save Richard Keys protest outside the channel's Isleworth headquarters. To anyone outside the close circles of the two presenters the only immediate cause for regret is the understandable decision of the referees' association to withdraw Massey from her scheduled duty at tonight's match between Crewe and Bradford. Noting the unusually high number of applications for media accreditations, particularly the requests for photographers' passes, they concluded that the twenty five-year-old official would not be permitted to go about her duties in the right sort of ambiance. The Sun – owned by Sky's major shareholder, Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation – also sank to predictable depths, filling its front page with a photograph of an off-duty Massey dancing at a social function, wearing a skimpy top and a short denim skirt. It was the sort of utterly harmless image that many women of her age put up on their Facebook page but its use here was blatantly exploitative, freighted with a nudging insinuation but having no bearing on the subject's role in the story.' As, indeed, this blog stated yesterday. And, this is one occasion where yer actual Keith Telly Topping does want to say 'I told you so.' To go back to Jim White's article for a second: 'That Gray is not a particularly pleasant bloke will come as little surprise to those who saw him on television exploring the outer reaches of self-importance. And Richard Keys is, so those who have worked with him attest, not much nicer. Their saloon bar banter about the assistant referee Sian Massey was not unusual, apparently. It was as ignorantly incorrect as it was inappropriate. By the very excellence of her performance Massey refuted the pair's laughable insistence that women are somehow genetically incapable of mastering a set of rules. As to Keys's claim that her presence on the Molineux touchline was evidence of a "game gone mad," it might be argued that the elevation of someone on the grounds of their sustained competence marks a rare moment of sanity in the sport. More difficult to defend on mental health terms is the idea that the front man of a television show is worth more than one million pounds a year. Or as they probably don't say in the Manchester City dressing room, fifty nurses. If a haughty self-regard coupled with old-school views preclude someone from doing their job then half the sports media are unemployable. You only have to look at some of the candidates to replace Gray on Sky - Glenn Hoddle, Graeme Souness, Stan Collymore, Paul Merson - to see that inappropriate behaviour is endemic in the calling. If everyone has to be a decent person to do the job, the future is silence.' Of course, the numskull dinosaurs who fill up the comments sections on the websites of newspapers like the Sun, the Daily Scum Mail and the Mirra will continue to bleat their pathetic mantra that this was 'all just a bit of harmless fun,' some 'workplace banter' that, twenty years ago would have been perfectly acceptable. I agree, it probably would have been - this blogger indulged in a fair bit of it himself, I'm sure most dear blog readers, of both sexes, have done too at one time or another. The point isn't that it used to be acceptable, rather that it isn't acceptable now. In life, things change all the time and people (and their attitudes) have to change with them or they become moribund in this society. Bear baiting was the most popular form of Saturday night entertainment in this country once upon a time. If Sky Sports had been around in those days, they would've probably been covering it, live, from the Dung-Heap Arms in Chelmsford with commentary by ye-olde Sir Richard of Keys and Smash It. And they would have got a huge and voyeuristic audience for it and that would have been perfectly acceptable. But society has changed and we know better now. In many ways the changes are for the better, perhaps in some others ways for the worse. But to argue against the process of change, in and of itself, is to show yourself to be an example of exactly what Mr Keys and Mr Gray have been accused of being. Dinosaurs. In other words, soon to be extinct.

Meanwhile, Keys himself has blamed 'dark forces at work' for escalating the Sky Sports sexism row, which has led to the dismissal of his former partner Andy Gray and put his own job on the line. Keys said that he apologised to Sian Massey on Sunday afternoon - just hours after the initial Molineux recording was leaked to the Mail on Sunday - but was told by his employer that his apology could not be made public. 'We were wrong. It shouldn't have happened, but there are some dark forces at work here,' said an emotional Keys on TalkSport on Wednesday morning. 'From something that was controllable, I have found the reaction to be extraordinary. I cannot believe the frenzy that's blown up. If I had been able to get out the fact that I'd apologised on Sunday I don't think it would have been as frenzied as it has been.' A new video entitled Richard Keys making lewd comments about girlfriend of co-presenter has, as mentioned above, appeared on YouTube showing Keys before a game at Chelsea's Stamford Bridge with Jamie Redknapp, Ruud Gullit and Graeme Souness. Someone off camera mentions a girl and Keys asks Redknapp: 'Did you smash it?' Redknapp replies: 'I used to go out with her.' Keys then adds: 'That is a stupid question, if you were anywhere near it. You definitely smashed it. You could go round there any night and find Redknapp hanging out of the back of it.' During the comments, Gullit looks at his mobile phone, whilst Sounness motions to kick Keys in the ankle. Redknapp laughs rather nervously.