Thierry Henry reminds us why it is a beautiful game

Henry has brought his cheeky smile back to the Premier League

Anyone who finds themselves complaining about the hype surrounding Thierry Henry’s return to the English Premier League had better drag out last month’s papers.

There they will find the football news they had grown to love, one dominated by scandal, racist remarks and court cases.

Recent portrayals of the English game have focused on the ugly side of football, the side with a flawed, pitted complexion and a hint of distrust in the eye.

The Luis Suarez racism case, on the back of racist allegations involving England captain John Terry, made us turn to the back pages for all the wrong reasons.

While they weren’t cases the media should ignore, they were cases most of us wished never existed in the first place. They left us reflecting on whether it was possible to heal football’s many maladies.

But then along came the New Year and shortly after that Thierry Henry.

Few would have foreseen the return of Henry to the English Premier League.

Arsenal’s leading goalscorer and the man who was instrumental in guiding them to an unbeaten season in 2004 was back. It was a blessing for Arsenal, and the Premier League, as legends rarely retrace their steps.

In December, Henry fought back the tears as a bronze statue was erected of him outside the Emirates in his honour - few would have envisioned him playing inside the stadium just a month later.

Firing next shot

However, on a two-month loan from the New York Red Bulls, his enduring love for the Gunners dragged him back.

If the fairytale wasn’t yet complete, it soon would be.

On Monday, Henry popped on an Arsenal shirt, leapt off the bench and scored within ten minutes of his return in front of the Emirates crowd. The goal gave Arsenal a place in the fourth round of the FA Cup but it meant so much more than that.

Here was an amazing story that reminded us how beautiful football could be.

Surely even those who dislike Arsenal could not have suppressed a slight smile on seeing the jubilance of Henry as he scored on his return.

The occasion signified everything that is right with the game: long-lasting talent, nostalgia, passion, a player’s love for a club and a club’s love for a player. And let’s not forget those Arsenal fans.

Gooners (as they are known) can be an outspoken and arrogant bunch but they celebrated Henry’s goal simply because they love the man and the man loves them back.

It is as close to a love story as we get in football.

Paul Scholes did not manage to score on his return to Manchester United but his story is also one to celebrate.

With Man United struggling for midfielders due to an injury crisis, Scholes’ loyalty to his side and particularly to Alex Ferguson encouraged him back into the fold.

Neither Henry nor Scholes returned to the English Premier League with capes on their back or wearing a pair of blue tights but to Arsenal and United fans they are superheroes.

They are pure footballers who play for the love of the game, the love of their club and the love of the fans. Both players also have done their best to keep their head down and out of trouble in the past.

We welcome them back with open arms and over the top headlines because the ugly side of football was getting boring.

It is time to reflect on football’s more beautiful side.

The reaction to Henry’s goal is overblown, ridiculously romantic, and not quite worthy of a Hollywood script…yet.

But what would you prefer: A smiley Henry on the back page or another picture of a surly looking Suarez?

If it is Suarez you, my friend, are a spoil sport.

The Luis Suarez ban had to be harsh

A portrait of Luis Suarez in black and white  

Due to racism scandals around Luis Suarez and John Terry, football players have once again been in the media spotlight this week for reasons other than their sporting prowess.

On Tuesday 20th December, Suarez of Liverpool fame was handed an eight-match ban by the FA after being found guilty of racially abusing Manchester United’s Patrice Evra.

On Wednesday 21st December, the focus shifted to Chelsea’s John Terry, who was charged over allegations he racially abused QPR’s Anton Ferdinand during a tense match on October 23rd.

As Liverpool learn to live without Suarez, Terry will sweat it out on and off the pitch before a West London court decides his fate in February.

At first glance, it would be easy to mark this as a depressing time for football. However, if these cases are dealt with in the right way it could do the world of football a lot of good.

Suarez's harsh punishment and the seriousness of the charges around the England captain suggest the ugly side of football is no longer being swept under the FA's dusty carpet.

Football players are being increasingly targeted for their behaviour and, one hopes, this is primarily because of the message it sends to the fans.

As role models the actions of footballers, and the reactions to their actions, send powerful messages to football fans.

The fight against racism or any other abuse has to start with the players as they are in the limelight.

Although the extent of racism in the terraces is unknown, general abuse in rife.    

All we need to do is look at the way Blackburn Rovers manager Steve Kean has been treated by the clubs supporters to see how far behind football is in the decency stakes compared to other sports.

Passion has often been used as an excuse for awful behaviour from fans. Of course Rovers fans swear at Kean from the stands, travel overseas to hold up signs saying they want him out, jeer at him as he enters the ground – they are just being passionate about their club!

Human element

While not all football fans behave badly, foul language will be as abundant on the terraces on Boxing Day as alcohol for many of us on Christmas day.

BBC journalist Phil McNulty poignantly writes this week in his blog about Steve Kean, "The argument goes that supporters pay their money and have the right to air their opinion, but even seasoned observers felt unease at an individual coming under such a barrage. It is called the human element."

The human element is sadly something that doesn't always mesh well with football.

In the 1980s, when hooliganism was rife and England football fans were feared around Europe, many accepted the terrible behaviour of our fans.

For too long people associated with football, whether players or fans, have been able to get away with behaviour that would not be accepted in the office or on the street.

This is a fact the English FA, and the British media, have awoken to over the last couple of years. 

More than ever before managers are being fined for criticising officials, players for breaking club protocol, Sky Sports' pundits sacked for sexist comments and FIFA execs banned from the game for... well, all sorts.

Through bans, fines and sackings, a stricter moral code is not just being sent to football players and administrators but to unruly fans. The key message being sent is: respect.

It is something that critics of Steve Kean should maybe mull over their mulled win before staging their next ‘Kean Out’ protest.

And also something Liverpool manager Kenny Dalglish should also mull over his mulled wine before he leaps to Suarez’s defence... again.

Because the message of the FA’s lengthy punishment for Suarez is far greater than the effect it has on Liverpool’s Champions League aspirations.

An eight-game ban is a powerful message to any football player or fan who believes that racist terms should be used, ever.

Spies in our midst?

As someone who has attended England international matches, the language that circulates stadiums is shocking. A yob culture does still exist and it is one that can involve homophobia, sexism and racism. 

The news that Tottenham Hotspur stewards plan to wear headcams at tomorrow night’s game against Chelsea to monitor "foul, abusive, homophobic or racist language" is a drastic action, but one that should be taken.

Racism is ugly and not what the majority of fans want linked to their sport, but taking nothing away from the seriousness of the issue, there are lots of ugly things associated with the beautiful game.

However, football organisations and the media are now sending messages that this ugliness is no longer acceptable, and about time too.

What has a sportswoman got to do?

Two time Olympic gold medalist Rebecca Adlington received an OBE in 2009

If you are a woman who loves sport, now is the time to get on your soap box and make a great big song and dance about it.

It is time the male-dominated sports media were awoken from their pre-21st century slumber.

“Wakey, wakey!” “Rise and shine!” Women are sick and tired of being ignored by your male-driven daily scribbles.

Although it was disappointing to see the British Broadcasting Company fail to include a single woman in their shortlist for the 2011 Sports Personality of the Year, it was equally predictable.

The sad truth is that women are not ‘sports personalities’ anymore. With the sports pages increasingly dictated by football, women have lost the media’s backing and support. Female sports personalities are a dying breed with the public kept in the dark about the women who dedicate their lives to the sports they love.

Not many people have heard of world champions Rebecca Adlington, Katherine Grainger and Kerri-Anne Payne, and this is why they failed to make it on to the shortlist. Their water-based accomplishments drown in each media storm around the latest FIFA scandal or Chelsea result.

However, while sportswomen are angry about this, really angry in some cases – it is action, not anger, that can help to change this sad situation. The silver-lining is that the absence of women in the BBC shortlist gives women (and hopefully also some men) the chance to publicise the raw deal sportswomen (and female sports fans) are being dealt by the British media.

It also gives us the chance, as several leading British sportswomen have already done, to criticise the BBC’s twisted nomination process for their 2011 Sports Personality of the Year. 

Just a quick glance at proceedings reveals a shoddy system that is indicative of the way women’s sport is treated in this country. The BBC hands over the nomination process to 27 newspaper and magazine editors.

There are two problems with this method. Firstly, all the editors are men. Secondly, and more crucially, the British print media lags behind the BBC and Sky Sports’ attitude towards women in sport.

Sports journalists at The Guardian, The Times, The Daily Mail, The Sun are predominantly male, and many yet to grasp the concept that both women and men want to see more female sports coverage. In fact, research carried out in 2010 showed more than 60% of UK sports fans would like to see more women's sports.

While most areas of the media, and society, work hard to achieve more equality for women, sports journalism is allowed to move backwards.

It’s Nuts

So who were the chosen publications voting for the Sports Personality of the Year? 

Reading down the list I was greeted by the usual suspects: The Independent, The Daily Mail, The Times, The Observer, The Sun, The Daily Telegraph. Then I saw a couple of words and gaped in horror. Nuts and Zoo Magazine... The plot had thickened.

It turns out that the well-respected BBC, which prides itself on equality and fairness, is relying on ‘sports experts’ at lad mags to identify their Sports Personality of the Year.

For those not familiar with the delights of Nuts or Zoo, these publications focus on a woman’s more superficial assets.

The sports editors at both establishments spend their days pondering which girl’s breasts deserve to go on their front cover. Women deserve a right to participate in sport but only if they are playing topless tennis.

The BBC should be embarrassed. They should be ashamed that, for even the briefest moment, they considered a lad’s magazine worthy of selecting a sport figure who can act as a positive role model in society. Ashamed they entrusted such a decision to publications that undress women rather than address their sporting accomplishments.

Is it too much to ask for a little common sense?  Former world champion Karen Pickering offered some in her reaction to the BBC’s 2011 shortlist.

She claimed the nomination process should shift from using sports editors to letting past winners of the award decide the shortlist that goes before the British public.

But instead of this view gaining support it will more likely leave people asking: who is Karen Pickering?