IF EAMON DUNPHY had been in the Sky studios last night, he would surely have uttered the six words he once famously directed at Liam Brady: ‘You’ve jumped over the fence baby!’
Dunphy was of course criticising Brady for criticising him for criticising Arsene Wenger, in possibly the most meta moment ever seen in sports punditry. By saying ‘you’ve jumped over the fence,’ Dunphy was suggesting that Brady was letting the fact that he was an employee of Arsenal overly influence his views on the London side.
Gary Neville, by contrast, is no longer a Manchester United employee, yet his analysis last night indicated that old habits die hard.
Without ever definitively saying that Ryan Giggs should be the next Manchester United boss, virtually every remark he made on the subject seemed to imply that it was his inherent belief.
And such an opinion is problematic for two reasons — a) because it’s one that very few people would subscribe to, and b) because it’s no secret that himself and Giggs are very good friends — his interviews with the United legend since becoming a pundit have not exactly been characterised by journalistic rigour, while their mutual links with the Class of 92 team have been well documented.
Let’s start by looking at what Neville ostensibly did his best to ignore — why choosing Giggs as Manchester United manager makes little if any sense. One of the primary arguments for dismissing Moyes was that he couldn’t be trusted to wisely spend the millions that the owners are likely to plough into the club this summer. Surely therefore, the same logic applies to someone who has never managed or bought players before.
Moreover, while they beat Norwich 4-0 at the weekend, they often easily overcame weaker sides with Moyes at the helm too. Accordingly, Giggs, quite simply, is the sentimental choice. Countless other great players — Alan Shearer, Glenn Hoddle and Bryan Robson to name but a few — have found that managing, compared with playing, is a different ball game entirely.
And another argument against Moyes was that he was unproven at the top level, so surely United won’t follow his disastrous appointment by giving the job to someone even less experienced in this regard than the Scot.
Neville, to be fair, did make reference to Giggs’ lack of familiarity with management, however he cited other coaches who have enjoyed success despite apparently having little experience, highlighting Diego Simeone and Pep Guardiola. Yet Guardiola had already enjoyed considerable success with Barca’s B-team and was taking over a far better side than the current United one, while Simeone had five years as a manager before joining Atletico — a club where expectations are nowhere near as high as they are at Old Trafford.
Neville also highlighted Giggs’ qualities, saying “he’s an experienced United man… he sounds the part… he knows everything about the club… his temperament is incredible.” Yet surely he is approaching the argument in an overly simplistic manner — if picking a manager were that straightforward, every club would simply choose a much-loved veteran star to do the job. In addition, ex-Newcastle boss Shearer was another example of a manager who ‘knew the club,’ yet that ended disastrously. So if Giggs does seek to be United’s manager, then surely he has to prove himself elsewhere first — a club of the Red Devils’ stature cannot afford to appoint a rookie coach.
(Giggs opened his reign as Manchester United’s interim manager with a 4-0 win over Norwich)
The former United defender also suggested Giggs’ dressing room talk had an impact at half-time, which he argued, enabled United to raise their performance at the weekend, nevertheless their victory seemed almost certain after their opener broke Norwich’s spirit just before the break — this one moment was therefore probably the decisive factor, rather than any inspirational words from the Welshman at half-time.
Neville continued by urging the United board to give Giggs “two or three more games to see whether he settles into the position”. However, United’s final three games are at home to Hull and Sunderland, and away to Southampton. Moyes won two of the three reverse fixtures in question in the Premier League, and came within minutes of beating Southampton too, so even if Giggs wins all three of these matches, it is hardly a reliable indicator of his suitability for the role.
The Sky pundit also seemed intent on doing his best to play down the chances of other candidates, pointing out that Louis van Gaal would not be able to fully focus on summer recruitment, given that he has the World Cup to worry about, adding that the Dutchman “doesn’t know the Premier League,” while suggesting that Carlo Ancelotti may not be a viable alternative, as Real Madrid are “unpredictable” in their hiring and firing of bosses.
However, Neville’s most egregious remark was the contention that he would personally “like to see a British manager appointed, because Manchester United have always appointed British managers”. This is a ridiculous statement on many levels. Manchester United have always appointed British managers, because before Alex Ferguson took over at Old Trafford, appointing a non-British manager at a British football club was virtually unheard of. Moreover, Ferguson aside, only one British manager has ever won the Premier League (Kenny Dalglish back in 1995), so if football has taught us anything over the years, it’s that a manager’s nationality is largely irrelevant to the degree of success he enjoys. The fact that a pundit as high-profile and venerated as Neville would make such a clichéd and baseless argument to suggest otherwise is disappointing to say the least, and his reference to the United way was unwittingly ironic, given that it was also supposedly the ‘United way’ to give a manager time to exert his influence on the club.
Of course, the 39-year-old Mancunian remains a fine pundit — he has proved highly insightful in the past whether discussing diving, Arsenal’s weaknesses or a range of other subjects. Nonetheless, this is not the first time he appears to have been influenced by ulterior motives — in the past, he has seemed reluctant to criticise Joe Hart most notably, given his England affiliations, while he also failed to castigate Blackburn’s controversial Venky’s owners (who he happened to have personal dealings with before then) amid the club’s disastrous relegation from the Premier League.
Granted, there is no doubt the former full-back has ultimately raised the punditry game to an extent with his innovative brand of analysis. But last night, he had a chance to silence the critics who feel he can often be unduly influenced by his relationships away from the cameras — by firmly arguing that Giggs lacks the experience to be United manager, as most commentators have, he could have definitively shown that he has left his past affiliations behind for the sake of demonstrating unequivocal objectivity.
Instead though, Neville epitomised everything that has been wrong with Sky’s analysis over the years (and BBC and ITV to an extent) — the cosiness with certain players/managers and the diplomatic tendencies that have been consistently implemented at the expense of rigorous and brutally honest analysis (Dwight Yorke unprofessionally and continually referring to Wayne Rooney as ‘Wazza’ also springs to mind).
Consequently, Neville is undoubtedly a good pundit, but until he fully understands that his primary allegiance is with the viewer and not those involved in the action, he’ll stop short of becoming a great one.
