Perhaps one day in the distant future Arsène Wenger and José Mourinho will be able to clink wine glasses and reflect that maybe, in hindsight, everything did get a little bit daft back there. People said it could never happen with Wenger and Sir Alex Ferguson, back in the days when their rivalry became so bitter and twisted it drew complaints from the Metropolitan police and government ministers. Those two eventually made up, though I can vouch from personal experience that Wenger and Mourinho would probably rather chew on broken glass than resume diplomatic relations, having asked Arsenal’s manager at the start of the season if he could ever imagine a truce. “I will leave you, and your love story with him, to continue without interference,” he told the reporters in his company, instinctively rising from his seat.
The irony is that Mourinho’s perception is that the press dance to Wenger’s tune, pointing out the difference we would see in reporting if Chelsea had gone a decade without a Premier League title or the outcry if it had been him who had administered the two-handed shove in the technical area when the two sides met at Stamford Bridge last season.
Ferguson used to say something similar about what he perceived to be favourable media treatment for the man he described in his most sarcastic voice as “the great Arsène Wenger”, whereas the angriest I ever saw Wenger was after a game at Bolton Wanderers, in January 2005, on the day Manchester United’s manager had given his version of the infamous food fight at Old Trafford. Wenger, almost grey with anger, looked at us through the eyes of someone who saw Ferguson’s henchmen and asked, with great sufferance in his voice, why we were “all at his feet”.
Over time, you learn that they all think each other receives preferential treatment and that they are all guilty of the same hypocrisies and double standards. Wenger is “one-eyed”, Ferguson noted without malice at his recent book launch, in the way that John McEnroe might chastise an opponent for being a sore loser.
These fall-outs will always exist in sport when there are so many stresses attached to management and there is no point being too critical when, generally speaking, football would be slightly grey and bland if everyone got on. The arguments form part of the entertainment. It is why the old Yorkshire TV footage of Brian Clough versus Don Revie is so popular and, hypothetical though it is, my guess is we would all tune in if Wenger and Mourinho could be persuaded to go head to head in the same way.
Equally, there is no doubt it is becoming increasingly undignified seeing these old rivals, with a combined age of 117, carrying on like two men bickering over the garden fence about who has the better lawn. Both inevitably blame the other whereas they could probably do with their heads banging together because, when everything is broken down, there has been an extraordinary amount of pettiness to bring them to this point.
It can certainly feel like a trick of the imagination that Mourinho spoke effusively about Wenger on his return to Chelsea and promised it was a new start. They had met on Uefa’s coaching courses, he explained, and spent time together at the World Cup and the European Championship. “He’s a nice guy. I met him a few times. We had dinner and so on. And when you are not in the same league and when you are not playing against each other, it is easier to get to know people. I’m back in the Premier League, yes, but he’s still a nice guy. I respect him a lot and I will show it always. I wouldn’t bet for one single problem between us.”
Instead, relations have unravelled to the point that Mourinho turned the Waterstones in Piccadilly into his bunker a few days ago, taking aim during a press conference that had been arranged on the strict condition, according to his publishers, that it was solely to discuss his new picture book. An email from Headline had gone out the day before, emphasising it was “not an opportunity to discuss the current football season”. Mourinho plainly had other ideas and, once again, his disdain for Wenger came to the surface in his long diatribe against the Football Association.
For what it is worth, he is probably right to wonder about what might happen if he ever shoved another manager in the way that Wenger did to him last season. Wenger was let off because the match officials informed the FA they had dealt with the incident at the time and, since then, a code of conduct has been introduced that means any manager acting that way in the future would be punished. Wenger, in other words, got lucky.
Mourinho is on thinner ground, however, when he argues that his comments about referees being “afraid” to give decisions against Chelsea were not wildly different to what Wenger said about Mike Dean being “weak” and “naive” after the two sides met at Stamford Bridge this season. A manager is allowed to criticise referees. It is when there is the allegation of bias or a referee’s integrity is questioned that a disciplinary case follows and, on that front, Mourinho not only crossed the line but has a long list of previous. The latest charge was his fourth of this nature, and the third since 2013, and that kind of serial offending makes it perfectly reasonable that the FA would impose a more substantial fine, £50,000, than the last one, £25,000, and a suspended one‑match stadium ban to act as, in effect, a good-behaviour bond.
As for his relationship with Wenger, the sniping is certainly not all one way and it seems unlikely there could ever be a reconciliation. Yes, we said the same about Wenger and Ferguson, when the FA was writing to them to ask for a ceasefire and the League Managers Association was offering to mediate. Yet there was an element of humour at times with those two. The Wenger-Mourinho dynamic is different: more personal and, undoubtedly, even more childish.
In his first stint at Chelsea, Mourinho did accept he had gone too far calling Wenger a “voyeur” and sent him a Christmas card containing a hand-written apology. Arsenal, unsure it was genuine, made a few checks to ascertain it was from Mourinho and their suspicions got back to the sender. As Mourinho saw it, his attempt to reconcile matters had been thrown back in his face. Mourinho took offence and, ultimately, it ended up doing more harm than good.
One day, perhaps, they will realise it did not have to be so silly. That day, however, feels like it might be a long time away.
Cellino’s latest spat with authorities is an own goal for fans
Even by Massimo Cellino’s standards, there is something remarkably hare-brained about his latest conflict with the Football League and, in particular, his apparent belief that the best way to make his point is by punishing Leeds United’s own supporters.
Cellino is unhappy that by the time Leeds have reached the end of the year they will have been on television 10 times – four at Elland Road, six away – and points out that they are losing money from the home fixtures because the television revenue does not amount to the losses in ticket sales and catering.
Leeds, he says, are being “exploited” and the situation is so grave – and this is where it all starts to get a little weird – the club’s owner is worried those televised dates could eventually lead to the place being boarded up. “I fear for the future of Leeds United,” he says. “The future of our club is at stake.”
He is entitled to be aggrieved and the complaint about games being switched should strike a chord with match-going supporters of all the clubs who are regularly affected.
Yet his solution is a belter: slashing the number of tickets Leeds’s fans receive for away matches and essentially asking supporters not to travel with the team, on the basis that “our silence will demonstrate our disappointment”.
“We have no choice but to take strong action to protect the future of Leeds United. In doing this, we must be civil, show respect and remain within the rules. We must not be violent in our way of protesting. Football League rules state that clubs must make a provision for at least 2,000 away tickets to be sold.
“Therefore, in line with those requirements, we will be selling no more than 2,000 tickets for each away game from now on. We understand that this means a number of fans will now be unable to attend certain away games, but this is the sacrifice needed to make the Football League take notice – we have to vote with our feet.”
Where to start? Cellino does not seem to realise that Sky’s viewing figures will probably go up if supporters are not able to buy tickets, or that many Leeds fans will simply go in the home stands (as happened last season at Blackpool, resulting in several punch-ups), or – just a hunch – that it will make no difference whatsoever to the television companies.
Either way, it confirms the view here that Cellino, despite some strong competition, deserves his place at the top in the long list of English football’s more bizarre owners.
Leeds have not had an awful lot in their favour in the last 10 years but they have maintained the Championship’s best away following and, if nothing else, that was one of the few remaining things their supporters had to be proud of.
Cole the drifter sent to Coventry
Coventry City announced the news as if they could hardly believe it themselves. “Welcome to #CCFC Joe Cole” they trumpeted through their Twitter account. “Yes, the actual Joe Cole. Seriously, Joe Cole. The real Joe Cole.”
There are certainly not many former England internationals in League One and it is true that Cole’s name was once synonymous with excitement and flair. But that was a long time ago. On the flipside, Coventry have been loaned a player who has not played a full game in the Premier League since Boxing Day 2013. Cole’s decline began unusually early and, considering all that uncommon talent, it isn’t easy to understand why, at the age of 33, he has been drifting for so long.
