Houston: We Have A Problem

[Frankie 8,145]

andy_steel examines more hypocrisy from managers who should know better...

 

http://www.gersnetonline.co.uk/2010/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=236:houston-we-have-a-problem&catid=1:articles&Itemid=67

 

Another game, another moan.

 

This time, Dundee Utd's Peter Houston- you may or may not have heard of him - muses aloud (read: questions referee's impartiality) whether the two penalties Rangers were awarded against his mediocre Dundee Utd team by referee Dougie MacDonald would have been given to his side. That the first one would have been given in 99% of games eludes him. That the second was a hideous manifestation of modern striking - i.e., hitting the deck at the slightest contact - is also too complex a theory for Mr Houston to digest.

 

As one who grew up in the 80s, watching Andy Gray and Graeme Sharp beast English defences in the old Division One, and who before that had seen the likes of John Wark, Paul Mariner, and closer to home our own Colin McAdam throw their weight around, it does grate on the nerves to see grown men collapse when threatened with the body odour of a nearby defender. However, if Peter Houston is trying to convince me that on the Tannadice training pitch, he daily enjoins his front men to stay on their feet unless absolutely hammered by an opponent, and that they alone amongst 21st century football clubs play up, play up and play the game, he's got a long way to go. In short: bullshit! There's not a player in the tangerine of United who would stay on his feet any more than Kris Boyd, the Rangers striker in question this week.

 

I'm quite happy to admit that most modern strikers are as wobbly on their feet as a drunk man on Port au Prince High Street. I can't see how we get from that to 'refs are biased toward Rangers!', though. I can see how we get from that to 'I want to put pressure on refs before the replay!,' though.

 

But that premise rests on some assumption that Rangers HAVE been getting the breaks, and that all the other, persecuted teams in Scotland must somehow break the cycle of back scratchery between the MeninBlack and their evil, Establishment-linked Masters, based in the Citadel of Doom in south Glasgow. And proving that becomes ever more difficlut when one looks at other decisions, perhaps less widely publicised ones, which have also happened this season. Keeping narrowly to the Scottish Cup, the tournament in which Mr Houston believes he was unfairly penalised, we can quickly find some grist to a quite opposite mill. Consider this quote from our forum's eminent poster, '26th of Foot':

 

I seem to remember in round three of the Scottish Cup, Dundee United were drawing with Partick Thistle 0-0 at Firhill. A breakaway from United saw a ball across the Thistle box and Casalinuovo punched the ball into the net. Game ended 0-2 to United (only by virtue of a late second goal) and they marched into the next round.

 

What did Kovacevic say after that incident? What did Peter Houston say, did he slam the referee? Maybe it was only me, but I heard the distinctive sound of silence emanating from Tannadice. Oh, I should mention the referee that missed Casalinouvo's underhand action, was Dougie McDonald.

 

This says it all for me. Refs make mistakes, but all teams benefit from them at times. It might not be at the time you really, really want it to: but it will happen at some point. You would think that having benefitted in the previous round from what was blatant cheating and a ref regarded universally as pretty poor, Mr Houston might have had the sense to keep his yap shut, but apparently not. So the question has to be: is he just plain dense, or does he just not think?

 

Being a football manager doesn't mean you HAVE to be stupid, although quite a lot of the evidence on view would lead you to an opposite conclusion. Our own Walter Smith, although perhaps not a devotee of Satre or Montesquieu, is quite patently a clever man, well able to judge when a blast is appropriate, and when a diplomatic bodyswerve is called for. Mark McGhee, though to judge by results not much of a manager, is clearly better equipped to write about football than the vast majority of football writers; Craig Brown seems to me to a most intelligent person. So I can't accept the prima facie case that as a boss, Mr Houston is excused having to think. I have to conclude that he's 'at it.'

 

What a pitiful display from a grown man! What laughable hypocrisy, coming from a Dundee United employee! Certainly I can't speak for anyone else, but I try to leave a legacy my children won't be ashamed of, even if they should think me the biggest prize chump of all time. Don't these football types care that their immature drivel will be preserved online and in print for all eternity?

 

I would love to see a new rule introduced into Scottish football, and beyond for that matter, which would be a maturity test for all managers. Anyone who falls into the maturity range of a toddler (most managers, I feel) would be barred from employment until they have sat in the hall and thought about what they've done. Any display of petulance would be met with a sound spanking, and for repeat offenders no River City for a fortnight. In short, for God's sake - will you please grow up?