Mixed fortunes in the mixed zones
With the Champions League and Europa League back in full swing, life in the “mixed zones” of Europe will be hotting up once again. The mixed zone – the post-match scrum for quotes from players as they file to the team bus – is not for the faint hearted.
For a start – and this is not a great base from which to work – most of the players will not want to talk to the scumbag media, whether it is TV, radio or, especially, the dastardly written Press. With huge headphones clamped to their ears, they will troop to the coach with a barely disguised smirk at the heaving mass in front of them.
“Just a quick moment, Wayne?” implore the hacks. “Any chance of a brief chat, Gareth?” And the replies are all too predictable. “Sorry, lads, I’ve got to get on the bus.” Or: “Not just now.” Or, most infuriatingly, a smug blank stare – as if you’d just crawled out of a hole in the ground.
Another favourite trick is when they pretend to be talking on their mobile phone. One international did just that as he exited the dressing-room after an England game and, to his embarrassment and the amusement of everyone else, the phone rang as he held it to his ear. He had, of course, been talking to no one.
Some players, a rare breed though, hold a refreshingly open view and will usually talk whatever the result and even if they have had a personal stinker. Peter Crouch is one of them, the beanpole striker almost always ready to stop and offer a considered opinion. This is vital for the journo needing a “follow-up” story for the next day, when even the most bland of quotes can be turned into a half-decent read.
However, if it’s an evening game and there has been a particularly controversial incident, the quotes might well be needed straight away and not kept back for the follow-up. In which case, it’s a frantic dash back to the Press room to bash out the story and send it through the ether to the sports desk.
Occasionally, again at a night match, there is no time to get back to the relative comfort of the Press room. In many European grounds, they can be quite a way from the mixed zone. I remember being in one particularly crazy post-game “mixer” in Portugal, the match having been laden with mad moments, and – with deadline approaching – having to squat on the floor against a wall, with laptop on my legs, and try to compose a need-it-now quotes piece.
Bodies were flying everywhere, I could hardly hear the instructions from my desk down the phone because of the noise and then I nearly got splattered by one of the team buses as it reversed out of the stadium. Not the calmest of enviroments in which to operate but, hey, that’s the journo’s lot sometimes. That’s what we do.
Now and again, you get the mixer from heaven. The club press officer will gently cajole a player into talking to us reprobates, he gives us a great “line” for the next day … and the job’s a good ‘un. We don’t need anyone else, the rest of the know-nothing superstars can ignore us and we don’t care. If only it were always that easy.
At least the mixer, if it is sensibly controlled and patrolled by club officials, should have some semblance of order. In the good old bad old days, waiting in car parks – often in the wind and rain – was the only way in which to get to a player for his views on the game.
And, believe me, to stand there, cold and drenched, for 45 minutes – only to be told to “Naff off” by some third-rate midfielder – was not a pleasant experience. For all its faults, all hail the mixer!
Well someone needs to join in and give another opinion so it may as well be me. Hello all.
I honestly couldn’t care less about what a player has to say after a game. Of all the comments I’ve read in the past so few shed any sort of light on the game that I stopped reading such articles a long time ago.
Likewise for managers. I’m not sure if there was ever a time when a manager would give genuine insight after a game, but if there was it’s long gone. These days most of the time is spent trying to get a certain line across about a ‘controversial’ incident, to apply pressure to refs in the future, or to dictate the media agenda, often to cover up their own side’s shortcomings.
I may be in the minority but I’d prefer it if journos spent their time analysing what happened on the pitch rather than bashing out words about a handful of incidents garnished with quotes that add precious little. There’s a dearth of tactical analysis in most match reports to the extent that you may be told what happened, but rarely given an insight into why it happened.
I agree that a manager will only allow a player who spouts the party line to appear in front of the cameras after a game so we only get a variation of where things went right/wrong with no insight or blame apportioned. God forbid that the said player should add-lib or voice an opinion. Like or loath Roy Keane he could usually be relied on to be his own man and refreshingly tell it like it was, and this surprisingly, under Ferguson. Same with the pretentious Cantona, he was at least interesting if somewhat baffling, in post-match interviews.
As you rightly say, there is usually an agenda to be addressed these days when the slightest deviation from the bland comment can be interpreted in many unintended ways.
Maybe the only real freedom of expression open to players is via social media sites such as Twitter but it will be only a matter of time until that outlet is blocked by cleverly worded contracts.
As for the journalists, they are left to pick over the scraps of comment and rumour while trying not to upset their sources. I’m sure there have been many reporters who have asked the wrong questions of a manager (Ferguson springs to mind again) and never been invited back. They have to walk a fine line between incisive interviews and the boring analysis such as that used by the smug band of ex players on MoftD and I personally think there is over use of analysis especially on TV with multiple camera angles and smart graphics. Happily some things will always be an enigma and defy analysis, how to explain the genius of Messi for instance!
Couldn’t agree more secret fan. The times over the years where journalists were on a trip with us and you felt no pressure to say how you felt because they knew the script. Now, if ever journalists travel with you there is an eerie silence around because you don’t know who to trust or if they are going to stitch you up. Instead of “hear no evil see no evil” its more like “see no evil so lets just make some up anyway”. The majority have made their bed and its now time to sleep in it. It’s about time too.
May I say that there are still some very good journalists out there that will always have my trust and before anything i say goes out I’m sure to receive an email of the piece in advance. That’s how it should be. Gain trust and it the same breath you get more truth.
The golden days of journalism died somewhere between the death of Diana Prince of Wales and the rise of Max Clifford when the rewards of betrayal outbalanced trust.
Since then Modern journalism has scored an almighty own goal with the phone hacking scandal when the very tools of their modern trade, namely sophisticated electronics, left an indelible trail back to conniving press bosses.
In the golden age of journalism ‘a well known personality’ might suffer innuendo knowing that they would be dead before the expose was written. It was left to the public to read between cleverly written lines, to decipher the meaning behind terms such as ‘perennial bachelor’ (homosexual), ‘tired and emotional’ (blind drunk).
This was before the newspaper proprietors did their sums and realised that the income from increased circulation far outweighed the payments made for betrayals and the resulting liable case.
It used to be the case that clever, witty journalists functioned as an extra man in cricket touring sides and on England team busses. As they were part of the late night partying they could be relied upon to write what was expected and keep schtum about any extra curricular activity. The upside to this is the funny, insider books that finally came out, written in a boys-will-be-boys format when a decent time was adjudged to have passed.
That the sports and entertainment world is far less trusting to the point of paranoia is unsurprising, when knowing that every statement can be used out of context and come back to haunt them.
Say nothing or put the headphones on and hear nothing, pretend to see nothing is the way now. The three wise monkeys never gave anything away and ultimately all we ever got from them was exactly what we deserve.
That’s the truth and that is what happened. Just look at the Notw and whats happened to them with there underhand tactics. Some players need journalists others like myself couldn’t care less whether i spoke to them or not. I don’t gain anything from speaking to them and i have never in my career said to one that i need to mention my boot sponsor or any charity i have done work for. I think if push came to shove journalists need footballers more than footballers need journalists. Remember the world cup of 98. The papers were desperate to get David Beckham into the England squad and were blowing smoke up his backside from every angle possible. He then gets into the team and the press are loving it. Then after his sending off the following days papers went as far to put a picture of a dart board with his face in the middle.
Alot of journalists love to build a player up just so they can knock him down. Its bang out of order and one of the many reasons that alot of footballers cannot abide alot of the press. You see its like everything in life. Just like footballers, journalists get tarnished with the same brush. Did at any stage anybody read in the papers over the summer about all of the Wigan players donating their staying up bonus to charity. I very much doubt it because unfortunately that doesn’t sell papers but i bet we all read enough of certain footballers doing certain things that were wrong. One prime example was a few years ago i was out on a night out with friends when i saw a girl lying on the floor who had fallen over and hurt her ankle. I walked over to her and her friend and asked if i could help in anyway. She took one look at me and said your a footballer so your scum, go away. At that point i just walked off infuriated that somebody had categorised me because of what i do for a living. So like i say unfortunately you get tarnished with the same brush as others whether you are a decent person or not and that is the same with journalists.
I think that the mixed zone is a good idea but if a player wants to talk a player will talk if not then hard luck really. I remember hearing a story from a few years ago ago about a journalist covering an England game in a major tournament. One of the Englands players had the game of their life and it was plain for everyone to see but then to his dismay the next day in one of the big papers at the time he was astonished to find that he had got the lowest rating of both sets of players. Bemused by this he managed to get somebody to question the journalist who had made this report. The journalists answer was priceless. He admitted that he only stayed at the game for the first few minutes because he had a dinner appointment that he had to make so decided to make up the ratings on what he believed to be correct. There are certain journalists that i have no hesitation in speaking to and you know they won’t stitch you up but in the past i have been misquoted on certain things so there are also journalists i will steer clear of. Its a matter of trust and if you gain trust you will gain more insight otherwise don’t hold your breath.
So, for a player to not to talk to a journo post-match for, perhaps, 2mins is OK. But to talk to him – as pre-arranged by the club press officer, agent, etc – two days later, on the precise condition of mentioning said player’s latest boot deal, kit sponsor or favoured heart-rendering charity, is absolutely no problem at all? Bit one-sided, isn’t it ?
Anyway, by the way, I have known many journos to turn up late for gms. I have known even more journos to turn up pissed, especially if it is a Sat game and their report is not not needed until Sun for Mon. But plse don’t tell me a journo turned up for a few mins, filed his match ratings and went off to a dinner date. Total bollox.
Yes, there are good and bad apples in the barrel of journos. Like among the players. And apparently harmless quotes can be “spun” into shock-horror-probe stories, sometimes by the sports desks and without the knowledge of the writer until he sees it in the paper the next day. I’ve been there; it is a horrendous experience to see something under your name that bears little resemblance to what you wrote !!
You can trust certain players, you can trust certain journos. The rest, possibly, of both are better to steer clear of !!