Chara's Pacioretty hit means a lot for NHL - and all pro sport

Part 3 of our continuing series: An Australian on Ice Hockey.

Part 1: You make excuses for the Habs

Part 2: NHL All-Star Game shakeup a great idea

Part 4: Canadiens vs. Boston the Austin Powers NHL Playoff matchup

Part 5: The Psychology of Choking

The sickening hit Zdeno Chara delivered to Max Pacioretty last week has escaped further sanction as debate continues over the Bruin defenceman's intent. The Montreal Canadiens, up 4-0 against divisional arch-rival Boston, lost one of their developing stars as 22 year-old Pacioretty was checked face-first into the turnbuckle, an area of the boards present in every hockey arena where the protective glass surrounding the ice takes a right-hand turn to allow for the player benches. The impact caused Pacioretty to suffer a fractured vertebra and severe concussion. Chara's penalty was classified as "major" and resulted in five minutes in the penalty box; it was also revealed late last week that Montreal Police have been asked to investigate if there are grounds for criminal prosecution.

Should Chara have been suspended for his action? Almost every NHL commentator and analyst has suggested the incident was unfortunate rather than malicious and as a result, the 6'9 Slovakian's on-ice conduct shouldn't be subjected to further inquiry. Pacioretty has said he wanted the Bruins' captain suspended but not charged criminally but NHL refereeing experts have trotted out the same platitudes: he's not that kind of player, he was just doing his job, it's hockey - these things happen.

But Chara should be punished. This isn't a Canadiens fan ranting at another perceived injustice at the hands of Boston, but simply an example of hockey becoming a microcosm of life. Chara - admittedly - was doing his job in taking an interference penalty to slow down a Hab break. But he did so clumsily and as a result, a player was seriously injured. Anyone who drives a car must accept the consequences of clumsy driving, be they suspensions, jail time or human costs. Chara, the largest player in the NHL, must accept responsibility for the results of his actions.

Just as when Sidney Crosby received two hits against the Tampa Bay Lightning in a January 5 match which cost him the season , a puck-playing skater has been hurt by the actions of a player who "played the man, not the ball". And as head injuries are forced to the forefront of sports administrators, hits to the head like this must stop or else leagues will find themselves in highly actionable positions.

As concussions become an increasingly large headache - pun intended - for hockey, the game's administrators, coaches and players all need to take actions to decrease the number of head injuries sustained. In all of America's major sports, concussions form a large portion of all injuries suffered and the NFL, NBA and NHL are now approaching the point where a standard concussion protocol is instituted meaning clubs, coaches and players have no say in remaining on the field. In this case, if the right boxes are checked, the concussed player is removed from the game.

This standardised concussion protocol is a big topic for NFL and now NBA franchises. After the spate of highly-rated NHLers being taken out and subsequently missing large chunks of time, it will soon be the same for hockey. It's insufficient to take an incident - or even fighting - and say "That's just hockey". For years, helmet-to-helmet contact has been "just football" and now more and more players, administrators and fans are becoming aware of the serious dangers of repeated blows to the head. The cost, both physical and financial has become too great.

Every single person involved in the NHL has a duty of care to the players. It simply doesn't do to have the game's biggest star MIA for six months (and allegedly considering retirement) because "that's just hockey". No one - fans, players or owners - should be robbed of Sidney Crosby for that long because of an avoidable incident. The same is true of Pacioretty: Canadiens fans shouldn't be wondering if he will ever be the same after his horrible injury.

It behoves the NHL to protect their players - their greatest asset - and as such, hits like those of suffered by Pacioretty and Crosby must stop. Outside the arena, the oft-touted example is that of the road-user: when getting behind the wheel of a car, a motorist takes upon themselves a duty of care for other road users. Should you run a red light with no-one around, chances are you will not be punished. Should the consquences of your running the red light be a car accident and a death, then you find yourself at the mercy of a jury of your peers facing serious driving offences. Sport doesn't happen in a vacuum - it reflects the mores of outside society and as such, on-field violence must be curbed.

When you watch the video again and again, you can tell (1.53) that Zdeno Chara knew exactly where he was on the ice when he shoved Pacioretty. He was aware they were near the turnbuckle and was faced with a decision - do the team thing or pull out and hit later. Either it didn't register or he didn't care that Pacioretty faced serious injury which makes his actions not necessarily malicious but negligent in any duty of care he has to fellow professionals. This lack of care in itself should be a sanctionable offence. Given the anti-concussion ruckus is (understandably) player-driven, it makes no sense at all - and is at worst hypocritical - for an athlete to cry foul about head injuries then go out and forcibly and negligently make contact with an opponent's head.

In Australia, the AFL has put into place a framework for administering justice to players where there is minimal room for personal opinion. Any hit is judged as negligent, reckless or intentional; contact is graded as mild, moderate or severe and the location of contact to the opponent's body is also considered. The severity of the injury isn't taken into consideration per se, but given the impact is acknowledged it falls under that category. Repeat offenders are given a percentage loading for past offences. Although inflexible, it has made every player in the league aware that their actions have consequences and as such, concussions have fallen markedly. It is time that such a framework is instituted in American professional sports before a player is hurt more seriously than even Crosby and Pacioretty.

Proessional sport in the USA needs to raise it's conscious levels about concussions lest they find themselves in a litigious position. The excuse that "hockey/football's always been played that way" is bunk: though the collisions have always been there, the athletes our society now produces are a relatively novel phenomenon and the athlete/collision combination (generally) causes greater damage than in days past. If this is not corrected, then sport will suffer due to the lack of stars available.

Mohamed Bin Hammam to challenge Blatter's Presidency?

It was Douglas Adams in The Restaurant at the End of the Universe who said "One of the many major problems with governing people is that of whom you get to do it; or rather of who manages to get people to let them do it to them: It is a well known fact, that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it. Anyone who is capable of getting themselves into a position of power should on no account be allowed to do the job". It could be said that this is very much the case with the FIFA presidency.

Sepp "Bellend" (link) Blatter has governed FIFA with the opposite of aplomb for thirteen years. During this time, he's been able to say that he pushed for - and got - World Cups in Africa, the Middle East and Russia. He has also implemented smaller strides - shuffles? - forward, namely the recent banning of snoods. His tenure, which has so far coincided with the rise of Hawkeye technology and a faster-paced sport, will also be noted for his hesitancy in employing those technological advances in world football.

Perhaps he will be most remembered as the man who helmed an organisation unable or unwilling to deal with probable corrupt elements within its own ranks. His political legacy will be masked by his occasional monstrous gaffes, such as his comments for homosexual men to refrain from sex during the 2022 Cup in Qatar and accepting the Liberian Humane Order of African Redemption from dictator Charles Taylor. Sepp Blatter's no angel - he may even define his nickname and appears to the general populace as a power-mad, publicity-hungry buffoon. His reign isn't most notable for what he has done, but for what he has failed to achieve.

And he has a challenger for the presidency of FIFA, Asian Football Confederation President Mohamed Bin Hammam. The Qatari is a member of FIFA's 24-man Executive Committee and is widely expected to announce his intentions within the next ten days. The elections are held in Zurich over 31st May and 1st June and Bin Hammam - who has made noises about running for over a year - must surely both disappoint and scare Blatter after what can only be described as a frustrating past four years for football's tallest poppy.

Both men were seen as crucial figures in Qatar's successful World Cup bid in November, the potential challenger for his role as bid champion and the incumbent for his hearty endorsement. This was a curious move by the President given his options and was seen by skeptics and neutrals alike as an attempt to mollify Bin Hammam and his Asian brethren. In many ways, Qatar's bid could end up facing more scrutiny as a result of perhaps one more ham-fisted action from one of the world's most influential men - not an election promise per se, but a pre-election payoff to a potential opponent.

But let's not say categorically that Bin Hammam is a more appropriate choice to head football's governing body than Sepp. It's also no fait d'accompli that Blatter loses the election - Bin Hammam apparently seems confident of backing from Asia, America and Africa but, crucially, less so of European support. Just the simple fact that he does not have the unwavering support of the football world appears to unnerve Blatter. It should hardly come as a surprise.

According to Adams, those who seek to rule are the least suited to doing so. This creates a philosophy which questions the morals and motivation of every politician, which is both good and appropriate. Politicians and governments need to be questioned - not because their ideals aren't right (though occasionally this may be the case) but because their practices or actions are ineffective. Questions are good because questions (should) beget answers.

For too many years, FIFA has been hamstrung by allegations of conceit, corruption and vote-buying. Change must take place - under Blatter or Bin Hammam.

Cricket: Jane Austen's World Cup

by Ben Roberts

For Anita, a Jane Austen lover and wife of a cricket tragic.

It is often said that sporting teams will take on individual characteristics that differentiate them from others. Describing these characteristics need not be limited merely to the mundanely clichéd terms of sport; they can come from the literary world.

Lying in bed thinking of how best to describe each of our World Cup challengers I realised how each of them fit seamlessly (in my own mind) into Jane Austen’s Victorian tale of Pride & Prejudice. See below, team’s are in alphabetical order.

Australia – Lydia Bennett: Gets what they desire in the end, however do not please others with the manner in which they do so, including their own ‘family’.

Bangladesh – Mr Bennett: Have some talent within them but are rarely taken seriously.

Canada & Kenya – The Bingley Sisters: Serve no purpose in the tournament except to ruin the future ambitions of Ireland.

England – Elizabeth Bennett: Like Lizzy, the English supporter lives a life of undue frustration and complication.

Ireland – Jane Bennett: With their coloured hair and pure joy in victory they are the simple souls of this competition.

India – Mr Wickham: Describe their motives as being pure however are believed by many to just be in it for the money.

Netherlands – Mr Collins: Existence is based purely on the patronage of one individual.

New Zealand – Mary Bennett: The poorer sibling of many, they have little talent but try hard.

Pakistan – Mrs Bennett: Can hold it together for short periods of time but likely to collapse into tantrum at any moment.

South Africa – Mr Darcy: The look and resource of a champion team however regularly cock it up at inappropriate moments.

Sri Lanka – Mr Bingley: Talent and riches and a zest for the game.

West Indies – Charlotte Lucas: Well past their glory years now, will settle for anything resembling success.

Zimbabwe – Lady Catherine de Burgh: More a reflection on the administrative leader of Zimbabwean cricket, a dictatorial and manipulative individual only concerned about their own end.

Like Austen’s tale we already seen the Netherlands bother England with more attention than one would feel comfortable about, and seemingly Ireland have a greater ability to woo victory than the English.

Do these undoubted parallels mean that England and South Africa or Ireland and Sri Lanka will be tied together at the end of the story...I mean tournament? Or will Australia and India elope in the final act of debauchery? This story is still to be written.

Getting a move on

by columnist Ben Roberts

It will soon be high time for Ricky Ponting to hang up the boots and retire his post as Australian captain. As is history's way it probably will take some time before the public feel any warmth in the memory of his leadership. But Ponting has presided over a team that can lay claim to continuing to propagate a modern scourge on the game of cricket.

At the conclusion to the 1995-96 Australian summer most cricket journalists had decided to wag a finger at least once at the conduct of the Sri Lankan team under their less than popular captain Arjuna Ranatunga. Great consternation was directed toward the time wasting activities of the tourists and their skipper. Of particular note seemed to be what were termed the 'Running men'. These members of the touring squad showed more potential as 400 metre runners than as cricketers as after each over they dutifully sprinted to the wicket holding gloves or drinks. They held up the play as they delivered a pearl of Ranatunga's wisdom (he was unlikely to run it out himself) and then ran off.

As I wrote that last paragraph the wave of hypocrisy that enveloped me was almost unbearable. I have just witnessed a summer of international cricket where the Australian team were able to lower the bar even further in falling behind over rates. The primary crime was exactly the same as the Sri Lankans 15 years previously. Constantly we witnessed 12^th men running drinks out onto the field at every available opportunity; and with the modern game now incorporating pauses while umpiring decisions are scrutinised by video, the opportunities have increased.

With the Australian cricketing summer drawing to a close, recently I took the opportunity to witness a final day of first-class cricket before the long winter ahead. Even on a coolish March day, where most players saw fit to wear sleeveless sweaters, somehow it was imperative that drinks were delivered to the batsman constantly. I am someone who does promote that the stereotypical alpha male does more damage than good as a role model, but really chaps it is time to harden up. The most humourous irony in it all is that it is guaranteed that five minutes prior to a scheduled break in play the fielders will be running around desperate to squeeze an extra over in, when in the past two hours most of the spectators could have found an extra five!

Time wasting is not limited to the proliferation of refreshment breaks. Captaincy standards have slipped also. Andrew Strauss may have severely out-thought his opposite numbers during the Ashes series, but in the one day matches his reactive captaincy belied someone having absolutely no idea what to do. During the summer I had the pleasure of watching Australia chase down 294 and Shane Watson score 161 not out. Strauss' field changes were overly regular and generally too late. Having seen Watson club a ball to a particular part of the field you could be sure that prior to the next ball an adjustment would be made in the field and a man placed in that exact spot. Despite displaying no faith at all in his bowlers, Strauss holding all things equal every ball only succeeded in holding up the game further.

It never used to be like this. The stories of play during the first half of the 20^th century indicated feats of performance and stamina that would simply be impossible to replicate based upon the terrible habits of our international cricket teams. So much different was it that during the early years of Sir Donald Bradman's career test matches played in England were strictly contested over three days only (four at a pinch). Experienced from a diet of wall to wall cricket during county seasons this was nothing to the English. (The Australian's would have to have adjusted from their own experience of timeless tests at home.)

The mention of Bradman led me to search out the records of one of his most famous innings as proof that cricket could be played at a far brisker rate. On the 1930 tour he of course scored the then world record innings of 334 – 309 of them coming during one days play at Leeds. Apart from the obvious need to return the balls from the boundary during the day that adds to time taken, no doubt with such a feat of scoring many standing ovations were given to the Don. That being said he would have simply doffed his cap raised his bat before continuing unlike the modern player who generally falls just short of a full lap of honour before passionately embracing at least on piece of his cricketing equipment.

Having delved into the record books I found that the first day had Bradman not out on his phenomenal score of 309 and the Australian on a huge total of 458 for 3. In these days matches were played to time so the recording of the number of overs bowled in days play did not occur, therefore we must do some rudimentary calculation to work out a rough estimate. On day two of the match we know Australia threw the bat and were dismissed for 566 in time enough for Hobbs and Sutcliffe to have taken England to 17 without loss by the lunch break. The total amount of overs (6 ball) that Australia faced in their innings was 168, therefore even disregarding the short period of English batting we can reasonably estimate that Australia faced near enough to 43 overs a session and therefore 129 overs on the first day!

Over rates have been a problem since the days of the four pronged 1980's West Indian pace attacks, but for them so dominant were they that they didn't require the extra time to roll through the opposition. It is an affront to spectators both live and through media alike that they are forced constantly to pay higher prices for the spectacle yet are constantly delivered less. The 1930 test match was of a different era and it would be unlikely to be easily replicated today, but it is by no means unreasonable to expect that teams should be able to easily deliver 90 overs in a day of test cricket and 100 in a limited over fixture.

World Cup Cricket: The time for Ireland to step up has come

In their recent appearances at the World Cup, Ireland's results have belied their status as one of cricket's "minnows". In 2007 in the Caribbean they infamously defeated Pakistan, tied with Zimbabwe and triumphed over Bangladesh; this tournament they've already upset heavyweights England behind a whirlwind middle-order display and their group stage efforts are only just half completed. There's plenty good argument that they should maintain full ODI status once this Cup concludes. Credit where credit is due - they've earned their stripes and deserve to reap the benefits.

When they defeated arch rivals England last week, Ireland proved themselves once and for all the strongest of the ICC's affiliate nations. Time and again they've defended their status as the strongest paupers around and the ICC should recognise now that their setup, fraught and import-dependent as it is, is strong enough to challenge superior programmes. They may not necessarily win, but that's merely an inconsequential detail: in any fixture between a top-five cricket nation and a bottom-five side the result is a near certainty anyway. Ireland have the same odds of upsetting Australia in Australia as Bangladesh; in neutral fixtures they may have a better chance of a masterminding a boilover.

They are themselves capable of playing some very good cricket and outmatch their affiliate counterparts by some considerable distance. Some would suggest that an Irish side would further water down international competition, but in truth if these nations are allowed to compete at the World Cup then the competition is weakened enough already. By admitting unready nations to these tournaments, the ICC has made a rod for its own back: only Ireland of the affiliates (and Kenya four years before) have announced their presence with any kind of definitive display.

Bangladesh, the last country admitted permanently to the ICC brethren, provides the best precedent for the proescution. Before their happy 2007 World Cup campaign, their cricketing highlight came on a damp day in the south of England when Mushrafe Mortaza (can someone tell me why he wasn't selected for this event?) led them to a win over the 2005 Australian Ashes tourists in a triangular ODI series. With their Kevin O'Brien-inspired big win last week, Ireland have surpassed this achievement already. The Tigers are the archetypal case of "failure to thrive" and mimic the Zimbabwe teams of the mid-90s, inconsistent sides with a few good players.

The largest obstacle Ireland's path is the lack of a top-flight domestic competition. In football, FIFA requires any World Cup hosts to have a top level home league; the ICC similarly looks not just at results but at grass-roots development. Unfortunately for Ireland, their best players - Eoin Morgan and Ed Joyce, most prominently - are attracted to the county circuit and thus the country risks that these stars will be lost to the lure of Test cricket. This talent drain, combined with a former reliance on expats like Trent Johnston and Jeremy Bray, suggests Ireland are temporarily punching above their weight and so are likely to be drawn back into the Affiliate pack. A grand total of only thirteen fully professional Irish cricketers also doesn't bode well for promotion.

Should Ireland be serious about entering the ODI circuit as a full member, junior development must be their first priority. Ireland has positives in achieving this: a European home base and administration small enough to be unhampered by bureaucracy. Perhaps the country's greatest cricket advantage derives from its great weakness: proximity to England. Where Bangladesh has enough cricketers to stock a first-class system, Ireland does not, meaning elite Irish players need to find competition on distant shores. The best way of ensuring an evolving junior programme comes through the excitement bred by major competitions. Placing an Ireland side in the County Championship could nurture a breeding ground for young Irish cricketers and provide a pathway for their best talents. It could also serve as a developmental yardstick, allowing them (and the ICC) to see how much the sport had grown.

In the most brutally honest terms, Ireland aren't going to win the World Cup any time soon, but so what? When the ICC allows a country full status, it isn't an admission that the country is ready to actually compete. Bangladesh haven't thrilled anyone with their performances on the world stage; neither has Zimbabwe, despite short periods of improved play; Sri Lanka were effectively patsies until their improbable 1996 World Cup triumph - the major nations' whipping boy for nearly twenty years. This is a neat, but flawed comparison as in those countries cricket isn't the underground sport it is in Ireland. However, the fact remains that the ineffective administration shown by Bangladesh over the past ten years means there's severe doubt as to Bangladesh ability to ever field a threatening side. As painful as it is, Bangladesh and Zimbabwe just make up numbers.

Admittedly this is a harsh assessment of both Zimbabwe and Bangladesh and doesn't take into account the sociological, political and geographical unrest suffered by both nations over the past decades. Those factors - and Ireland's insolvency - contribute to a changing cricket world, one where a two-tier system is almost irrevocably in place. Cricket, whether we like it or not, is now a divided across "have" and "have not" lines": and if Ireland wants to join the lower tier, then why stop them?

BYU shows stones in dealing with Brandon Davies dilemma

NCAA Final-Four hopefuls Brigham Young University (BYU) last week caused sensation by suspending their most effective basketball forward Brandon Davies for failing to comply with the school's honour code. The code, which is based on Mormon beliefs and signed by every student attending the private school, states the student will be honest; chaste; law abiding; use clean language; a regular churchgoer; comply to dress standards; abstain from alcohol, nicotine, coffee and tea; and encourage others in maintaining their commitment to the code. By enforcing their rules, BYU may have derailed their team's chances of holding aloft the NCAA Championship this year. Agree with their decision or not, it's a high price to pay for principle.

But a fair one? Since their decision a week ago, the Cougars have slumped to an 18-point defeat to New Mexico but remain adamant their decision was correct. Under star guard Jimmer Fredette, the Cougars are playing out probably the best basketball season in their history - they're 27-3 - and had won seventeen of their last eighteen encounters before their slip at New Mexico. Davies was a key component of that as he provided interior defence, rebounding and inside scoring to complement Fredette's outside mojo.

The university, owned by the Church of Latter Day Saints, is a big college programme both in football and basketball, with alumni such as quarterback Steve Young, basketballers Shawn Bradley and Danny Ainge, politician Mitt Romney, author Stephanie Meyer and actor Aaron Eckhart. By effectively dismissing their second best player, the college's powers-that-be have decided that the infraction committed by Davies - appparently consensual sex with his girlfriend - was too great to be punished only with probation or a reprimand. A suspension - potentially a long one, given BYU's title chances - was considered the most appropriate penalty; a penalty which also affects the entire team.

Outcry has come from many and varied sources. New York Knicks forward Amar'e Stoudemire raged on his Twitter feed, later retracting his statements, while Tim Tebow suggested punishment was justifiable under the terms of the code, but probably harsh. Brandon Davies has understandably remained silent. Media sources seem to acknowledge BYU were well within their rights to take the actions they did and also that, in some ways, it speaks positively, rather than negatively, of the college given their insistence on the importance of character.

That's not to say that Brandon Davies has no, or weak, character but the bare truth is he knew the risks inherent in his actions. On signing the code, he accepted that should he not fulfill his side of the contract he would be penalised no matter how large or small his infraction. His "crime", it seems, is regarded as serious by university bigwigs; it should be thought of as unfortunate and understandable. However, that an act is deemed understandable and unfortunate doesn't mean punishment is undeserved.

Little has been said about the effect on the player under scrutiny. He's obviously a very talented basketballer and his error has been punished, probably severely. Hopefully he will rebound (no pun intended) and be allowed to complete his education at the Utah-based school when his case goes to a tribunal at a later date. In all likelihood, he will come back a wiser man: in life - especially in business - there are consequences for a breach of contract. He understands this now more than ever. And more than most.

As ESPN's Chris Broussard has said, it's refreshing to see a big college program value its principles more highly than it does wins. It's something very rare in college sport these days as evidenced by the number of colleges sanctioned for recruiting infractions. As in amateur sport, college athletes aren't paid but there are creative ways of roaming the grey area between legal and illegal which are exploited by schools. BYU have voluntarily sanctioned their own man for his transgression, allowing us to read their priorities as paramount. This was an in-house matter, not leaked to the press. No-one needed know about it: jeopardising their title chances could wait or be conveniently ignored. Because they chose to address it deftly, BYU should be congratulated even as many alumni begin to cry into their beverages - alcoholic, caffeinated or not - at the prospect of a lost title.

Ryan Giggs' Twenty United Years, Part 2

In Part One of our special feature on United stalwart Ryan Giggs’ Red Devils’ tenure, we examined the football landscape when Giggs made his Man U bow twenty years ago. More telling perhaps is a birds-eye view of how the world was at that time.

In those twenty years - 7305 days - he’s seen a lot:

Two weeks before that substitute’s turn against Everton, US-led troops invaded Iraq in Operation Desert Storm. The first Gulf War was over in 100 hours as President George Bush chose to ignore advice from several senior advisors; the Welshman then saw history repeat twelve years later. Since that first war, Giggs has outstayed three US Presidents: Bush, Bill Clinton and Bush Jr. The Prime Minister of England was also a newbie – John Major, who had ended eleven years of Thatcherdom in the same month Giggs turned professional, November 1990. Wales’ favourite son has seen off four British PMs and five Australian.

Even more astonishingly the USSR was still a viable (barely) entity when Giggs’ debut came. Only five-and-a-bit months later in August, the country broke up after a failed military coup. The Ukraine and Belarus were first out the Union’s door; even United’s recent European Super Cup opponents changed their name from Zenit Leningrad to Zenit St Petersburg as their home city reverted to its original name after seventy-odd years of communist rule.

Perhaps the incident with the most staying power from March 1991 followed the cosmic ripples emanating from Giggs’ debut; it occurred the following day in Los Angeles as LAPD officers were filmed beating black motorist Rodney King which caused communal uproar and several high-profile damages claims. Magic Johnson also made the headlines for admitting in November that he was HIV positive. If you wanted to play FIFA or Football Manager, you’d have to do it on the state-of-the-art Super Nintendo Entertainment System. And the all time clue to let you know how far back in time we’ve traveled: Mike Tyson, the man for whom the Tyson Zone is named, was arrested for the first time, charged with raping a Miss America contestant.

Other debutants that year included TV’s Home Improvement, movies Silence of the Lambs and Thelma and Louise; the music world rocked to Pearl Jam’s Ten, U2’s Achtung Baby, Metallica’s eponymous release and the last of Michael Jackson’s truly great albums, Dangerous. The world mourned the passing of Michael Landon, Gene Roddenberry, Stan Getz, Dame Margot Fonteyn, Frank Capra, Freddie Mercury, Doctor Seuss and Miles Davis.

Real Madrid starlet Sergio Canales was born only six weeks before Giggs first turned out for the Red Devils and it’s an amusing thought that he was wearing (admittedly awful 1991-style) United kits before Danny Welbeck and Federico Macheda were born – shortly after Germany’s 1990 World Cup win. He’s been a professional for over twenty years, seen five FIFA World Cups in that time and not played at any of them, perhaps the greatest injustice he’s ever been dealt Eleven of his first-team comrades this year were three years of age or less.

Ryan Giggs has outlasted all but Sir Alex during his time at United. His success and longevity due mostly to his special blend of skill, pace, resistance to injury and focused evolution. As his pace has declined he’s moved from the flanks into the centre of the park and has, for the past three-plus seasons, defined the role of “midfield schemer”. More than anything else, you get the feeling Giggs feels privileged to be playing football this late in his career, especially for a club that means so much to him.

Congratulations, Ryan Giggs. United, and football, are glad that you’re going around for season twenty-one next term. We hope also that there’s a twenty-second.

Announcement from Balanced Sports

Hi all. Matthew Wood here, the (alleged) brains behind Balanced Sports. We've been doing this for some time now and we'd like to thank you for taking the time to listen/read what we've got to say.

We'd like to ask that if you enjoy our analysis, please take the time to follow us. You can do so either by clicking the "Follow" button below the list of posts and "About Us" on the right, or by signing up for email updates, which sends the day's posts to you in one easily manageable email. No posts, no email.

Both are absolutely secure so you won't be spammed either - you'll just get our latest sports opinion sent straight to your inbox or to your internet reader.

Thanks again for visiting. We hope to see you here again soon.

Ryan Giggs: Twenty United Years

During their 2-1 loss to Chelsea on Wednesday, Ryan Giggs achieved the incredible feat of playing for Manchester United for twenty years. And when he appeared to a generous ovation from the substitute's bench, Giggs equalled footballing immortal Bobby Charlton's United appearances record with 606. Think about that: twenty years! 133 teammates, ranging from the very best (Eric Cantona) to the utterly ineffective (David Healy). Forty -eight times he's been on the podium as a trophy winner or runner-up. That's just silly - and a convincing case could be made that he's football's all-time winningest player.

On a personal note, he's been my favourite player ever since that first season where United finished sixth in the old First Division. I'd only recently decided to follow football and the first game televised after that decision was a United fixture - I wish I could remember the game, but for the life of me I can't - so I followed Man U. Mark Hughes, Bryan Robson and Denis Irwin were the stars of that era but, in my first early teenage rebellion, I decided my favourite player was a young guy who showed flashes down the left, the most prominent a back-heel to Hughes just outside the box which led to a "Sparky" score. It was Giggs. 

It can't have been his debut as United lost that 2 - 0 to Everton, but it was one of his earliest appearances for the club. For the entire twenty years I've followed soccer, Ryan Giggs and Sir Alex Ferguson have accompanied me.

After some thoroughly unexhaustive but very fun research, that season 1990-91 can show just how different football is today and the changes in leagues that Giggs' career has endured and outlasted.

In that first season United won the European Cup Winners' Cup, a trophy since replaced by the Champions' League. First Division clubs included Crystal Palace (who finished third in their highest league position ever), now non-league Luton and the now defunct Wimbledon finished one spot below United in seventh. Now-Premiership clubs Fulham, Wigan, Stoke and Birmingham City sat in the lower reaches of Division 3, a league won by Cambridge City. The largest raise in club stature since that time, however, belongs rather unsurprisingly to Blackpool who finished the season fifth in Division 4. Wimbledon notwithstanding, Luton's demise is the greatest fall.

Notable debutants included Giggs, Watford's David James, Liverpool's Steve McManaman, Forest's Roy Keane, Palace's Gareth Southgate and another man to make the United flanks his own, Andrei Kanchelskis. Retirements included former United man Norman Whiteside and Liverpool stalwart Alan Hansen. The football world mourned (?) the passing of Robin Friday when the greatest non-league footballer ever died of a heart attack at 38. Liverpool were re-admitted to European competition after the Heysel Disaster and in remarkable symmetry, only eight days prior to Giggs' debut, Kenny Dalglish resigned as the Scousers' manager. That he is at the helm of the Merseysiders and opposes Sir Alex Ferguson seems very apt.

Stay tuned, as part two of our series on Ryan Giggs' twentieth year in the Manchester United first team will be published in coming days.

Image courtesy: http://www.whoateallthepies.com

Steven Davies coming out a badge of courage

Steven Davies' decision to come out of the closet in a recent interview with the English newspaper The Daily Telegraph is perhaps the most important sports story of the year so far. It may even retain that title throughout 2011. Hopefully it will help to dispel an aura of homophobia that surrounds sports like low cloud. The first openly gay international cricketer, Davies should be congratulated for his courage. Given the machismo of sport - and sadly, much of society - which looks down on homosexuality, his decision can't have been an easy one and may earn him unwarranted abuse from bigoted fans. It should also draw him plaudits for honesty and strength.

The list of openly gay professional athletes is not a long one. In Australia, the first openly gay big-name professional sportsman was Ian Roberts of South Sydney, Manly and North Queensland who revealed his sexual preference in 1995. Since then, the Australian list has been a slim one: our most visible "out" athletes now include Roberts, beach volleyballer Natalie Cook and 2008 Olympic gold medallist Matthew Mitcham, one of only eleven openly gay male athletes - of nearly eleven thousand males - at those games.

Many - most - sports have a lot to learn when it comes to dealing with bigotry. The horror stories still remain of Justin Fashanu, whose career and then life were shattered by coming out in 1990. His former manager, Brian Clough, with whom Fashanu butted heads at Nottingham Forest over football and lifestyle differences, has admitted that his treatment of football's only openly gay player was his greatest regret. Fashanu, who took his own life after a controversy in America in 1998, is remembered by The Justin Campaign (http://www.thejustincampaign.com/), formed to oppose homophobia in football and thus aiming to prevent any possible repeat occurrences. Fashanu' story probably dwells heavily and understandably in the minds of closeted homosexual footballers.

Sepp "Bellend" Blatter recently underlined the need for organisations such as The Justin Campaign and offended many with his recent suggestions that gay men "refrain" from sexual activities during the 2022 Qatar World Cup. That gaffe came from the head of one of the most powerful organisations on Earth, albeit a head with a large and misshapen mouth from repeated attempts at swallowing his own foot.

In America, the story isn't much different. Former NBA Centre John Amaechi wrote in his autobiography that his coach in Utah, Jerry Sloan, suspected his sexual preference and bullied him for it. Amaechi, like Fashanu and Davies, stands alone as the only gay player to come out from his sport's top level.

Homosexuality has been wrongly perceived, in male environments especially, as a threat or as a disease. Both perceptions are majorly flawed but the stigma attached to being gay refuses to go away. Davies' example should be lauded as another step forward, small but significant, against bigotry in sport. Like all battles, this war will be made up of one skirmish after another: for every Steve Davies there will be a Tim Hardaway. Victimisation has no place in sport or life, whether it be against race, colour, religion or sexuality. It is not only the actions of people like Davies, Amaechi & Mitcham who will change the way homosexuality is viewed, but the actions of society at large.