RIP Jonah Lomu

At the mere age of 40, the world sadly said goodbye to the rugby giant – in so many ways – that was Jonah Lomu this week, who unforgettably introduced himself to the rugby and sporting world at the 1995 Rugby World Cup, destroying defences with astonishing displays of pace, balance, acceleration and power. A natural athleticism and physique that set the template for today’s muscle-bound, gym-dwelling, supplement guzzling professionals 20 years later. He’s probably not the greatest rugby or even All Black player ever, but nobody has created such an impact in the sport before or since. RIP Jonah, you’ll never be forgotten.

And in case you can’t remember or ever wondered what the fuss is all about, click here to see that ‘introduction’ once again.

Rugby World Cup 2015 – who should be hosting games?

After being fortunate enough to ensnare tickets for the opening match of the 2015 Rugby World Cup at Twickenham, and feasting on the near wall-to-wall ITV coverage from the opening weekend of games, I feel like a spoilt child at Christmas were I genuinely feel this could be the best ever tournament. But there are two things about the stadia being used which slightly rankle.

Firstly, this is supposed to be a World Cup hosted in England, probably the world’s richest rugby nation blessed with a plethora of international-standard rugby (union and league) and football stadia, so why is Cardiff’s Millennium stadium being used? Nobody doubts its unique atmosphere and size, but it gifts Wales an unfair advantage of two home games, when they should be on the same level playing field as every other nation, bar the hosts England. As I’m sure Scotland and Ireland would love the opportunity to play two pool games at Murrayfield and Croke Park respectively.

And this leads directly into my second point, about the paltry number of RWC 2015 games being shared with, hosted by and played in the North of England. Beyond the Midland counties, a mere six games from 48 are being played in the ‘North’ – at Elland Road in Leeds, the Manchester City Stadium and St James’ Park in Newcastle. Whilst the organisers are busy gifting six matches to the Millennium stadium, it’s frankly a disgraceful number to reward sporting fans with in the North of the country and an almost moronic missed opportunity to grow the sport beyond its traditional Southern strongholds. If the RFU and tournament organisers were really serious about ‘growing’ the sport, spreading the rugby gospel and attracting new fans, they’d forget about the pound signs associated with filling the Millennium stadium and instead focus on giving the people of Northern England a greater slice of the tournament.

Does Ched Evans realise playing professional football is a privilege, not a right?

After wanting the dust to settle from Oldham’s aborted and ill-advised attempt to sign the convicted rapist Ched Evans before writing this, his legal team has today submitted ‘fresh evidence’ in their latest bid to get his conviction overturned. Which has compelled me to pipe up on this issue, where it seems Evans, his legal team and (unsurprisingly) members of the football community still haven’t grasped the full ramifications of the crime he’s been convicted for and why there is such fierce opposition to him returning to the professional ranks.

Whilst the continued lack of a moral barometer in football allowed both Sheffield United and Oldham to consider re-signing Evans, the reality that supporters or sympathisers of Evans are choosing to ignore is that playing professional is a privilege, and not a right, as they would have you think. A privilege – besides the wages across the country’s top four divisions which I can bet are well above the current average UK annual salary of £26,500 – that comes with a high-profile, public-facing responsibility of being a role model who represents clubs, communities, towns, cities, years of history, countries (Wales in the case of Evans), our national game, sponsors and professional sport as a whole.

Yes, having served (only half of) his sentence, Evans has every right to pursue new employment and move forward with his life without prejudice. The old adage says everyone deserves a second chance. But that employment does not have to be professional football, a job that comes with a profile, lifestyle, responsibility and higher-than-average wages that only a lucky view will ever enjoy. Put another way, if a recognisable or high-profile figure such as an MP, television presenter or company CEO were convicted of the same crime as Evans, would they even be allowed to entertain the thought of returning to that same position or holding public office?

Especially, after seemingly showing no signs of remorse or regret until issuing a carefully worded and belated apology to their victim? (In the wake of public pressure deterring Oldham from signing Evans).

Because that in effect is what football would be condoning if Evans were to return to its paid ranks – unless his conviction is overturned.

Only performances should get Sam Burgess into the England team, not his reputation

After completing only his seventh game of rugby union last week since converting from rugby league in November, Sam Burgess’ club coach Mike Ford is already touting him for international recognition with the England Saxons ‘A’ team . A wildly premature suggestion considering Burgess’ limited impact and game time so far and England’s failed history of fast-tracking rugby league stars into the union national team, based on reputation and hefty investment from the RFU – not performances.

Burgess was undoubtedly a superstar of rugby league, earning the hard won respect of Australia’s rugby league fans, media and players during his four years with the South Sydney Rabbitohs, culminating in leading the club to its first Championship in 43 years with a Man-of-the-Match performance in November’s Grand Final. His arrival in rugby union has understandably sent ripples of excitement through the sport but despite his potential, Burgess needs to learn and adapt to a new game, new positions and new rules, and most importantly, produce performances that earn him the right to play for England, the same as everyone else.

I personally 100% want Burgess to succeed, fulfill his undoubted potential and flourish in the sport. Yet, for all Mike Ford’s eulogies talking up of only a handful of appearances, he is not yet an international rugby union player. The fact Jason Robinson, with the slight exception of Chris Ashton, has been the only recent unequivocal international cross-code success in this country, only serves to highlight the difficulty of picking up and excelling in the 15-man game, and the RFU’s failed policy of parachuting league stars into the international arena. The failed list of Henry Paul, Shontayne Hape, Barrie-Jon Mather, Andy Farrell, Lee Smith, Lesley Vainikolo, Joel Tomkins and Chev Walker (plus the high-profile example of Wales’ Iestyn Harris) should temper any thoughts that Burgess will automatically make the same transition as Sonny Bill Williams and Israel Folau have for New Zealand and Australia respectively.

Lancaster should only pick Burgess if and when he is truly ready, has an obvious position and is playing well enough with Bath. If not, experience shows the danger is that both Burgess and the England team could ultimately suffer.

Whether Gerrard is jumping ship or has been pushed, Liverpool still can’t afford to lose him

As a Liverpool fan, the surprising news of Steven Gerrard’s (premature) departure was certainly not the New Years gift I was hoping for. For the second half of the season, an error free Simon Mignolet or an injury free Daniel Sturridge was closer to what I had in mind. But after cutting through the crimson waves of emotion, sadness, sentiment and appreciation that have greeted Gerrard’s announcement to seek pastures new, despite advancing years and the inevitable restriction of his abilities, this season – with the possible exception of Raheem Sterling – he is once again proving to be Liverpool’s best player. And Liverpool can ill afford to let him leave and should have done more to keep him.

At the time of writing, his match-winning brace against AFC Wimbledon has put Liverpool into the next round of the FA Cup taking him three goals clear as the club’s top scorer this season. His fourth goal in two games as manager Brendan Rodgers has finally realised the most effective place to deploy his aging skipper is higher up the pitch – as Rafa Benitez first did – where his in still-in-tact match-winning thrusts are best utilised.

This is surely why Brendan Rodgers – as big a Gerrard fan as any of his previous managers at Anfield – wants to measure his game time so that he’s available for the key battles. A strategy, despite Gerrard’s apparent fear of becoming a ‘squad player’, that has seen Anfield’s most celebrated no.8 once again be amongst the team’s top league starters this term. Against the backdrop of Frank Lampard’s continued excellence at Man City after being discarded by Chelsea, it beggars belief that Gerrard is even being allowed to leave, before you even consider how much experience and know how would be lost. Amidst the accolades and eulogies, the PR spin from Gerrard and Liverpool is clouding whether he has jumped, is being pushed or has simply misinterpreted Rodgers wanting to protect his 34 year old legs. But what is clear is that even after 17 years of distinguished service and excellence, this Liverpool side will be a significantly lesser team without Gerrard in it.

The time has come for Stuart Lancaster’s England team to stand up

English rugby (the team, management and fans alike) would have breathed a collective sigh of relief, tinged with a little satisfaction no doubt, after yesterday’s 26-17 victory over Australia. A win in England’s last game of the year that eases pressure on Stuart Lancaster as the first serious questions of his position as England’s head coach were being asked after five consecutive test defeats at the hands of New Zealand and South Africa. A win serving a welcome reminder that England are able to put Southern Hemisphere opposition under St George’s broadsword, even if the Wallabies are the weakest of the bunch.

In the cold light of day, criticism after those five straight losses has been short-sighted as England could and possibly should have won more than one of those contests, comfortably competitive in each (as they have been throughout Lancaster’s reign) and that in spite of consistently missing a host of front line players through injury (another issue altogether). Lancaster’s record of W3 D1 L10 against rugby union’s traditional ‘Big Three’ is hardly a disgrace (a certain Warren G would kill for that record) and the national team is clearly in a more unified and healthier position under his guidance than it ever was under Martin Johnson’s tenure.

But notwithstanding the aforementioned injuries and the team’s marked improvement over the past three years, the time has come for Lancaster to stop hiding behind the mantra of calling this a ‘team of youngsters and pups’ and for him to start settling on players and consistent style of play. England’s increase in player depth has given him a greater quality of options than his recent predecessors but has also seen many misguided experiments (Courtney Lawes at blind-side flanker, Tom Wood at No.8 and Manu Tuilagi on the wing are a few examples with the consequence being that in many positions Lancaster is still no closer to learning which players and combinations can provide a winning formula. Inconsistent and muddled team selection has started to creep in; poor decision making and game awareness continues to rankle; and the age-old reliance on England’s three pillars of Scrum, Lineout and Maul when under pressure has seen the team’s progress stall and even regress since this year’s Six Nations.

But in a home World Cup year, whatever XV takes to the field in games in 2015, the performances need to indicate that Lancaster is leading them in the right direction.

Nobody wins when sports stars attack those they acheive success with

Each year brings yet another revealing-must-have-warts and all autobiography from a sporting icon either retired, soon to pack it all in or in the cases of Messers Beckham and Owen, still safely in mid-career (cashing in whilst their celebrity stock is high).  Last year it was football’s ‘Sir Alex’ and this year it is cricket’s ‘KP’, two men united by their almost unparalleled success, forthright opinions, unshakable self-belief in their ability, and confidence bordering on (and sometimes crossing into) the arrogant. So it comes as no surprise that both has upset, and continues to rile, former colleagues, friends and team-mates as they re-count past glories, victories and defeats.

What is surprising and slightly saddening is that the mud-slinging is from two men who both played instrumental roles in periods of uncharted success for Manchester United and the England cricket team respectively. Nobody is naive enough to believe that in every team, everyone is best friends, whistling in the shower, holding hands and singing ABBA songs to one another. Like any successful organisation – in fact, ANY organisation – not everyone will see eye to eye. But whether it’s the pursuit of silverware and trophies, or promotion and pay-rises, human beings have long ago realised the best teams / workforces are ones that pull in the same direction.

However true or accurate their accounts actually are, they only serve to cheapen and tarnish the all-conquering sides they were both integral to. Sports men and women involved in elite sport are incredibly driven souls and the pursuit of success requires that few prisoners be taken and that quarters are not often given, but it shouldn’t mean we then attack and even humiliate those who’ve sweated blood to help us achieve success. Because then we are effectively saying it’s okay to use, manipulate and exploit anyone as long as they help us achieve our goals. A scary prospect if we all applied that kind of thinking.

Should Andy Murray have said ‘No’ to tweeting about the Scottish Referendum?

After receiving criticism and no shortage of Twitter abuse, Great Britain‘s Andy Murray this week apologised for tweeting his support for Alex Salmond’s now defeated ‘Yes’ campaign ahead of the Scottish Referendum vote, specifically the ‘way it was worded’ where he openly criticised the successful Better Together campaign.

But after the almost inevitable fallout driven largely by the British sporting public and media south of the border who feel betrayed after years supporting Murray at Wimbledon, during Davis Cup matches and at two Olympics, should he have got involved in the first place?

The quick-fire would be no as surely Murray, with a history of being quoted (or misquoted) making anti-English remarks and now a resident of leafy Walton-on-Thames, didn’t want to risk alienating and losing the support of the British sporting public. Hard won support after initially being caricatured as a screaming, on court tantrum queen and previous auld enemy baiting episodes, which include joking about wearing the shirt of England opponents Paraguay during the 2006 World Cup and claiming he would always support ‘anyone but England’ at the same tournament.

But as a passionate Scot – a survivor of the horrific Dunblane disaster no less – Murray is well entitled to an opinion about the future of the country of his birth. But with emotions and tensions running high on both sides of the border as voting D-Day approached, Murray was ill-advised to keep quiet for so long, only to tweet his support and take an open swipe at the ‘No’ campaign on the morning of the vote. Combining my day job working in PR and being a sports fan, I know what I would have advised him.

Which begs the question, did Murray take it upon himself to tweet, was he cajoled into doing so as a last-ditch attempt to sway voters or was his the joker card the ‘Yes’ campaign always planned to play on the morning of the vote? However it came about, Murray has surely learnt a valuable lesson about the potential toxic combination of sporting celebrities, politics and social media and will in future likely follow the more world-wise lead of Sir Chris Hoy (and the Queen) in staying diplomatically neutral.

What will a ‘Yes’ vote mean for British sport?

No, seriously. This is a legitimate question which has seemingly been forgotten and almost avoided amongst all the rhetoric about what a ‘Yes’ vote would mean for the pound, UK passports, border controls, military infrastructure, EU membership and bla, bla, bla bla Zzzzzzz….

(Bad) jokes aside, whilst not being sufficiently well informed enough about the implications of tomorrow’s referendum vote to offer a meaningful opinion on the political and social permutations, there would be a tinge of sadness if Scotland was to break free from the United Kingdom. Especially as a sports addict who has enjoyed – and on a few occasions had to endure – many memorable performances from Scottish sportsmen and sportswomen. Many of those on the BBC, though let’s not get started on that…

Putting the bleeding obvious Mr. Andrew Murray to one side – potentially destined to be called ‘Scotland’s Andy Murray’ in victory AND defeat from now on – in the event of a victory for the ‘Yes’ campaign, what will the British & Irish Lions rugby team call themselves? Will legendary, history-laden golf courses such as St. Andrews, Muirfield and Carnoustie still be permitted to host The Open championship? How would separate Olympic GB and Scotland teams cope without one another? And does this mean that ‘Andy’ could never again win the BBC Sports Personality of the Year award?

Imagine for a second a British sporting history that didn’t include the achievements of Alan Wells, David Wilkie, Gavin Hastings, Sir Chris Hoy, Liz McColgan, Sam Torrance, Sir Ian McGeechan, Stephen Hendry or Duncan Ferguson. OK, maybe not the last one. It would certainly be much the poorer and only time will tell if a victory for Team Salmond will see the British sporting public continuing to watch, enjoy and celebrate Scottish sporting heroes in the same way they did before.

Quite possibly, maybe sport can be one of the few things that unifies the countries on this small island. Let’s just see what Friday morning brings.

Kell Brook’s boxing ambition must exceed chasing cross-Pennine bragging rights over Amir Khan

No sooner had Sheffield’s Kell Brook won boxing’s IBF welterweight world title from America’s hard-hitting Shawn Porter earlier this month, thoughts were already turning to a prospective all-British grudge match with long-time verbal jousting partner, one Amir Khan. A mouth-watering prospect for UK fights fans that would pit Brook’s undoubted skill against Khan’s box office combination of dazzling hand-speed, but questionable punch-resistance. Their long-running feud and taunts about who is the better boxer simply adding ice to the proverbial.

But before the lavishly gifted Brook potentially risks his hard-earned world title – a belt arguably well overdue at the age of 28 after suffering with injuries, fitness and motivation – against the quicksilver Khan, I hope he realises his full potential lies beyond beating Bolton’s finest.

Khan’s Olympic silver medal, media profile and early capture of world titles means he’s a British household name and notable scalp, but the realisation of Khan’s frailties with each defeat and the gradual ascent of Brook, means the latter has finally stepped out of the former’s shadow and can really now establish himself in what is undoubtedly boxing’s most talented and lucrative division. The other welterweight world champions are modern greats Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquaio, whilst a supporting cast of Adrien Boner, Marcus Maidana, Timothy Bradley, Devon Alexander – all multi-weight world champions in their own right – mean there are no shortage of meaningful and money-spinning big fights for Brook to choose from.

Unless Khan shocks the world and manages to beat (and even fight) Floyd Mayweather, a victory over him would be relegated to a mere domestic skirmish, when Brook should be setting his sights on conquering the world. Something he has the opportunity, and quite possibly the ability, to do. Froch v Groves demonstrated all-British ‘super’ fights get bums on seats and those bouts undoubtedly moistened Brook’s appetite for a showdown with Khan that is seemingly inevitable. I just hope cross-Pennine bragging rights aren’t the limit of Brook’s ambition.