Coaches’ Shenanigans Are Hogging the Attention

This article is from the archive of The New York Sun before the launch of its new website in 2022. The Sun has neither altered nor updated such articles but will seek to correct any errors, mis-categorizations or other problems introduced during transfer.

The New York Sun

Are coaches getting too big for their boots? I ask because events this past week in England have highlighted coaches in ways that suggest they are more important than their players.

Much of this emphasis is the product of television. It is impossible to watch any soccer telecast without being presented with repeated shots of the coaches on the sidelines, prowling up and down or sitting glum-faced or screaming at referees or gesticulating madly with manic flurries of utterly incomprehensible arm movements.

Or, worst of all, cavorting like lunatics when their team scores a goal. You have to wonder about that. Is it really all that entertaining — or even pleasant — to watch as middle-aged men leap into the air and pump their fists or indulge in paunchy embraces with their assistants?

I mention television because there can surely be no doubt that most of these childish histrionics are staged for the benefit of the cameras. It cannot be a coincidence that the shenanigans have become more openly operatic as the number of television cameras has increased.

The coaches know they can have their onstage, internationally viewed, moments of clownish behavior, then right after the game they can appear on television again in the postgame interview, where they invariably talk vapid nonsense, but manage to give the impression that they’re not feeble-minded after all but merely reasonable guys who might have gotten a little too emotional during the game.

The knock-about comedy routines spilled over into ugly animosity on Sunday at the West Ham United vs. Arsenal game in London. A traditional London rivalry that had already before the kickoff been unnecessarily inflamed by exchanges between the coaches, Frenchman Arsene Wenger for Arsenal, Alan Pardew for West Ham.

A year ago, Pardew questioned Wenger’s use of so many foreign players on his squad. In response, Wenger accused Pardew of racism. All very nice. Sunday’s game arrived with both West Ham and Arsenal desperately needing a win — West Ham because they were floundering at the bottom, Arsenal because they were not playing well and were slipping behind in the race for the championship title.

In a game full of excitement in the biff-bang English way — it included a nasty incident when Arsenal’s Dutch forward Robin van Persie was struck by a coin thrown from the crowd — the score remained 0–0 until the final minute, when West Ham’s Marlon Harewood struck the winner.

Obviously, understandable delirium ensued all around West Ham’s stadium, but there was sheer insanity on the sideline, where the two team benches lie side by side. Each bench has marked out in front of it a so-called “technical area,” beyond which the coach is not supposed to wander. But Pardew’s glee got the better of him as he burst into the Arsenal area in what appeared to be a fit, his arms raised before the inevitable fist-pumping routine.

Wenger, knowing the game was lost, was not amused by this invasion. Possibly Pardew banged in to Wenger, possibly he brushed him, possibly Wenger sought contact. There was a confrontation — game officials rushed to separate the men, Wenger appeared to swing an arm at Pardew. As the game ended, Wenger brushed aside Pardew’s attempt at the customary handshake. And this is Wenger, generally considered the most sensible and intellectual of the English Premier League coaches.

Then came the postgame charade: Pardew, the winning coach, bursting with triumph but trying to appear contrite, admitting he may have overdone the celebration a bit, actually apologizing to Wenger. But Wenger was still fuming — he refused to attend the postgame session and left the stadium in high dudgeon.

And so, just as in this column, the behavior of the coaches overshadowed the performance of the players. That reversal of roles now seems acceptable. The week leading up to the West Ham vs. Arsenal clash was full of glowing tributes to two of the league’s top coaches: Alex Ferguson, who has just completed 20 years as the boss at Manchester United; and — wouldn’t you know it? — Arsene Wenger, celebrating 10 very successful years with Arsenal.

No story about intrusive and obnoxious coaching behavior in the EPL would be complete without a contribution from Portugal’s Jose Mourinho, the coach at another London club, Chelsea. Mourinho, rapidly turning into Sourinho for the sour grapes attitude he adopts on the rare occasions when Chelsea loses, did not disappoint this weekend and duly grabbed his chunk of the headlines.

This was another all-London clash, as Chelsea traveled to north London to take on Tottenham Hotspur. And another blood-and thunder battle that resulted in a narrow win for the home team: Spurs 2, Chelsea 1. No sideline incidents here — rather the opposite as Mourinho embraced Spurs coach Martin Jol at game’s end. In the press conference, Mourinho continued his magnanimity by straightforwardly acknowledging defeat: “They scored two goals. We scored one. So they won the game.”

The generous mode did not last too long. Mourinho went on to lambast referee Graham Poll, calling his decision to eject Chelsea captain John Terry “ridiculous.” He added, “Referees should come to press conferences,” quickly undermining that notion with “but it would be fake conference. They would come with their excuses.”

Mourinho’s point about a referee press conference is a good one, but his formidable record of knee-jerk refereebaiting will weaken his case. His reputation as a poor loser is also catching up with him — “He’s like a kid who didn’t get a toy he’d been promised,” was a recent tart comment from Lennart Johanssen, president of UEFA, Europe’s soccer federation.

No doubt Mourinho, as well as Wenger and Pardew, will face disciplinary action from the English FA. But dealing with individual incidents seems inadequate. A more general clampdown on sideline exhibitionism and overacting would be more effective. Particularly — and here’s wishful thinking — if it could be combined with a ban on banality in postgame interviews.

pgardner@nysun.com


The New York Sun

© 2025 The New York Sun Company, LLC. All rights reserved.

Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. The material on this site is protected by copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used.

The New York Sun

Sign in or  Create a free account

or
By continuing you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use