Bellew was Haye’s Achilles’ Heel

Bellew was Haye’s Achilles’ Heel

On Saturday night, Tony Bellew shocked the boxing world. If he’s honest, he shocked himself. David Haye’s recovery was an unknown quantity since returning from injury. Two “fights” against men not fit for sparring told us very little. And the fitness question mark will always hang over Haye’s head. That being said, his explosive punching power was never in doubt. What transpired was something straight from fiction but Haye didn’t lose to Bellew in the eleventh round – that had happened months before and was confirmed in the build-up.

Imagine the scenario: a cruiserweight hounds and pesterers the perceived best heavyweight on the planet. The attacks are verbal and public. The heavyweight struggles to go about his daily business because the yapping cruiserweight will not go away.

So the man in the weight division above finally gives in and agrees to a bout he’s sees as nothing more than an inconvenience – a money spinner, maybe – but still a major unnecessary distraction.

The fight goes ahead and the outcome is what the heavyweight expected: he wins.

That heavyweight was Wladimir Klitschko and David Haye was the annoying cruiserweight. It’s why he hated Bellew so much in the build-up to their fight. The Liverpudlian had out-Hayed Haye. He’d been backed into a corner through persistence, his planned plot back to the top delayed.

Now the question becomes: was that outpouring of anger something deeper rooted than a mere dislike for changing his plan? Was he worried Bellew – a fighter looking like he’s still on the way to finding his prime – could expose his newfound flaws? There was a reason Haye hadn’t taken a proper bout since his shoulder injury.

This doesn’t mean anything should be taken away from either fighter. Both Haye and Bellew gave good accounts of themselves on Saturday. After the first round, Haye took control. It was when he decided to trade blows in the centre of the ring in the middle of the fight that his night unravelled. It looked like something from a Rocky movie at the time and was described that way by Haye afterwards.

Then the extent of the injury to Haye became obvious. He dragged his foot around the ring like he was auditioning for a role in The Walking Dead. But he was a zombie that hung on and kept coming back for more.

The damaged heel isn’t an excuse for his loss, but a reason to consider retiring. He can’t keep going to the well when it’s nearly running dry.

Naturally there will be calls for Haye’s corner to be examined. The criticism being they should have thrown in the towel earlier. The Reflective takes the opposing view. He wasn’t taking dangerous head shots and they can’t pull a proud man early when he still wants to go toe-to-toe.

Haye played the role of bad guy beforehand but he showed heart and spirit when many others would have taken the easy way out.

Eventually that pride had to give way to the inevitable fall. It was a physical descent and a metaphorical one from grace. Not that he’d ever shown much of that, but his royal standing was removed, humility served. A career that remains in intensive care.

About the distasteful side of Haye in the promotion of the bout: he needs to be cut some slack. He remembers when the benchmark for heavyweight trash talking was set by Tyson, saying he’d eat Lewis’s children. It’s panto. Brutal panto, but panto all the same.

The PC brigade have no place in softening boxing’s bravado. And before they jump on that one line: I’m not saying comments that marginalise or discriminate race, colour or sexual preference are acceptable. But nasty words between two men absorbed in their roles is okay. It’s expected. They do have tickets to sell.

And it’s now Bellew that holds a wad of offers, all resulting in more life-changing paydays. Make no mistake, this was always about winning the payday lottery for the Scouser. It follows a trend of boxers seeking bouts beyond their ability, in weight divisions above, for one highly publicised contest.

Except the result was within Bellew’s grasp and he snatched it.

Eddie Hearn won’t want a rematch – that alone could retire Haye if he’s unable to avenge the defeat – he’ll be eyeing the suspect pair that have box office seats, Deontay Wilder and Joseph Parker.

Whatever Tony Bellew decides his legacy is already secure. As he continued to point out: he’s a current world champion. He’s also a legitimate heavyweight that deserves to, finally, be taken seriously.

Shedding Some Moonlight on La La Land’s Oscars

Shedding Some Moonlight on La La Land’s Oscars

Between them, Warren Beatty and Faye Dunaway, managed to make the 89th Academy Awards end with a bizarre climax. Somehow Beatty was handed the envelope for Female in a Leading Role and stuttered from there toward a car crash not usually reserved for such a prestigious event. Dunaway jumped in, saw “La La Land” printed on the card, and the rest was history. Until history was corrected and Barry Jenkins’s Moonlight was revealed as the true winner.

The end took away from what should have been the true climax. The Academy’s triumphant step away from the dark ages and proof that #OscarsSoWhite has been acknowledged and corrected. But that statement, and position, threatens to diminish from Moonlight as a picture. The question is: did it win purely on merit when it seemed La La Land was nailed on to clean up in all categories?

The only way to judge, is to review each film on its strengths.

Moonlight, while being grounded in the harsh reality of Little’s life in the hood from the beginning, still manages to achieve stunning visual work. The rotating camera from the opening scene plants the viewer in a Boyz in the Hood world painted on an artistic canvas. He is befriended by Mahershala Ali’s Juan. He took the Oscar for this role last night, and it’s clear to see why.

The scene when he is teaching Little to swim is as immersive a piece of cinema you’ll see this year, matched by its supposed simplicity.

But nothing in Moonlight is simple. It’s a layered movie that takes Little from the bullied confused pre-adolescent to the isolated teenage version, Chiron. Here the movie explores the themes of sexuality that have become the main tag attached to the project. It wouldn’t work if it was just an exploration of this topic. Themes are compounded by his crack addict mother, isolation, and the powerful but fleeting connections Chiron makes.

By the final act, Chiron has become Black. A fully-grown man. Hardened by the world and his experiences. He is now the drug dealer and the mood of the film manages to again pour sympathy onto its protagonists. He’s assured as a man while still removed from others and life.

For a film that handles dark issues, it also has a tender side. With it, comes a great hope.

There isn’t a weak performance from any of the cast, the tonal shots and soundtrack throughout bring the vision close to ideal.

The big rival for the Oscar, La La Land, had more than soundtrack going for it. It’s a musical. Well, kind of.

It starts as one, setting its stall out with a number straight from the top. It’s unashamedly nostalgic for a by-gone era of Hollywood. Characters even refer to this with a tongue-in-cheek exchange. If you had no clue Damien Chazelle was the director, you’d soon ask the question. Jazz references from Ryan Gosling’s character, Sebastian, and the recurring loops bring back memories of Whiplash.

However, the first section of the film remains in the musical mould. Emma Stone took home the Oscar for Best Actress for her Mia, it’s questionable if this in hindsight was a case of sharing the love. La La Land tied for record nominations yet drew many blanks. She is good in this role, but is she better than Natalie Portman’s turn in Jackie? This writer has to say she isn’t.

But Gosling and Stone do share a good chemistry. It’s not obvious to begin with. You slowly get sucked into their chase of a shared dream. With it, come the recurring melodies that will make even a musical skeptic leave the cinema humming.

For a film that sets out to be a throwback, it does eventually become a contemporary offering. You’ll be forgiven for thinking at the halfway point the musical idea has been shelved. It’s also at this moment the movie starts to find its heart and voice.

This isn’t a failing. Chazelle is a great filmmaker and knows when to push and pull the audience. The closing chapter of the film presents an ending that the Oscars debacle on stage last night gave a tip of the cap to. It also questions if this was a movie about Hollywood for Hollywood or if it pays homage to the perceived simple lives that pursue love above everything else.

It could be that such ambiguity made judges opt for Moonlight when the two were so closely matched but one had a clear and important message.

If we were to split heirs, it could be argued Moonlight starts strong then levels out. The narrative jumping as it does, mean blanks have to be filled in, and the final act leaves one wondering if the Chiron we knew would have become this version. But we see that the essence of Little is still there. Still, the conclusion isn’t as explosive as what precedes it.

La La Land on the other hand, gains momentum the further into the film it gets. All the seeds that have been sowed throughout – musically, visually, emotionally – are brought together for an ending that surpasses expectation.

It means either film would have been a worthy winner and there’s something fitting that, for a time, they both knew what it felt like to be declared Best Picture.

You can’t have a tie in the Academy Awards, but this comes as close to one as you’ll ever see.

Ranieri Reign Makes Case for Manager Rules Review

Ranieri Reign Makes Case for Manager Rules Review

Claudio Ranieri – the man responsible for taking Leicester City to dreamland – was brought crashing back to reality with the ruthless nature of the Premier League once again being displayed by a twitchy chairman. He becomes the fifth top flight manager to leave his post this campaign, and the fourth out of the last five to win the title only to be axed the following season. The time to analyse each individual case on its merits has passed – if Ranieri can be sacked, there is no measure of safety to consider – it’s time to question the staff system as a whole.

Before offering an alternative to the current way of life for football managers, it’s worth noting every club making a change has clear (if cold) reasons for doing so. Swansea believed Bob Bradley was in a sink or swim scenario with his lack of Premier League experience and showed no signs of doing even a doggy paddle.

Mike Phelan on the other hand, had shown signs of improvement at Hull City. His seemed a thankless task: a small squad, no money, an eleventh-hour appointment. Despite the cards being stacked against him, he soldiered on. That aforementioned improvement didn’t translate into the only element club owners care about when faced with relegation: points.

That’s why Crystal Palace replaced Alan Pardew with Sam Allardyce. The former went on long runs without collecting many, the latter almost guarantees survival.

It’s the fear of not surviving that prompted Vichai Srivaddhanaprabha to wield the axe at Leicester. (Yes, the chairman’s name was copy and pasted.)

It’s the players at the King Power who should be taking ownership of a change in their application and work ethic. It’s clear to see their interest levels have only peaked in the Champions League. They used player power, regardless of what Craig Shakespeare says in press conferences, to avoid taking direct responsibility for their attitude and performance.

Ironically, the man favourite to replace Claudio Ranieri – Roberto Mancini – left Manchester City for the same reason.

He lost that dressing room and Manchester City hired a pussy cat. The Foxes have gone the opposite way, fired Mr Nice Guy and hired a disciplinarian. Makes sense when people need whipping into shape but the players who lacked professionalism will rue the day they got a good man fired.

All these managers needed the same thing: Time.

The panic of losing Premier League status, and all its rich financial rewards, has chairman all too eager to press the panic button. The League Managers Association (LMA) have a thankless task. They have no negotiating power in the boardroom and can only transition managers into the job market. The chance of them ever taking a big club to tribunal is on the same scale as it was for Leicester to retain the title and win the Champions League this season.

If the managers and the LMA can’t enable a fairer work place, who can?

Well, it has to come from the top. It would require UEFA to make it law or for the Premier League to take a bold step and make rules for clubs on these shores that would remove the equal playing field they currently enjoy with the rest of Europe.

And while this sounds outlandish at first, it’s worth remembering the Premier League has set out to differentiate itself from its European equivalents. The new branding seen this year, without the need for a sponsor, was an effort to make the Premier League a global symbol like the NFL or NBA.

It’s from those American counterparts they could take inspiration.

Before we get to their methods, there is already a system in place that could afford managers protection: the players’ transfer window. Seen as an awkward disruption nowadays (ask a West Ham fan about Dimitri Payet) and a way for clubs to inflate prices, it does offer one thing to players – a settled block period without the threat of being moved on.

Of course, a club can fire a player by releasing him from his contract, but they see the financial loss as too great to ever do this. Unless the player involved is Joey Barton. This gives players a fighting chance to prove themselves. And when the writing is on the wall, at least they have time to prepare and fashion a deal with their agent for a new club.

The modern day manager goes week-to-week – sometimes day-to-day – with the threat of the chop in the background. If they were afforded the same protection by only being removable during the player transfer window, clubs would have to show the same commitment they gave on day one of the manager’s reign.

Maybe it would only result in the January transfer window becoming a crazy merry-go-round of players and managers, but there’s also a chance clubs would buckle in for the season. Clubs that still felt the need to part ways when relegation loomed would only be able to promote from within, giving backroom staff a chance and some form of continuity.

But maybe the Americans have got it correct. In NFL, coaches are fired on the first day of the regular season. It’s known as Black Monday and several sackings is seen as harsh. A regular debate within NFL is whether firing bosses actually improves results. They still make changes during the regular season but across American sports it’s not as prevalent as it is in football.

So, what if there was no transfer window for managers in football because clubs couldn’t replace a Head Coach with an external appointment at any point in the season?

It would ensure clubs got behind their managers 100%. They’d have to make it work. The time, and undue pressure a lack of it brings, would be afforded to coaches often struggling against resistant waters. Some players don’t like a new ethos or coaching methods and in today’s football world, they know all the power lies with them.

If a chairman had to retain his manager, that power would swing back to where it should be: with the boss.

These ideas are the extreme end of the spectrum but the results they offer would please fans and clubs alike. Currently agents have more influence than the people that work long hours coaching teams and preparing for matches. A safety net and legal assurances for managerial staff would reduce this ugly side-effect of today’s game.

It seems far-flung right now, but everything has a breaking point. If the Premier League carries on its current trajectory, it will buckle under its own weight. The manager sack race is just another indication football is in silly season.

It’s time for calmer heads to prevail, and loyalty and respect to have more bearing than the potential of a few short-term victories to snatch the pound signs flying around.