cyrilsteven

BECAUSE of Jose Mourinho's nauseating behaviour in Barcelona last week and Arsene Wenger's classless performance at Upton Park, there may be a temptation to put them in the same dock. But that would be a mistake. Mourinho's crime runs a lot deeper than mere egocentricity. It is a calculated, often vicious and invariably hypocritical effort to not only put himself in the spotlight but also to distort, at any cost to truth, the course of football justice. Wenger, on the other hand, is merely congenitally incapable of dealing rationally with defeat - a problem which West Ham manager Alan Pardew, not withstanding his later apology, compounded rashly and provocatively by choosing to celebrate so uninhibitedly in the face of his rival. In the end, the effect on the image of football can, as we saw at the weekend, be pretty much the same, but unfortunately there is another problem, which is much more serious in Mourinho's case. While Wenger is subject to periodic mockery for his one-eyed view of anything that touches his interests, Mourinho has succeeded in persuading a substantial body of opinion that what he does is the pragmatic work of a master coach and winner. It has been said that if Chelsea are capable of vomit-inducing examples of deceit on and off the field, it is justified if they get the right result - especially if the victims are Barcelona. Included in this voiding of conscience is the bizarre theory that John Terry, somehow struck a blow for honest assessment when, as captain of both Chelsea and England, he drove the ball at Deco in the Nou Camp. This, said one headline, was something to compare favourable with past ages of the game, and notably the 1960s and '70s which for various reasons - perhaps not least the profusion of great players and teams - are held up as relatively golden epochs. The point, apparently, is that football is far superior today in its lack of premeditated violence and general cynicism. Unfortunately this is a parody of the truth worthy of Mourinho himself while on the subjects of Swedish referees and Berkshire ambulancemen. There was no doubt a culture of violence in the old football, but there was an identifiable remedy. It was a drive to heighten discipline on offending players and clubs and the awareness of referees. One problem today is far more insidious. It is the cheating which increasingly makes football rotten at its core. You can counter violence, a he-man culture. It is not so easy to deal with the poisonous seepage of lies and systematic cheating - especially when a large section of the audience seem to have the moral grounding of a dinghy caught on a rough day in the Bay of Biscay. Arsenal's manager was public enemy No 1 on Sunday for his charmless reaction to Pardew's excessive exhilaration when West Ham scored a late winner, but he can scarcely complain if past offences sprang to mind. Wenger has selective amnesia. While reported to be seeking out the video of the Thierry Henry goal against Moscow which he swears should have been allowed, Wenger's gallic shrug at the breaks that have often gone Arsenal's way were impossible to put on one side - no more than his disgraceful behaviour when Spurs were allowed a legitimate goal at Highbury last season and some of his players were accused of throwing pizza at Alex Ferguson in the wake of a crushing defeat. 'If Mourinho has a carefully applied agenda, Wenger, has reactions and this is one occasion when he should be made to pay' For some the descent into the culture of cheating was never more disgusting than when former Arsenal player Robert Pires went out of his way to collide with a Portsmouth defender and win a penalty which preserved his team's glorious unbeaten run. Afterwards Wenger said it was a matter for the referee. In this you cannot separate Wenger from some of the worst excesses of his Portuguese rival. Indeed, some will say his refusal to accept any blame or criticism for the disgraceful behaviour of his players when they mobbed Ruud van Nistelrooy at the end of a match at Old Trafford was one of the pivotal moments in the slide towards toleration of behaviour striking at the heart of football values. Then, some argued it was merely handbags. In fact we were witnessing the most revolting mob behaviour, which brought its own consequences when in the next game at Old Trafford the Arsenal players ran out of control in the corridors of the great stadium. The difference with Mourinho is he has a plan, a campaign with motives of self-glorification and team advantage that become more apparent with every shoddy episode.Rado Watches.On Sunday he complained bitterly over Graham Poll's decision to dismiss Terry at White Hart Lane, and in language that may have been unconsciously significant. Mourinho said: "I don't understand why Mr Poll wants to be an important part of the show, but the show is Chelsea against Tottenham." You could give that remark some credence if it wasn't equally true of Barcelona and Chelsea last week. But then Mourinho, a man who regularly fields divers like Didier Drogba and Arjen Robben, changed all that when he accused Barcelona of teaching former Chelsea player Eidur Gudjohnsen how to dive. He set up, quite shamelessly, another drama of the Special One. However, if Mourinho has a carefully applied agenda, Wenger, has reactions. They come to the surface whenever he loses and this is one occasion when he should be made to pay. Both men should also perhaps spare a moment to consider the nearest thing to redemption at the weekend. It was Pardew telling the world he wanted to apologise to Wenger. He felt bad that he got carried away, and that what followed was not good for the game. Before his recent difficulties, Pardew was not known for conspicuous humility. But here was a fine, or at least judicious, example at a vital time. - James Lawton Download our iPhone App Now