Michael Owen: a bit better than Robbie Fowler.

There are several stories that seem to emerge from the back pages of British newspapers when recurring events occur; and ultimately they never happen. One is that Arsenal should sack Arsene Wenger when the club go through a dip in form (as is happening currently), and when Michael Owen scores a goal or two, he should be in Sir Alex Ferguson’s starting XI at Manchester United or certainly on England manager Fabio Capello’s radar. There is no doubt that Michael Owen was a talented player and can still perform a role within the Premiership, but is the talk pure hyperbole and the career of Michael Owen now part of football history?

When Owen joined Manchester United in the Summer of 2009, many writers believed that with the exits of Cristiano Ronaldo and Carlos Tevez the arrival of a player with Owen’s goal scoring record and experience could be a shrewd signing by Sir Alex, the main question was how many games he would play and whether he would remain fit. Owen’s father was a professional footballer and had a successful career at Everton and Chester City in the 1960s and 1970s. His son, Michael, came through the ranks at Liverpool and made his name by scoring on his league debut in May 1997 against Wimbledon. Owen had also played at different age groups for England, despite many people claiming he was Welsh. When Owen graduated into the Premiership, he was one of many top class England strikers, who all had proven at club and internationally that they could score goals. The likes of Les Ferdinand, Ian Wright, Alan Shearer all had made a big impact. Owen was soon to join this band of talented goal scorers, included in Glen Hoddle’s World Cup squad for the 1998 competition in France, Owen made an impression scoring firstly against Romania and then a wonder goal against Argentina in the second round. Here was an English striker that terrified foreign opponents: his explosive pace, sharp shooter finishing and intelligence off the ball were all destined to make Owen a great for both Liverpool and England.

In his early years with Liverpool, he was part of a side that collected six pieces of silverware and not forgetting in 2001, he was named the European footballer of the year, the first Englishman to win the prize since Kevin Keegan in 1979. No England fan will forget his hat trick in the 5-1 mauling of Germany, in Munich in September 2001. Yet, when we fast-forward a decade, with spells at Real Madrid, Newcastle and now Man Utd, Owen’s name is normally precluded to the substitutes’ bench or the stands. Why has his personal career been in slow decline since that night then years ago?

Injuries took their toll on Michael’s body and have ultimately had a lasting effect. Groin and hamstring tears, plus knee ligament damage changed the player renowned for his pace, to a rigid front man. Undoubtedly, the timings of his injuries were unfortunate but there is no reason why he couldn’t adapt or change his style of play. Alan Shearer, the great England centre forward of the 90s, thought his career was ending after endless problems with his knees. Bobby Robson, then Newcastle manager, told Shearer that he needed to change the way he played. He needed to use his strength and intelligence to run off defenders and if necessary come shorter to receive the ball (something unusual for a traditional English centre forward), Shearer went on to become the Premiership’s all time leading goal scorer and most pundits even forget about this transformation. It was the same for Teddy Sheringham, a player who is most famous for ‘playing with his back to goal’ signed for Manchester United when he was 30 and continued playing in the English Championship into his forties. Sheringham was known for his intelligence but even when his legs started to go, he was able to dictate play and helped West Ham reach the Premiership in 2005.

Owen said in an interview after his knee injury with Newcastle, suffered when playing for England in the World Cup in 2006, that he put on a stone in muscle to protect himself from recurring muscle injuries. No longer was Owen the nippy sprinter that we remembered of old. He was much broader and stronger, a striker who took the ball to feet rather than chasing through passes. Owen still managed to score goals, but not as prolifically as before, and not as effortlessly as we remembered. It was a similar tale for his former Liverpool teammate Robbie Fowler. A striker with a brilliant ability to score goals for fun (he still holds the Premiership record for the quickest hat trick) yet his fortunes were not helped by continuous injuries in his middle years. Fowler, like Owen, still scored goals but they weren’t as dynamic or thrusting as before.

Both players grew up and came through a system where English football was still flawed by its inability to adapt. Foreign players were increasingly drawn to the English game by the money and the excitement, but the tactics or the technical skills hadn’t fully trickled down. Owen and Fowler were fabulous finishers, both benefitted from the experience gained playing in European competitions and in an England shirt, but they didn’t have anything else beyond that. When you watch the best players today, they are quick, strong, intelligent and technically brilliant. Owen is a product of the twentieth century coaching, unlike Wayne Rooney or Sergio Aguero. This is reflecting in the teams he has started against, mainly in the Carling Cup, not against top class opponents.

What is interesting when listening to recent interviews with the players is that they are still hungry to score goals, but you feel there is a great deal realism and acceptance that they both reached the peaks of their careers at an early age, hastened through injury. Both have made their fortunes in property and Owen is known for his love of horseracing. (Tabloid writers joked that Sir Alex only signed him for betting tips) Neither player has anything further to prove. Owen will continue to play for United for the rest of the season and will certainly score goals in the games he plays. The only reason why Capello would pick him is for a player who scores goals in the final ten minutes of matches, some may be deemed this a luxury. Hall of Fame is certain, but breaking further records? Unlikely.

9/11 - America's nightmare

If history is a subject about remembering the names of dead kings and queens and memorising important dates, then September 11th, 9/11, is the most memorable of them all. On that, beautiful Tuesday morning in downtown Manhattan, where clear blue skies and naked sunshine shone upon the east coast metropolis, the events of that fateful day, that left the whole world aghast, turned the vivid blue sky to a choking, black fog. The television news replaying footage like an advertisement, looping pictures of horror and awe. Beneath, within the panic, saw the remnants of a European city, razed to the ground by Allied bombing; a grey haze and tampered soul. Yet this was not just a mass grave, this was the sowing of seeds for a nightmare that was about to unfold, one that would make us all victims. Ten years on, the drama appears to have quelled. The protagonists have been written out of the script. George W. Bush, then US President, is now retired and has already written his memoirs and Osama bin Laden, the poetic Saudi and Al-Qaeda leader, met his end this year in his compound in Pakistan. A decade later, as the world relives the tales of bravery and loss from loved ones and observers, we have a clearer picture of the world we now live in and what 9/11 experience taught us all and inevitably the history books.

America’s response and subsequent combat mission in Afghanistan was permitted by the UN and was backed by 41 different countries, who all provided troops to bring down the Taliban in Afghanistan. Nearly ten years after the Cold War had ended and involved in fewer armed conflicts, this was an opportunity for the world to see the firepower of the American military. Cruise missiles, stealth bombers and futuristic weapons all contributed to the downfall of the Taliban regime and the liberation of Kabul in late 2001. This was a victory for the men and women who had lost their lives in the towers, the Pentagon and the many who had tackled the would be suicide bombers in Pennsylvania. Yet, all the while Mr Bin Laden managed to cross the border and live safely in neighbouring Pakistan.

Perhaps the country that has suffered the most subsequently is Pakistan. None of the men that flew the planes into the towers were Pakistani nationals. Before 9/11 there had been only one suicide attack incident, since 9/11 there have been hundreds. The Pakistani state has become a lot weaker and many of the moderates have been succeeded by Islamists who despise the values of the West and America. Much of the aid given to the Pakistani state has been swallowed up by the military, leaving the education budget with a miserly 2%. Most military analysts say that the problem now lies in east of Afghanistan, in Pakistan. NATO troops will never be able to defeat the Taleban because its roots are tribal and local, just like the British Government could never defeat the IRA. The notion of state building in Afghanistan is impractical because the issues that need addressing are political. When NATO troops finally leave, will Afghani troops be capable of defending their country or will the militants from Pakistan be waiting in anticipation? The war planning was nonexistent and improvised as the battles ensued.

Not since Pearl Harbour had America been attacked so unexpectedly and spectacularly. As intelligence experts searched for answers, the stories of heroism and selflessness emerged from the dust. No one can deny America’s anger and certainly, its self-contemplation of what had just happened; the people who had died were casualties, just like other people who had died in bombings or hijackings over the years. Yet to die ‘at’ 9/11 made someone more exceptional than for someone to die ‘on’ September 11. The circumstances were horrific, but it blazed a trail of American exceptionalism that was ultimately toxic. They weren’t just killing and targeting Americans, they were killing and targeting America itself.

This led to the Bush Administration, acting with impunity in Iraq, without a second resolution from the UN Security Council because this was a war for freedom and democracy. The CIA conducted the rendition and torture of foreign nationals in Guantanamo Bay and other countries. It was a foreign policy based on a doctrine not the economics, so as Americans enjoyed further tax breaks and the extension of social security, the country’s foreign adventures were paid on its credit card (the Bank of China had the lowest interest repayments). It is inconceivable based on today’s sluggish American economy and deficit that it would even consider intervening in countries with despotic regimes such as Syria or Iran.

9/11 was a horrendous day for the people of New York but it now is a part of what it means to be a New Yorker. It was the first event that the globalised world witnessed and suffered. We all are subject to stricter security measures in airports and the rise of CCTV in our towns and cities. We were brought together by the loss but it did a great deal of harm to the global communities. Suspicion and contempt for innocent people has only made some situations worse. September 11th was a dark day and forever the empty chair will always remind families at holidays and celebrations. Yet we should not forget the other victims and the how it really changed the world forever.

The 'Right' of Europe

As the party conference season descends on the UK after the Summer Parliamentary recess, much of the focus will be on the three major parties and their policies towards the economy, education and health. One party that will be holding its party conference this week in Eastbourne, will be the United Kingdom Independence Party, UKIP as it is ubiquitously known, and its charismatic leader Nigel Farage. Known within the mainstream as a party that rejects UK membership of the European Union, UKIP is often seen as a place for right wing Tories to retreat to when they don’t like the direction of the Conservative Party. Yet, with bailouts within the Eurozone and increasing concerns about immigration, where does the future lie for parties of the right within Europe.

All across the continent, parties with right wing agendas have surged in popularity. Countries like Finland, in the heart of liberal Scandinavia, saw the True Finns party take almost a fifth of the votes in the recent Parliamentary elections, finishing third overall. The True Finns reject the EU bailout of countries like Greece and Portugal and promote Finnish women to stay home and have more children, preferably ‘ethnic Finns’. This was all democratic, whilst across the border in Norway, Anders Behring Breivik a lone gunman killed scores of younger members of Norway’s Labor Party, an institution he felt that had polluted the Norwegian way of life.

Traditionally, we associate right wing politics with racism and anti-Semitism. The massacre at Clifford’s Tower in York, the conquest of Toledo in Spain and latterly the Holocaust. Yet anti-Semitism is becoming less accepted by most European countries, all European countries recognise Israel and have anti-Semitism laws in place. In fact, figureheads of Europe’s right wing movement such as Marie Le Penn of France’s Front National or Geert Wilders, the Netherland’s most outspoken politician both embrace Judaism. Most right wing parties on the continent have turned their scorn towards Islam.

Too much immigration is not necessarily a right wing dictum; you are just as likely to feel resentment of uncontrolled immigration from traditional UK Labour Party members to traditional Tories living in the Shires. The right has always been successful in threading such political wisdom through appropriating the right of the individual and the need for a smaller government. Single issues parties like the British National Party (BNP) have usually failed because their narrow point of view and lack of political organisation, rare successes can be attributed to voters wanting to give the Government of the day a bloody nose, nothing more. UKIP does not pursue a racist agenda, it is libertarian, it believes Britain has the right to control its own borders and sees Europe as a talking shop full of unelected bureaucrats. In the last European elections in 2009, UKIP secured 13 seats, the same as the governing party of the day, Labour, and under an electoral system that is slightly more favourable to them.

When asked about what concerns voters most, Europe is normally an issue that comes way down the list of priority for most of the electorate. Yet, it would be interesting to see what would happen if UKIP perhaps took a sharper line on immigration, like other European parties. The current Conservative Government of the day would have a dilemma of what to do regarding its coalition partners, the Liberal Democrats. In 2005, under the leadership of Michael Howard, the Conservatives took a right wing stance on crime, immigration and Europe, forcing Tony Blair to move his election strategy to the same audience, most likely because they did not have the capability of winning. In an age where austerity is king and voters want secure employment and an accountable political and tax system, it would be interesting to hear what Mr Farage has to say and whether he decides to tread on the toes Mr Cameron.