Barney Ronay is sticking with his schtick on Harry Kane despite any and all evidence while Lee Carsley acts like an actual employee.
Never write off Kane…unless
‘Never write off Kane. It has become a truism. It was the captain whose masterpiece of a pass provided the spark, a flat and perfectly calibrated diagonal from the left putting Bellingham up against Scales in the area. He jinked inside; Scales lunged and caught him. When the penalty was awarded, Gordon turned and simply applauded Kane,’ wrote David Hytner in The Guardian.
Hytner had already written several justified paragraphs criticising Kane’s woeful first-half performance but was wise, self-aware and crucially non-dickish enough to change tack, with his match report acknowledging that it was ‘Harry Kane – who else?’ who ‘precipitated an alarming crash’ from Ireland.
Meanwhile, Hytner’s clever-clever Guardian colleague Barney Ronay was absolutely not for budging from his ‘Kane has been the defining player of an era, but this thing has run its course’ narrative. Oh no.
Did Kane’s sumptuous pass entirely change the game? Well yes. Did he then score the penalty to begin the rout? Well yes. But why would you allow that to change your snarky schtick? Especially when a 31-year-old man struggles for pace in the 88th minute of a 5-0 win…
There was an oddly heartbreaking moment with 87 minutes gone at Wembley, as Harry Kane was put through on goal with a chance to score his second of the night, made all the more tender by the fact he seemed so desperately keen to do exactly that with England already 5-0 up.
Mainly it was heartbreaking because of the way Kane reached down to pump the accelerator, and just found nothing, a man suddenly running backwards through time, wind chimes tinkling. The finish was rushed and too close to the goalkeeper. Kane ended up flat on his face. He didn’t stop, passing and pointing and leading this team of tyros to the final whistle. Maybe he can wear his Bobby Charlton top next time and still take all the penalties.
This chain of events was so ‘oddly heartbreaking’ that nobody but Ronay deemed it remotely important; even the Guardian’s minute-by-minute coverage described it thus: ‘Kelleher makes a pretty good save, adjusting his feet to kick away a crisp low shot from Kane.’
Indeed, the Guardian gave Kane 7/10 in their player ratings, acknowledging his poor first half but then key role in England’s eventual rout.
Does this sound like a 7/10 performance? As told by Ronay…
Time calls for everyone in the end, and here there was something present below the hum of the crowd every time Kane took the ball and seemed to be visibly rearranging his legs, like a pantomime horse setting off on a trot, the creak of the clapper, the clanging of that distant bell.
Imagine Kane actually reading those words as he wakes up the morning after a 5-0 win. There’s snark and then there’s just being a prick.
Ronay is right that Kane was poor in the first half…
The score was still 0-0 at the break, at which point Kane’s breakdown read: 11 touches, zero shots, dribbles, crosses, tackles or headers won. He was definitely out there. Like the moon landings, we have footage. But this was Kane as an absence, a ghost in the machine, falling between the numbers.
But Ronay was absolutely not right to rigidly stick with his schtick in the face of the actual evidence in front of his eyes, though Mediawatch knows that he would not have wanted to let go of his ‘like a ceremonial city mayor with a gold chain round his neck, off to stand near the winning courgette display for the local newspaper’ joke.
It takes Ronay 12 paragraphs of a piece about Kane to mention the defining moment of the game. And then the ‘masterpiece of a pass’ is reduced to ‘a fine pass’ in the name of ‘Kane is now shit innit’ revisionism.
There is now the Kane conundrum, which really shouldn’t be a conundrum for anyone with a set of eyes. This game is cruel. It will take its bite in the end.
But what if you have a set of eyes but you choose to only see what you want, Barney?
Mediawatch would now like to see Harry Kane write a piece about Ronay and begin: ‘One of a few who may be remembered by some as the defining football writers of an era, but this thing has run its course.’
MORE ON ENGLAND FROM F365:
👉 England player ratings: Kane and Bellingham class allows others to have their fun against Ireland
👉 Why do people ‘froth at the mouth’ about England’s ‘egotistical lummox’?
👉 Harry Kane teaches England pair a lesson and silences critics in comical Ireland collapse
Doss house
It never fails to amuse Mediawatch how perfectly normal parts of working life are rendered mysterious and other-worldly by the football media.
Lee Carsley has been the caretaker England manager for the last six games and Thomas Tuchel will take over in January on a semi-permanent basis. In what world would Carsley be expected to step down without any semblance of a hand-over? In what world would Carsley do the job for several months and not give Tuchel any information whatsoever?
In the world of football it seems. Because there is awe and wonder…
‘Thomas Tuchel to receive ‘secret dossier’ on England players from Lee Carsley’ – Daily Star.
‘Secret dossier’ is quoting literally nobody. It’s only ‘secret’ in the sense that they won’t be showing the Daily Star, which we suspect is the case for roughly 99.99999% of the e-mails sent today.
Sky Sports just call it a ‘dossier’ as they breathlessly announce that ‘outgoing England interim boss Lee Carsley will prepare a “dossier” handover for new manager Thomas Tuchel ahead of his appointment on January 1’.
It would be really f***ing weird if he didn’t.
Henry Winter goes even further on the talkSPORT website: ‘It should be a chunky dossier, an attractive attachment to an email…’
An ‘attractive attachment to an email’? Have these people ever done an actual day’s work?
The Kyiv IndependentThe Kyiv Independent news desk
