Brexit: A Sleepwalk into Disaster

“The United Kingdom has voted to leave the European Union”

My alarm clock went off at 6:00 as usual on Friday morning, but the world I woke up to was markedly different to the one I left when I fell asleep. It was the dulcet tones of Conor Bradford that relayed this cataclysmic news to  me. For those unfamiliar with the broadcast journalist, Bradford is a newsreader and anchor on BBC Radio Ulster’s Good Morning Ulster programme. His grand and patrician style is particularly appropriate for events of such significance. l couldn’t believe his words. Like most of us, I hadn’t seen this coming.

I’m a bit of political anorak and had spent most of Thursday evening watching the television analysis of the Brexit referendum. However, as I retired to slumber, all the meaningful early predictions and exit polls were calling a narrow but clear victory for the Remain campaign. Therefore, the mind-boggling news that the electorate had decided to end the UK’s 43 year membership of the EU came as an almighty shock. Coming from Northern Ireland, the Brexit debate has undoubtedly assumed a greater significance, given the complex dynamics of all-Ireland political and  economic structures. All of a sudden, we were facing the unsettling prospect of sharing a land border with the European Union. What would that mean for our industry and agriculture? On Friday morning, shock and confusion reigned above all else. Dismay was the prevailing emotion. The fact that Northern Ireland had voted to remain was scant consolation.

Once the shock had abated, my mind turned to a more rational analysis of these groundbreaking and unprecedented events. What did it all mean? How best to make sense of the madness? It occurs to me that whatever about the merits of the outcome, this was a decision made for the wrong reasons. My abiding impression of the Brexit fiasco is that this was a critical decision made by many without even a basic comprehension of the facts. I can scarcely recall a political debate where the campaign was so thin on information and rational argument. The Brexit referendum was a triumph of ignorance and alarmist rhetoric over rationality. There was plenty of noise, but no real substance. For a decision of such magnitude, the debate was painfully thin on detail. In fact, many people seemed genuinely confused about what they were actually voting about. Some folks seemed to think that the issue related to immigration. Although a misguided view, having regard to the EU’s insistence on the free movement of people, goods, and services, you can see how they came to that conclusion. Others strangely linked the referendum to terrorism. How bizarre! The idea that this unstable action has somehow made us safer in this volatile world must be the ultimate example of hysteria and ignorance triumphing over rational thought. The Brexit vote, it seems to me, is the result of a weird form of collective impulsiveness, individuals hastily making a vital decision without recourse to even the basic facts.

In truth, there are those who have no real interest in dealing with the facts in relation to this discussion . For events that are hijacked by such hysteria and febrile emotion, there is a form of “confirmation bias” at work here. Facts and details are consumed by a perfect storm of prejudice and preconceived ideas, sacred cows that cannot be challenged. It is my belief that the propagandists on both sides of this debate have no interest in hearing anything that remotely challenges their predetermined notions. For a debate of such fundamental importance, objectivity and emotional detachment were needed to drown out the rhetoric and emotion. Alas, the opposite appears to have been the case. As happens so often in these emotionally charged debates, individuals decide what side of the fence they’re on and then look for evidence, no matter how flimsy, to support and justify that preconceived view. That is an inherently flawed process when dealing with something so significant and fundamental.

The other curious factor was how many voters ostensibly sacrificed self -interest for  emotion.  It’s remarkable that Northern Irish farmers apparently derive over 70% of their income from the EU by virtue of the Common Agricultural Policy. And yet statistically, some of those same farmers must have voted for Brexit. In a region that is so dependent on EU finance and support, how can such actions be rationalised? And for that matter, it seems strange that the largest Unionist party supported a decision that seems, on the face of it, to be utterly detrimental to the stability and prosperity of their beloved United Kingdom. You wonder if they’ve given it any coherent thought. Maybe they want another Scottish referendum and the consequent break-up of the union they supposedly cherish?!  That’s before we even get to the dreadful miscalculation of David Cameron. The deeply flawed decision to hold this referendum is borne in arrogance and strategic senselessness. I’m no fan of Cameron and the Tory party, but I’ve always viewed Dave as an effective and clever politician; a consummate leader who  exerted an almost clinical control of an often dysfunctional and divided party. To have sacrificed his legacy, just a year after securing an impressive majority, is one of the greatest political errors of the last 50 years. Regret must be the least of Cameron’s emotions this morning.

In truth, Brexit has produced no real winners, aside from the remorselessly ambitious Boris and the eccentric, absurd Nigel. For all the well-meaning and naive talk of a second referendum, I think we’re stuck with this disaster. As someone living in Northern Ireland, we’re facing a particularly uncertain and potentially divisive time. What will the impact be in relation to our re-defined frontier? Surely there will be some form of enhanced demarcation and customs presence? No-one really knows for sure, but we’re about to find out. However, a time of great flux and uncertainty awaits the entire United Kingdom. Brexiteers. Strange term. Sounds a bit like musketeers. All for one and one for all? Not anymore following this seismic vote. Well, they’ve got what they wanted. The law of unintended consequences in all its dramatic glory. The UK has sleepwalked into Brexit. Now we all must face the consequences of this new and scary reality.

Image Courtesy of Wikipedia: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/25/Boris_Johnson_July_2015.jpg

File:Boris Johnson July 2015.jpg

 

Twitter:@RoryMcGimpsey

You Don’t Have to be Brazil to Prosper

“My eyes have seen the glory of Espana ’82;

When little Northern Ireland showed the world what we could do….”

So goes the opening line of Northern Ireland fan favourite:”We’re not Brazil, we’re Northern Ireland.” The song goes to the very heart of the identity of the Northern Ireland international football team. “Our wee country.” The idea that you don’t need the resources of Brazil to be successful is embedded in the culture of Irish football, north and south. The Irish have long punched above their weight in the international arena. This week provided another example of this wonderful fact when lowly Northern Ireland defeated Ukraine 2-0 at the European Championships. This was a spectacular win by anyone’s standards. Michael O’Neill’s men had faltered in their opening game, losing 1-0 to Poland. Northern Ireland entered that game with a defensive mindset, seemingly determined to stifle the Polish with unrelenting pressure. The tactic worked to an extent, but eliminated Northern Ireland as an attacking force-there wasn’t a clear shot on target throughout the whole game. O’Neill was criticised for abandoning the positive philosophy that got his side to the tournament in the first place. A response was needed. And what a response it was. Northern Ireland were quite superb as they outplayed the Ukranians, with a display full of passion, commitment, and bravery.

Prior to Thursday’s game, Northern Ireland’s finest hour was the victory over Spain in 1982 to secure their place in the quarter-final of the World Cup. That win has assumed an almost mythic significance in the Northern Irish football psyche. Northern Ireland tore the form book into millions of pieces as Gerry Armstrong’s goal condemned the Spanish hosts to an embarrassing loss in their own tournament. That night in Valencia is etched into Irish football folklore, ranking alongside the Republic of Ireland’s win over Romania to reach the quarter-finals of the 1990 World Cup. The Irish don’t enjoy such nights very often, and that’s why they deserve to be celebrated when they come along. The victory over Ukraine has earned the right to be cherished amongst the greatest Irish sporting wins.

Sporting success has always had a disproportionate influence on Irish life and culture. The McGuigan fights, rugby Grand Slams, Rory McIroy’s rise to the top of the golfing world. They all have a special place in Irish life. Because sporting triumph means more to smaller nations and populations.  The likes of England, Germany, and the USA may beg to differ, but it’s true. The reason is pretty simple. Such successes resonate with possibility and hope. Small nations aren’t expected to succeed on the international stage, and therefore such success transfixes spectators when it happens. And it’s not just the underdog factor at work here. In these austere economic times, sporting victories have the capacity to enthuse an entire nation, to give hope that potential exists beyond the daily grind. Such  elation is short-lived, but it means a great deal in those fleeting, transient moments. Sport is the ultimate form of escapism, where millions can live vicariously through their heroes. It’s all very well cheering for the multi-millionaires of Manchester United or Barcelona, but we all feel much more involved when success is achieved by our international sportsmen, regardless of the pursuit. These are people we can relate to, our neighbours, whose exploits carry our own dreams and aspirations.

In a divided society, sport has always been a rallying point that unites us in the midst of polarisation. Soccer has often been the exception to this rule, where more tribal realities regularly come to bear. However, there are signs that times are changing. With both Irish football teams qualifying together for a major tournament for the first time, there had been fears that such division would manifest itself, both at home and in France. In the event, Irish fans have been magnificent thus far, their behaviour an exemplar of inclusiveness and tolerance. In the attitude of Irish supporters, a template has been set for cooperation among rival fans. In France, we have seen Irish fans united, united not in the support of one team, but united in mutual tolerance and respect. And therein lies the lesson.

Sporting rivalry doesn’t have to divide, doesn’t need to appeal to the worst tendencies of human expression. What the Euro 2016 fan experience has shown us is that sport should be about colour, fun, enthusiasm, and happiness. National identity exclusively expressed in a positive, joyful, and non-threatening way. Irish fans have set the example, but it’s clear that the vast majority of international football fans just want to cheer on their team in a positive and respectful manner. They want to participate and celebrate, celebrating great wins like Northern Ireland’s on Thursday night. In a tournament where the spectre of hooliganism has raised its ugly head once again, it’s heartening that the Irish (north and south) are leading the way in setting an alternative example. Best fans in the world. Regardless of what happens on the field, that alone is worthy of celebration. Just ask the Northern Ireland fans who are still celebrating an historic win. You don’t have to be Brazil to be successful.

Image Courtesy of Wikipedia: By Source, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=11297898

Shirt badge/Association crest

Twitter: @RoryMcGimpsey

Sublime Ireland Sink Boks

I’m finding it hard to make sense of it. You know the way events sometimes just don’t make sense no matter how hard you try and rationalise them? Well, I had that sensation in abundance yesterday. For those who missed it, Ireland defeated South Africa (Saturday 11 June 2016) at their Newlands stronghold. The win was significant enough in itself. Prior to Saturday’s game, the Irish had never tasted victory on South African soil. In truth, they hadn’t even come close. Therefore, their win was historic and unprecedented in equal measure. However, as anyone who witnessed the Irish performance will tell you, Saturday’s effort was so much more.

Typical of this enigmatic Irish side, they made history the hard way. The visitors found themselves down to 14-men after just 20 minutes thanks to the controversial sending off of their naturalised back row, CJ Stander, who was red carded for a clumsy challenge on his former compatriot and team-mate, Patrick Lambie. A Test match in South Africa is an unforgiving environment for any rugby team. The conditions are notoriously brutal, confrontational, and hostile. Therefore, for a young Irish side to think their way to victory in such challenging circumstances is nothing short of incredible.

I’ve been watching rugby for nearly thirty years, and can’t remember anything remotely like Saturday’s career defining performance. Indeed, I’m old enough to remember the bad old days when underpowered Irish sides were sent to South Africa to compete against enormous  Springbok sides comprised of utter behemoths. In those days, the men in green faced mission impossible, they were ritual lambs to the slaughter. In writing this piece, I think back to 1998 when an Irish team led by Paddy Johns faced shocking levels of aggression and attrition on the Highveld. The Battle of Pretoria and all that. Look it up on You Tube if you haven’t seen it. It was shocking stuff. Notorious. Madness everywhere. Nevertheless, Johns’s men didn’t take a backward step, meeting fire with fire on one of rugby’s darkest days. Thankfully, the game has come a long way in the ensuing years. Such overt and unfiltered violence simply isn’t tolerated in the uber-sanitised modern, professional game. Here’s the point, though. In those days, it was inconceivable, unrealistic even, to think that Ireland would ever defeat the Springboks on their home patch. That they did it in the midst of such adversity is remarkable in the extreme.

Of course many of Ireland’s woes were self-inflicted. What of the sending off? While Stander’s challenge was undeniably reckless and ugly (it doesn’t get any better with repeat viewing), CJ assuredly had no intention of hurting his former team-mate, and it’s hard to resist the impression that Ireland’s flanker was committed to a challenge he was unable to avoid in the heat of the moment. The post match consensus held that a yellow card was a more fitting sanction, and I don’t disagree with that analysis. Despite Ireland’s deeply ingrained propensity to make life difficult for themselves, this was a performance to be admired and treasured as a monumental effort. While Ireland’s tactics undoubtedly worked a treat, this was a win achieved with old fashioned grit and determination. The Irish refused to submit, just wouldn’t be beaten; even when reduced to 13-men following Robbie Henshaw’s first half sin-binning. This victory was all about belief and conviction; the young side showing unwavering heart and composure to withstand the South African onslaught.

Witness the way three Irish defenders bundled JP Pietersen into touch at the death to deny the South Africans a win they scarcely deserved. This display  was all about collective will and determination, the Irish simply wouldn’t be denied. In a side shorn of experience and leadership, good performances abounded everywhere. To a man, Ireland’s players emphatically rose to the occasion. Iain Henderson, Jordi Murphy, Jamie Heaslip, and Jared Payne all contributed outstanding performances. So too Paddy Jackson. The Ulster youngster has waited a long time for his opportunity and he grabbed it with both hands, with a performance full of composure and thoughtfulness. This was Jackson’s moment. And what about captain fantastic? Rory Best was magnificent. I lost count of the times the Irish skipper saved the day. Best was everywhere in a game where his leadership and character shone brightest. If anyone still doubts the class of the Ulster hooker, I suggest they look again at the video.

Incredibly, an historic series win is now within the ambit of Joe Schmidt’s men. After Saturday, belief and optimism must be surging through the veins of the entire squad. A word of caution, though. I can’t recall a worse South African performance. The Springboks were dire on Saturday, and this proud  rugby nation will unquestionably be smarting like never before. I fully expect a terrifying backlash next week. However, if Ireland can somehow withstand the mammoth onslaught, anything is possible. The bar has been set, and Schmidt’s men will be determined to make further history. It’s going to be a fascinating couple of weeks. It seems fitting to leave the final word to Man of the Match, Devin Toner. It’s been a difficult few weeks for the giant second row following the passing of his father. Toner has developed into a mature and vital member of Schmidt’s squad; his humble, modest demeanour reflecting the core values of this Irish team. On collecting his thoroughly deserved MOTM award, the big man simply said: “I just wanted to say, that’s for dad.” It was a poignant and evocative end to one of Ireland’s greatest days.

Twitter: @RoryMcGimpsey

Muhammad Ali: The Greatest

I woke early on Saturday to the sad news, news we were expecting, but no less awful for that. Muhammad Ali is gone. The most revered sportsman of all time. The Greatest. Despite having spent the last thirty years being ravaged by the debilitating condition that is Parkinson’s Disease, his passing still comes as a shock. Isn’t that the way it always works, though? Somehow, regardless of the relentless inevitability of death, we don’t expect our heroes to die. No matter how many times it happens, we find it hard to accept the mortality of heroic and iconic people.

It’s part of the human condition. Each of us are programmed to view our heroes as transcendent, quasi-immortal figures. Even the grim certainty of death is unable to penetrate this cruel illusion. Such deception of the mind is especially common with individuals as iconic as Ali. We just can’t accept they’re gone. It doesn’t seem right, plausible even, that someone so superhuman and powerful is as mortal as the rest of us. Even when we’re confronted with inescapable evidence of their fragility, as we had been  through Ali’s cruel, chronic illness, we find it difficult to accept the merciless truth. I suppose this syndrome is one of the reasons people still occasionally see Elvis in chip shops. Heroes just aren’t supposed to leave us. And that’s why it devastates us when they do.

I’m too young to remember Muhammad Ali fight. Instead, I came to him through my father. My Dad is the biggest Ali fan imaginable, Muhammad Ali is his all-time hero. Like many of that generation, Dad seemed to regard Ali as the personification of sporting perfection. Therefore, I grew up with stories of the legend. The iconic fights, the trash talk, the peerless record of achievement. As a young lad, I heard about Ali’s brutal three fights with Joe Frazier and of course the big daddy of them all: the Rumble in the Jungle when Ali dethroned the mammoth George Foreman to regain the heavyweight title. The Rumble intrigued me the most. Forget the amiable figure with the grill. Foreman was an utterly terrifying pugilist in 1974. My Dad would regale me with stories of this gigantic, intimidating man who seemed virtually indestructible.  And yet the immovable object was indeed defeated, Ali employing his controversial and innovative “Rope-a-Dope” strategy to fell the hitherto unbeaten Foreman. I subsequently watched the fight myself in later years, and the Rumble ingrained the Ali legend in my mind.

When I discovered more about the man, though, what really interested me was his life outside the ring. I’ve always been fascinated by Ali’s activism; the name change, his strident opposition to racism in all its ugly forms, and his courageous refusal to be conscripted into the Vietnam War. For me, these convictions and crusades truly illuminate Ali the man. His conscientious objection to  Vietnam, moreover, defined Ali’s career as much as anything else. His opposition to the controversial war cost Ali three years of championship bouts at a time when he was entering the peak of his athletic powers. The enforced sabbatical undoubtedly had a detrimental effect on the ascendant star. How good would Ali have been otherwise? It’s a sobering question! That Ali came back so spectacularly from this fighting exile to enjoy the most celebrated moments of his career in the 1970s tells us all we need to know about this remarkable man.

What about Ali the campaigner? Societal achievement can be hard to quantify, but the champion arguably did more for African-American rights and equality than any other individual. Long before Barack Obama, Ali was often a minority voice in the wilderness, shining a light on America’s inequalities and providing a vision of pride, integrity, and achievement to which millions of African-Americans could aspire. The champion had his faults, but I think it’s difficult for the modern mind to appreciate just how courageous and prescient Ali’s fearless stance against racism was. Of course one can be churlish and suggest that the sometimes vitriolic nature of Ali’s activism actually fostered division, but this view fundamentally misses the point. In becoming a global hero to millions of people of every class, colour, and creed, Ali promoted an inclusiveness that transcended petty human division. Ali’s mass appeal, in fact, helped eradicate prejudice in a way that legions of elected representatives can only dream of. And his vocal, unapologetic opposition to racism and inequality paved the way for the integrated American society millions take for granted today. This inspiration was felt throughout the world. That is Muhammad Ali’s lasting legacy, as far as I’m concerned. 

In sporting terms,  Ali boasted an aura and charisma that matched his supremely electrifying talent. Many have since imitated, but no-one has come close to generating the box office appeal so effortlessly exuded by the legendary  fighter. Boxers like Chris Eubank and Naseem Hamed attempted to captivate the sporting public with a crude simulation of Ali’s theatrics, but their performances were less than convincing. When it came to charisma, charm, and humour, there was only one Muhammad Ali. If illness hadn’t reduced him so savagely, this man could have done anything. Movie star, lecturer, President, who knows what he might have been if Parkinson’s Disease hadn’t intervened? I think that sense of loss one of the reasons Ali’s illness and death are so galling. We know we’ll never see his like again.

As if all that wasn’t enough, any fair summation of the man must also account for his humanity and character. For all Ali’s unprecedented exploits in the ring, the three-time Heavyweight Champion’s later years proclaimed him as a universal role model who set the bravest of examples. The proud and dignified manner in which the great man handled his illness speaks volumes for Ali’s character: he had integrity, fortitude, and humility in abundance. How ironic that Parkinson’s robbed him of that priceless ability to speak out, to elucidate his thoughts in the articulate way we were used to. In a strange way, though, Ali’s more muted appearances in recent years highlighted  the bravery and humanity of the man in a way that words simply cannot capture. Sometimes there are just no words capable of defining the human spirit. It’s horrible to think that any person should suffer the cruel symptoms inflicted by a degenerative disease like Parkinson’s. Nevertheless, patients of this cruel illness-and others like it-couldn’t have had a better advocate and role model to highlight their suffering. The great man has gone. How sad we’ve finally lost him. He has left us with a tremendous legacy, though. Muhammad Ali was the greatest. In more ways than one.

Twitter: @RoryMcGimpsey

Sexton Blow is Jackson’s opportunity

The Irish Independent  reported this morning (2 June 2016) that the talismanic Johnny Sexton will miss the upcoming three Test tour to South Africa. Although the news has yet to be officially broken, the story is expected to be confirmed at a press conference this afternoon. I heard a whisper regarding this  from a reliable source yesterday, and the story duly broke this morning . Once the news is officially confirmed, attention will turn to the man who will deputise Ireland’s fly-half.

The chief beneficiary of Sexton’s misfortune seems to be Ulster’s Paddy Jackson. Although Ian Madigan has been Joe Schmidt’s nominal replacement fly-half for the majority of the New Zealander’s tenure, the Leinster star’s imminent move to Bordeaux-Begles has apparently seen the utility back move down the Irish pecking order. Allied to that, Jackson has been in fantastic form for his native Ulster throughout the season, and is thoroughly deserving of this belated opportunity. The former Methody pupil is held in the highest regard by his Ulster colleagues, but has struggled to translate provincial form into international recognition. While Jackson’s talent has never been in doubt, some observers have questioned the ability of the Ulsterman to boss a game at the highest level.

However, Jackson’s performances this season have witnessed the fly-half come of age as a  Test standard number ten, and seen him mature into a consummate professional, one that can be trusted in any scenario. Jackson has emerged as a leader and totem this season, much to delight of the Ravenhill faithful. As the Irish Independent has reported, Madigan is expected to be called up as a direct replacement for Sexton, and there is no doubt that the mercurial Dubliner will remain influential if called upon. His Ulster rival has earned this opportunity, though, and there is every chance that Jackson’s patience is going to be rewarded by his national coach.

And the Ulsterman will need to muster every inch of his resilience and self-belief for the monumental challenge that lies ahead. South Africa is an unforgiving environment for any Test player, and the fact the Irish have yet to taste victory on South African soil speaks volumes for the magnitude of the task at hand. Schmidt will be encouraged by Jackson’s form, though, and the manner in which the young fly-half has impressed in a difficult Ulster season. Strength is often found in adversity, however, and a massive opportunity now awaits the likeable and popular Jackson. While it’s sad to lose Sexton, the form and temperament shown by his understudy underscores the belief that the Ulster fly-half is well-equipped to handle one of the biggest challenges in sport. Cometh the hour, cometh the man. It will be fascinating to see if Paddy Jackson can finally deliver the goods when his country needs him most. Irish fans will wish him well. Opportunity indeed beckons for the modest Ulsterman.

Twitter: @RoryMcGimpsey

 

McCartney The Master

As I write this piece, I’ve just finished watching the Paul McCartney interview, filmed as part of BBC Radio 4’s Mastertapes series. The interview  was broadcast on Saturday 28 May 2016 and featured a 45-minute long conversation with the legendary entertainer, focusing primarily on his post-Beatle career. The interview was presumably intended to coincide with the imminent release of McCartney’s compilation album, Pure McCartney (scheduled for 10 June 2016), which chronicles the former Beatle’s extensive solo catalogue, including the massively underrated Wings material that emerged following the break-up of  The Beatles in 1970.

As a massive Beatles fan, I devour anything remotely connected to the group, and was therefore eager to hear the latest musings from the evergreen McCartney. Most encouraging, though, is the fact that Macca is still busy as ever, planning the next phase of a career that’s seen him scale every conceivable height. I know it’s hard to believe, but the Liverpudlian musician turns 74 next month. For Beatles’ fans, the interview is certainly  worth a look, and although it understandably finds Paul in nostalgic mood, there is no indication that McCartney is hanging up his guitar just yet.

I came to the Beatles relatively late, and it’s fair to say I found their music from a position of acute scepticism. Despite the fact that many of my favourite bands cited The Beatles as an influence, my younger self struggled to see the appeal. Back then, I knew a handful of the Beatles’ hits and although they seemed okay, the music didn’t strike me as particularly earth shattering. And the image of mop topped young men performing to hordes of screaming teenage girls didn’t seem especially cool either. Yet, for all that, the Beatles just wouldn’t go away; their music proving enduringly popular across several generations. Why? And why did respected figures like Noel Gallagher insist this band was the greatest thing since sliced bread? I wasn’t sure.

Out of curiosity as much as anything else, I decided to find out what the fuss was about. In 2009, The Beatles released remastered versions of their albums, and this seemed as good a time as any to get better acquainted with their music. I purchased all thirteen original albums, from Please Please Me to Let it Be, and from that moment I was hooked. I immediately got it. It was all there: the beautiful melodies, simple, yet profound lyrics, and a diversity of musical output that I hadn’t heard from any other recording artist. What particularly struck me was how fresh and original the music sounded, 40 years after its original release. This was supremely inventive music, captured in extremely creative albums like the experimental Revolver and the psychedelic Sergeant Pepper. At once, I saw how virtually every band that had emerged since had been influenced (either directly or indirectly) by these sounds.

The biggest revelation, though, was Paul McCartney. Although I was familiar with the genius of John Lennon, I was genuinely shocked and delighted to discover how brilliant Paul McCartney is. I suspect, like many others over the years, I had been fooled by Macca’s amiable and genial image. I probably thought he was a bit naff. What a pleasure, then, to find out the extent of McCartney’s magical, mercurial talent. Of course, it shouldn’t really surprise that the man who wrote Yesterday, Let it Be, and Hey Jude was worthy of celebration, but I was legitimately taken aback by the sheer breadth and quality of his work. I’m fairly sure that perceptions of McCartney have been coloured by the Beatles’ break-up and the rancour that briefly ensued in the following years. When Lennon compared McCartney’s work to Muzak in 1971’s How Do you Sleep?, the idea became embedded in popular consciousness, I think. It now seems quite absurd to suggest that McCartney can’t rock (he wrote Helter Skelter for goodness sake!), but such sniping must be viewed in the context of the time. Break-ups are rarely civil after all!

The Mastertapes interview shows McCartney as the legendary, iconic figure he is, respected and admired in equal measure by generations of his fans. Kindred spirits like Gallagher and Paul Weller remain keen to show their appreciation. For a time, it seemed that McCartney hadn’t got the kudos his talent deserved; but at long last the former Beatle is consistently cherished for what he is, an international treasure. Beatles’ fans have long understood the genius of Paul McCartney, and we can only be thankful that his importance as an artist is celebrated in his lifetime. One hopes Sir Paul performs long into the future, but alas none of us can go on forever. It is heartening, therefore, that perhaps the most successful songwriter of all time continues to enjoy critical acclaim as well as commercial success. Because McCartney is the master. Long may he reign. We are extremely fortunate indeed to experience his enduring genius.

Twitter: @RoryMcGimpsey

 

Too little too late for Van Gaal

If reports are to be believed, it’s over. Louis Van Gaal’s disappointing two-year tenure as Manchester United boss is set to come to an end in the next few days-according to several reports-with the enigmatic Dutchman being replaced by the impressive but divisive Jose Mourinho. If the papers are to be believed, the deal has already been done, with the former Chelsea boss set to take charge at Old Trafford on a three-year deal. Although mere speculation at this stage, the smart money is on Mourinho being installed as United manager in  the near future.

It’s fair to say that such reports have received a mixed reception from United fans. While no-one can dispute his record-Mourinho has proved consistently prolific at accumulating trophies-the man who started his coaching career under Bobby Robson at Barcelona is a controversial and outspoken figure who provokes confrontation wherever he goes. There is also understandable concern that Mourinho’s style doesn’t chime with the fluent, attacking football which the Old Trafford faithful were accustomed under Alex Ferguson. Mourinho’s football philosophy is best described as pragmatic, practical rather than excessively entertaining. Many fans will counter that it’s hard to serve up anything worse than some of the dire performances that have emanated from the Theatre of Nightmares this season.

There’s also a school of thought (rapidly diminishing it has to be said) that Van Gaal should be given more time to impose his ideas. However, with performances uninspiring at best and Van Gaal having spent a veritable fortune, it becomes difficult to sustain the argument. Despite Saturday’s FA Cup victory over Crystal Palace, it’s hard to view Van Gaal’s Old Trafford reign as anything other than a failure. While the FA Cup win was a timely boost for United’s increasingly deflated players, it doesn’t mask a deeply unsatisfactory few years for the club. Ever since Ferguson’s retirement in 2013, the club has been mired in an unfamiliar state of mediocrity. David Moyes was unceremoniously removed after a disappointing ten-month stint, to be replaced by the seemingly dependable Van Gaal, but frankly United’s fortunes haven’t improved in the intervening period. All of which would be pardonable if the Dutchman hadn’t spent a fortune on a team that’s struggled to keep pace with England’s elite. He has, though, and that’s where the case for Van Gaal falls down irretrievably.

Although Saturday’s FA Cup win will be welcomed by United supporters, it’s too little too late for the beleaguered Dutchman. In a relatively mediocre season where Leicester won the Premier league and Tottenham finally mustered a serious challenge, all Van Gaal could deliver was fifth place and an FA Cup win for United. I didn’t see Saturday’s game, but I understand that it was a pretty drab affair. To be honest, I’ve rather lost interest in the FA Cup as a tournament. It’s just not the same competition now compared to my youth.

The FA Cup used to really mean something to fans. Outside of the league and European Cup, it  was THE competition to win. I don’t think that’s the case anymore. The global ubiquity of the Premier League and economic importance of the Champions League has relegated the once great FA Cup to a subsidiary competition. Sad, but a sign of the times I’m afraid. History and tradition will always be important in sport, but the FA Cup has lost much of its former lustre. I can’t help but feel that the delirious manner in which United’s players celebrated Saturday’s win says more about the underachievement of recent years than the status of the competition.

The writing is on the wall for Van Gaal. It has been for some time. Whether Mourinho (or whoever succeeds him) can do any better remains to be seen. Whether anyone wants to admit it or not, the ghost of Alex Ferguson still haunts Old Trafford, providing his successors with an extremely difficult CV to emulate. When the bar is set so high by your predecessor, you have to fight to be judged on your own merits. It’s incredibly hard to assert your identity. Moyes and Van Gaal have suffered from the weight of this expectation as much as anything else. Is Mourinho the answer? The jury is still out. Although the Portuguese normally delivers, he tends to provoke along the way and his managerial spells, although trophy laden, are often tense and confrontational affairs. Sometimes, however, change is needed to renew an organisation. The long held suspicion among many fans was that while Mourinho had an impeccable record, he wasn’t the right fit for United. He probably still  isn’t the right fit. But he’s not Van Gaal and that’s all that matters right now.

Twitter: @RoryMcGimpsey

 

Beware Brexit!

You only have to take a cursory look at any news outlet to appreciate that something quite fundamental is happening in the next few weeks. On 23 June 2016, Britain will vote via referendum on whether the United Kingdom will remain in the European Union. Ever since the UK entered the political union (or its predecessor the European Economic Community to be precise) in 1973, its citizens have had a rather distant relationship with the supra-national body. Unlike other European states like Germany, France, and the Republic of Ireland (who entered the union in the same year as the UK) to name just a few, it’s fair to say the United Kingdom has never been an enthusiastic advocate of the European project.

Throughout the complicated history of the European institutions, the UK has often seemed like a semi-detached observer, its politicians instinctively resisting the red tape, bureaucracy, and integration associated with EU membership. Indeed, successive British governments have effectively sought to renegotiate the union’s treaties and deals, often with mixed success. While British administrations of all persuasions have been locked in a seemingly perpetual cycle of renegotiation, it is not the minutiae of political rules that has led to next month’s crucial referendum.

Rather than the aforementioned red tape and bureaucratic intrusion that is often cited by  polemical commentators, the problem that many Britons have with continued EU membership has nothing to do with bureaucracy, but everything to do with perceived political integration. What clearly irks some of the loudest voices endorsing the “Leave” campaign is the notion that this alleged integration will become ever more pronounced, and all traces of national sovereignty will be permanently ceded to Brussels. Campaigners for Brexit fear a de facto United States of Europe above all else, it seems.

One of the more interesting aspects of the debate surrounding Britain’s European future is the overwhelming focus on emotion. With such a seminal vote imminent, one would have expected political leaders to focus on the details. After all, how else can voters make a genuinely informed decision? Instead, what many campaigners offer  (on both sides of the debate it has to be said) is emotive and immature rhetoric. Perhaps that is why the “Leave” campaign has attracted some very eccentric and vocal proponents to its cause.

Arguably, the propensity for populist and sentimental rhetoric is one of the reasons many observers are predicting the retention of the status quo in June’s referendum. For seismic constitutional change to take place, logic states that the middle ground must be persuaded. It’s difficult to make the case for substantive change when febrile emotion has hijacked the argument. It is easy to scoff at some of Boris Johnson’s more bizarre pronouncements, but it is clear that the former Mayor of London is much more intelligent and capable than the crude caricature often presented of him. Despite his unconventional demeanour, Johnson is undeniably a shrewd and ambitious operator. None of which makes him right on the Brexit question, of course. We’ll soon find out if Boris and his fellow Brexit supporters have persuaded enough British voters to leap into the unknown.

It’s interesting to observe the different dynamics operating on both sides of the Irish Sea. Unlike the UK, Irish people (of all political persuasions and none) tend to be more enthusiastic and vocal in their support of the EU. With some exceptions, Irish people generally give a wholehearted seal of approval to the European project. And how could it be any other way? Modern Ireland is testament to the triumph of the EU. Irish infrastructure, from roads and railways to everything else in between, has been transformed by EU finance.

It’s not just economic factors that underpin Irish support for the EU, though. A majority of Irish people have bought into the EU on all levels, viewing it as an institution that enriches their nationality rather than compromising it. One of the positive aspects of  Ireland’s progressive outlook is that it doesn’t allow borders to stifle the benefits of EU membership. Northern Ireland has benefited enormously from EU participation and peace funds are only a small  part of a substantial European investment. It’s easy to understand, therefore, why normally conservative Northern Irish leaders are reticent to back the  Brexit campaign. Perhaps this shouldn’t come as a shock. Contrary to popular perception, residents of Northern Ireland instinctively understand complexity of identity, that someone can be British as well as Irish, European rather than insular. One of the consequences of our tragic history is an appreciation of this cultural and national nuance.

The very idea of Brexit threatens the layered and complex Irish political architecture that’s taken years to construct. The implications of a British withdrawal from the EU extend far beyond middle England, therefore. Ultimately, the British people will re-define their own relationship with Europe on June 23, but a huge amount is at stake. It is not an exaggeration to state that millions anxiously await the outcome of the Brexit referendum. Irish citizens (north and south) are included in that number.

Twitter: @RoryMcGimpsey

All Hail The Underdog!

The underdog (once an endangered species in sport) is making a welcome and sensational comeback. Witness Leicester’s City’s remarkable triumph as Premier League winners as cast-iron proof that supposedly impossible dreams sometimes come true. All season long, we all wondered when Claudio Ranieri’s trailblazing side would come off the rails, but to the Italian’s eternal credit he managed to get unfashionable, ordinary Leicester over the finishing line. Leicester’s title win is an incredible feat, a victory borne from tenacious endurance and an indefatigable spirit. In an era of grim hyperbole, Ranieri’s achievement is the real deal, a truly remarkable feat that will be cherished for decades to come.

The Foxes’ victory would be worthy  of celebration in any era, but coming as it does in the context of billionaire sugar daddies and astronomical TV deals, Leicester’s title is nothing short of miraculous. It must also be immensely satisfying for the genial Ranieri on a personal level. The former Chelsea boss was once vilified and castigated as a well-meaning eccentric, a talented manager whose undoubted potential was curtailed by erratic team selections. How times have changed! Such unfair characterisation has been permanently cast aside, as Ranieri’s charges romped home with composed, ruthless determination. What makes Leicester’s achievement  so incredible is that it has been crafted with comparatively meagre resources. The champions of 2016 simply haven’t got the financial or political clout to justify a title challenge in the modern game, let alone a win. To  outflank their more illustrious rivals in such emphatic fashion ranks as one of the greatest sporting  achievements in recent times. From Tinker man to managerial genius. It has been quite a journey.

It hasn’t generated as many column inches, but another fantastic and wondrous underdog story is happening on this side of the Irish Sea. Pat Lam’s Connacht haven’t won anything tangible (not yet anyway) but their Pro12 achievement stands alongside that of Leicester’s footballers in terms of historical significance. The western province has led the way throughout the regular Pro12 standings, playing a style of rugby that is enterprising and innovative. Creativity practically oozes from the Galway men these days, and a regularly jam packed Sportsground is testament to their attractiveness for supporters. What makes Connacht’s feat genuinely remarkable as it it has come out of what can only be described as sporting oblivion. Traditionally labelled the “Cinderella province”,  it is easy to forget that just over a decade  ago, Connacht were threatened with professional extinction. The IRFU considered disbanding Ireland’s fourth professional franchise, only to have a last minute change of heart, partly inspired by a popular outcry against the decision. Connacht’s revival, therefore, must be viewed in this context of uncertainty. One hopes the men in green finish the job, but regardless of their final league position, Lam has done phenomenal work at the Sportsground.

There is something about unexpected success that sparks the soul of sports fans. Such victories are as elusive as they are laudable, but I don’t believe that is the reason we eulogise underdog wins to such an extent. Winning against the odds (in any walk of life) inspires the romantic and idealistic within all of us. But such wins also scream possibility and hope. We all constrain ourselves with self-imposed limitations, but truly great things can be accomplished if sufficient belief is marshalled. For if Leicester and Connacht can do it, anyone can. All hail the underdog. Events as rare as hens’ teeth deserve to be celebrated for the miracles they are. Jamie Vardy has every right to have a party.

Twitter: @RoryMcGimpsey