Who to back - Lawwell or the legend?

Feeling compelled to criticise your club is an unpleasant endeavour at the best of times. Finding that some of your views are shared by Charlie Nicholas, can just make you feel dirty.

So we are presented with a dilemma. Who would you back – the former idol of the terraces who quite rightly points out that Celtic were ill-prepared for the recent European football campaign, or the suit, who finally snapped and hit back in a bitter personal dispute?

Well, for me, that’s a no-contest. I don’t like some of the decisions that have been taken at Celtic lately and I like even less the attempts to manage the expectations and opinions of the fans.

But Peter Lawwell, like everyone who rises to the top in commerce, is a survivor. Charlie Nicholas, on the other hand – like most former Celts in the media – can most kindly be described as a buffoon.

His latest bitch that "Lawwell's ego has become so big he has forgotten the true soul of the club, the fans," at least allows us a laugh. Nicholas has many qualities – but he will never have to fear accusations of modesty. This is a man who has been known to list himself in the list of Celtic legends.

We also don’t need to dwell too long on the quality of this pundit’s judgement. After all, when faced with the first possibility to jump ship from the club you claim to love, where you had been given the opportunity to fulfil your dreams (and yes, for a short time, he was very, very good), should you:

A – Stay for another year out of loyalty
B – Go to Liverpool, the most successful club in Europe
C – Join perennial challengers Manchester United, the biggest club in Britain
D – Sign for Arsenal, a team going nowhere, in the belief that you are so fab you will single-handedly make them world-beaters while visiting London’s glitziest clubs?

Charlie’s choice is now as legendary as “and-Smith-must-score” – but who could blame him for having his head turned? By that time he had already been modelling white slip-ons and pleated trousers for the Evening Times and giving fashion tips advising young men to reallocate the resources of their sock drawer.

It says much of Charlie’s ability to waste his own talent that the most significant contribution he made to any team was to Aberdeen and yet he barely rates a mention among the Dons heroes.

Having steadfastly refused to return to Celtic because “that would be a backward step”, he eventually did come back to a team that would be eliminated from the UEFA Cup by Xamax Neuchâtel – a team so bad that, even following a 5-1 defeat in Switzerland, there was hope that Celtic could yet qualify.

An early penalty miss at Celtic Park from – you guessed it, Charlie Nicholas – put paid to those ambitions. That said, an aggregate win over Germinal Ekeren can hardly be discounted in perusing the European achievements of that team of Charlie’s.

The final benchmark on Nicholas’s return was the manner in which he was outshone by a Frank McAvennie whose own second stint at Celtic (we had beaten Partick thistle to his signature) came after years of boozing, cocaine abuse and with an ankle that had been smashed to pieces by Chris Kamara.

However, Nicholas is not alone in believing too strongly in his own greatness. Having, for years, rubbed shoulders with Rodney Marsh, who thinks his talent comparable to George Best’s, he found a spiritual home at SkySports TV.

And something about media punditry seems to turn Celtic players into idiots who take pleasure in putting the boot into the team. Alan McInally (he played for Bayern Munich, you know) made the flesh creep with his nauseating sycophancy in trying to win over Rangers supporters.

Murdo MacLeod – the epitome of “boy done good” sports broadcasting – also revels in opportunities to roundly condemn Celtic while being far more circumspect with his comments on Glasgow’s smaller team. Davie Provan gives the impression of a man who is embittered by everything while Craig Burley deludes himself that he is still widely loved and admired for his modest skills.

MacLeod and Provan at least can have genuine claims of making a sustained and outstanding contribution to Celtic. John Hartson, as yet appears to have resisted the tradition of unfairly criticising Celtic to win over Rangers fans, though anyone who writes columns for Scotland’s tabloids will rightly be viewed with some suspicion.

And, of course, Bertie Auld has recently joined in with his comments, probably designed to promote his book. In Auld’s case, at least no-one can doubt his desire to see Celtic prosper and his place as an all-time great will never be challenged.

But that is where Lawwell and Nicholas really don’t stand comparison. Whatever your opinion of some of his decisions, it is undeniable that Lawwell is one of the best in his field and has made a huge contribution to Celtic’s recent (and hopefully future) success. He may never be accorded legendary status but the empirical evidence suggests that his importance to Celtic dwarfs that of middle-rung players like Nicholas and Burley.

It is true that ex-players have every right to express their opinions, even if it is remarkable that the same behaviour is almost never given page space when the subject is Rangers.

When those comments seem to be exclusively the embittered rantings of players turned media whores, they should expect a response.

Nicholas 0-1 Lawwell
(Missed pen. - Nicholas)





--