Still I Rise You may write me down in history With your bitter, twisted lies, You may trod me in the very dirt But still, like dust, I'll rise.
Does my sassiness upset you? Why are you beset with gloom? 'Cause I walk like I've got oil wells Pumping in my living room.
Just like moons and like suns, With the certainty of tides, Just like hopes springing high, Still I'll rise.
Did you want to see me broken? Bowed head and lowered eyes? Shoulders falling down like teardrops. Weakened by my soulful cries.
Does my haughtiness offend you? Don't you take it awful hard 'Cause I laugh like I've got gold mines Diggin' in my own back yard.
You may shoot me with your words, You may cut me with your eyes, You may kill me with your hatefulness, But still, like air, I'll rise.
Does my sexiness upset you? Does it come as a surprise That I dance like I've got diamonds At the meeting of my thighs?
Out of the huts of history's shame I rise Up from a past that's rooted in pain I rise I'm a black ocean, leaping and wide, Welling and swelling I bear in the tide. Leaving behind nights of terror and fear I rise Into a daybreak that's wondrously clear I rise Bringing the gifts that my ancestors gave, I am the dream and the hope of the slave. I rise I rise I rise.
Just a week after we supposedly won the SPL, it’s crisis time again as our lead at the top of the table was cut to four points.
Of course the talking point will be Artur Boruc’s clanger, which will become a Youtube classic before long. Boruc is good but, whatever his personal circumstances, he does need to concentrate fully on his job as a professional football player – even if John Rankine later said he had been practising his “squiggles” from 40 yards.
That said, the chances of the Celtic supporters being conned by a gleeful press into turning on him are surely remote. Artur has earned the esteem of Celtic supporters and it will take more than the odd howler to challenge his position as first-choice goalkeeper and one of our favourite sons.
And, though the error was inexcusable, Boruc was not helped today by a bizarre team selection. Gary Caldwell was arguably our best player at Easter Road and, at this stage, is vying with Scott Brown for the title of Celtic’s player of the year.
We know he can play in midfield – and more power to him – but it seems ridiculous to have broken up Caldwell’s defensive partnership with Stephen McManus to accommodate Glenn Loovens. Injuries undoubtedly played their part but rather than tinker with defence, surely Paul Caddis or Aiden McGeady could have started in midfield.
If Gordon Strachan didn’t see McManus and Loovens troubled at any time, presumably he missed the first-half miss by Steven Fletcher (admittedly McManus was nowhere to be seen at the time).
Loovens has his qualities but positional sense is not one of them. On several occasions he was caught out of position and indeed the central defenders pushing too far forward was a theme of the game.
And yet – here we go – it could all have been so different if Celtic had invested properly in the summer. We started the season with only three established strikers, two of whom have been injured, with the other one rarely looking like threatening to score.
That was always likely to be problematic and the real surprise is not that Celtic failed to score against Hibs but that we managed to win 12 matches without being fully staffed in that area.
Today, the strikers may as well have been non-existent. Scott McDonald did work hard, Cillian Sheridan, who is still young and inexperienced, made no discernible impact and Georgios Samaras clearly still has some way to go to reach peak fitness.
It has become commonplace for those defending this failure to strengthen (and left-back is still an issue) to portray those who wished to see the club with a balanced squad as demanding reckless spending. That is not the case. Some people would just like to see the club assemble a squad that has adequate strength in all areas. That, we clearly do not have.
Some of the decisions made recently are tantamount to setting up a jewellery store and saying that you don’t have enough money for proper security.
The apologists for this negligence – and that is precisely what it is – insist on comparing our “net spend” to Britain’s worst-run club since Leeds United, one that is in the midst of a calamitous financial crisis brought about by a bombastic impresario.
Is this the only benchmark?
The more I read from some Celtic officials and commentators telling us how it is ridiculous to have expected our worldwide scouting network to have identified a striker and left-back, the more they sound like politicians telling us there is nothing in the coffers to fund free personal care for the elderly.
At football clubs, like central government, funds are found depending on the policy whims of the day.
It is simply dishonest to represent those of us who identified weaknesses in the squad months ago as demanding random, unsustainable spending. And let’s not forget that Celtic’s failure to do so has already cost the club millions of pounds in European football revenue.
Gordon Strachan must shoulder some of the blame, but not the lion’s share. However, if he continues to make excuses for people he believes to be his friends, he may very well one day find himself being held accountable for the failures of others.
The newspapers, of course, will have their headlines, which we in turn will ignore.
Those charged with running the club, those whose only comprehension of ownership is defined by the number of shares certificates with their name on them, ought to think twice before trying to reconcile the supporters to another disappointing transfer window.
How can you account for a team that has won the league championship three years in succession getting turned over on its own ground by a side with some talent but which is also peppered with mediocre footballers?
Bad luck? Bad refereeing?
No.
The answer is bad planning and inexcusable errors from individuals.
First, to the defence. Yet again, Celtic have been exposed as a team that is uneven in its distribution of personnel. We have at least six talented midfielders but still only one left-back. (The “versatile”, injured and invisible Jean-Joel Perrier Doumbe can hardly be counted.)
It has been apparent since, 12 months ago, Vladimir Bystrov raced past Lee Naylor like a Ferrari overtaking a Skoda with a caravan in tow that we needed another left-back. We didn’t sign one. What are we left with? A good right-back putting in an abysmal performance in the left and being skinned by the likes of Kirk Broadfoot.
Gordon Strachan, who often mentions the duty of full-backs to protect their centre halves, would do well occasionally to remind the men in the middle of small consideration such as cover, when players like Daniel Cousin are tearing down the wings with only one option in the penalty box.
Wilson was bad – really bad – but the experienced pairing of Gary Caldwell and Stephen McManus far too often watched play developing around them, perhaps because of the clever zonal marking system that Celtic execute so brilliantly.
Then there is Artur Boruc. Let’s mention the elephant in the room: Boruc is a great goalkeeper – probably the best in the world – but has started the season in the manner of a man whose priorities are seriously distorted. Two disciplinary incidents since the summer, a visible belly and a casual demeanour do nothing to engender confidence after a display that would have embarrassed Henty “Drop the Ball” Smith.
Then there is our most experienced international striker, Jan Vennegoor of Hesselink. A game is not lost at 3-1 with 20 minutes to go, especially when your opponents have just had a man sent off.
To aim idiotic kicks at opponents off-the-ball and then leave the pitch with a wry smile when quite correctly shown a red card is inexcusable and unworthy of a Celtic player. Jan has been an exceptional player for us and has suffered a serious injury. Hopefully the manager will demonstrate to him forcibly that as a senior Celtic player, he is expected to be professional at all times.
How frustrating this must have been for the players who were performing well. Scott Brown and Paul Hartley worked hard to be productive for the attackers, Georgios Samaras was dangerous throughout and Aiden McGeady, Shaun Maloney and Shunsuke Nakamura looked capable of producing more openings. Ben Hutchinson faced an unenviable introduction to the derby fixture but should now be in third place in the strikers' pecking order.
However, it was a wasted effort when let down by such unprofessional, juvenile displays elsewhere.
Rangers deserved their win and congratulations to them on an excellent display. Some Celtic players should seriously consider issuing an apology.
In the aftermath of a remarkable period in terms of bad blood between your favourite team and mine, let me address some of your recent commentaries in The Herald.
In today’s paper – available on the internet, of course – you spout forth on the actions of Artur Boruc, crassly, if indirectly, linking the wearing of a T-shirt depicting the late Pope John-Paul II to the death of a Celtic supporter attacked on Sunday night.
You also refer to a violent attack, quite possibly sectarian in motivation, on Aiden McGeady remarking, “Suddenly, stoking the fire does not seem such a smart idea, does it?”
Violence, Darryl – sometimes fatal – related to matches between Celtic and Rangers is sadly nothing new. It is something that most decent people abhor, making no distinction regarding the victims or perpetrators of such vile acts.
Yet, you chose not to make mention of the actions of Walter Smith, who, prior to the match, joined with Martin Bain in making direct personal attacks on Peter Lawwell and Celtic in general, scorning the integrity of the club and chief executive and claiming to have been directly disadvantaged by Lawwell’s intervention.
Not so long ago it was accepted that no-one associated with Celtic or Rangers would make any comment likely to raise tensions in the West of Scotland prior to such a match. You apparently seek to imply that Artur Boruc is responsible for fanning the flames yet, by implication of silence, absolve Walter Smith, a veteran of some 40 such encounters as Rangers manager and with an involvement going back 22 years.
Do you think it might have been better for Smith and Bain to have used more temperate language? Why did you make no direct remark on this, other than to add to the “point-scoring” furore?
You also caricature Artur Boruc as a “pantomime villain,” guilty of “overt symbolism,” “antagonism,” “wreaking havoc,” and “selfishness… using football grounds, as a soap box for his beliefs”. That’s a hell of a T-shirt.
It must also be said that your use of the term “granting an audience” in relation to an interview with Boruc is wholly inappropriate. I’ll credit you with the ability to know why.
Has it ever occurred to you or your colleagues to properly challenge the “FTP brigade” who so berated Boruc and reported him to the police for having the temerity to make the sign of the cross at Ibrox Park? Was there a word of condemnation in The Herald when fans at Ibrox displayed a banner degrading Boruc on the grounds of his Catholicism, with the words “Voodoo no worky"?
Apparently not, even though it has been claimed that the banner in question was commissioned by The (non-sectarian) Blue Order, is similar in style to others used by that organisation and appeared in an area used by the group, once the bane of Ibrox officialdom but now quoted as part of the “Follow with Pride” campaign: “Davie Macintosh of The Blue Order said: ‘I'm really looking forward to hearing the singing even more this season and I'm sure all the fans will be right behind the new Follow With Pride campaign. We are really going to up the anti in terms of stadium atmosphere this season with a few new plans of our own including using megaphones and each stand having its own design of flag.’"
I suspect that the lack of attention to such matters is due to the fact that you, like the majority of Scottish football journalists, seem to consider yourself one of the arbiters of common sense when it comes to defining who has a right to be offended by what and how much.
Then again, derision aimed at Catholicism and Scotland’s Irish community, e.g. the recent song with the words “the famine’s over, why don’t you go home” is routinely displayed by Rangers supporters with barely a line noting its occurrence in the mainstream media.
Despite quoting chapter and verse of the relevant legislation pertaining to Boruc’s T-shirt, and implying that FIFA had been asked to intervene, you conspicuously failed to reference the numerous FIFA and UEFA directives breached by Rangers supporters – and by implication the club – at a significant proportion of the club’s games.
But, Darryl, this is where I have trouble fathoming either what your standpoint is or, perhaps more properly, what inspired The Herald to appoint you as “Chief Football Writer”.
Just last week, you assumed the role of social commentator, scorning people such as yourself (“log-on looneys”, I believe you then called them), “who seek a form of internet-driven infamy; the kind who have taken to inconveniencing UEFA every Monday morning with their pathetic reel of YouTube one-upmanship”.
“Internet idiots are drowning out right-thinking Old Firm majority”, blasted the headline, as you declared “the internet age has spawned a new strain of Old Firm idiocy. Untraceable and unaccountable [We’ll come back to that], this is the evolution of the bampot.”
The “intelligent, reasoned follower of Old Firm fortunes”, you claimed, has had “concise and cerebral arguments drowned out by feverish and irrational proclamations”.
You grossly exaggerated the response of Celtic supporters to Rangers fans unfurling yet another illegal and racist banner at a UEFA Cup match, where the entire ticket allocation had been controlled by the club. You then referred to “the hidden meaning behind ‘Nakamura Ate My Dog’.”
“Racist, discriminatory, the SFA must act was the gist. Are we to assume Celtic's sublimely gifted and profoundly intelligent midfielder has endured sleepless nights over a banner that is not only inaccurate but, given his limited grasp of English, probably lost on him?
“Do we even have to point out that Japanese don't eat dog meat?”
I am sure, Darryl, given your own grasp of English – and a few other usual characteristics of the broadsheet writer – the irony was lost on you but that very night a courageous, gifted and respected journalist, Rageh Omaar, presented the third part of “Immigration: The Inconvenient Truth”. I suggest you watch it before you deign to make any further pronouncements on social cohesion and the acceptable face of racism.
Omaar refers to tabloid headlines accusing Eastern European immigrants of eating swans and relates this common gruesome stereotyping of foreigners to his experience of stories claiming that his fellow Somalis ate donkeys.
The Polish journalist Omaar spoke to said such stories appalled her when faced with the realisation that British journalists “perceive us as wild animals”.
But perhaps we shouldn’t take that seriously. After all, a writer of your standing has already illustrated how the “right-minded majority” should feel, according to their command of English and certain perceptions of what constitutes offensive racism – as opposed to the other kind.
And you clearly feel qualified to pass judgement on Artur Boruc – an immigrant Polish Catholic (and probably, Darryl, the best goalkeeper in the world, in case you can yet be jolted back into the dark realms of sports reporting) who does not easily accept the derision of people who consider themselves to be the natural majority in this country.
“A clear distinction must be drawn between real Old Firm supporters and the plankton who contribute nothing but embarrassment to their respective clubs,” you say, “Those who seek a form of internet-driven infamy”.
There is another clear distinction: “between real journalists and the plankton who contribute nothing but embarrassment to their respective titles” internet-driven infamy being a felicitous side-issue.
Let’s return to fulfilling my promise. “Untraceable and unaccountable,” you say. Well, we could debate who has a right to spout their utterances on the Internet, as you do, and the concept of identity. Does a believable name carry greater weight than one obviously meant to denote an identity without claims that any related passport or driving licence is registered?
Is it more honest to be declared as Darryl Broadfoot than “One Star Means More”, “Fat Eck”, “Hector Bandido”, “Murphio”, “GrandMaster Suck” or “Paul 67”?
What about “Martin McMillan”, “Derek Miller” et al, who beef up the pages of The Herald without indication that they are just two of many Herald "writers" who do not even exist? What about the Herald writer whose reports are listed as “at Stamford Bridge” but who really watches the matches on satellite TV?
The point is, Darryl, if I really have to articulate it, that perhaps we should all try to evaluate what we do, where we are, how the hell we got here and what shaped our perspectives objectively (if we possibly can), lest we face charges of hypocrisy.
Alternatively, rather than taking to the keyboards to attack people and suggest sanctions against them, for example Artur Boruc or those non-journalists who dare to speak, some of us should, as Mr Lincoln advocated, “remain silent and be thought a fool” rather than have our utterances remove all doubt.
Artur Boruc had revealed that he once "dreamed" of signing for Rangers and owes much of his success to a meeting with Andy Goram.
In an interview with Polish sports magazine Kurwa Mac! Boruc described a meeting with the former Rangers No1 when Scotland played a friendly in Bydgoszcz.
Boruc revealed: “I was just establishing myself with Legia Warsaw but in Poland the only goalkeeper anybody talked about was Jerzy Dudek. He had just announced he was moving from Feyenoord to Liverpool and all the countrywas talking about him.
“I felt there was no point in me being there because I was third choice. I was mainly looking forward to see Scotland play because I had heard so much about Andy Goram being an amazing goalkeeper but they had some guy from Wimbledon or somewhere at the time.
“Before the game I was practising and not really caring when Jan Tomaszewski shouted over that a “dupek” wanted to talk to me. I didn’t even recognise him but when Jan introduced him I couldn’t even speak.”
“Even with Tomaszewski translating I was so nervous but he told me that Goram liked the way I moved. He said to never give up and to forget Dudek – one day I would be better than him because he could see it in my fantastic eyes and invited me to have a drink and talk about football at the Scotland hotel but I didn’t go.”
“He even offered to show me a few things and I was amazed that such a big man could move like a cat.”
“He told me to always to believe in me and not care about anyone else because they only hate a great goalkeeper. For months all I could think about was that I wanted to be at a big club like him. I think about this sometimes when people shout at me in Scotland. It’s funny because they only called him “The Goalie” and they call me something similar in Glasgow.”
Regardless of the inevitable pro-Rangers media spin- and there is a time and a place Artur - it looks like Boruc can join the likes of Kenny Dalglish and Danny McGrain as “ones that got away”.
And just maybe we have to thank the Roly Poly Goalie.
Many thanks to Darek Kraska for heads up and translation
