Why directors need some direction

KENNY DALGLISH was clearly a logical choice for the Newcastle United board of directors when it came to finding a successor to Kevin Keegan. They covet the championship; Dalglish has, with not one but two clubs, shown how it can be done.

Sometimes, however, one wonders how boards arrive at their decisions, how much homework they do and how aware of candidates' capabilities they are. A Newcastle director was once asked how Jack Charlton was shaping up as their manager. "A bit blunt, isn't he?" he replied. What was he expecting?

Frequently, uninspired shortlists of candidates might just as well be headed "the usual suspects". Arsenal's recruitment of Arsene Wenger was enlightened, as was Blackburn's of Sven-Goran Eriksson. It remains a mystery, though, why none in Britain has approached Louis Van Gaal, who will leave Ajax this spring. Unless, assuming they have heard of him, all are assuming he is Bobby Robson's successor at Barcelona.

Too often the names trotted out are either players coming to the end of their careers or those who have failed elsewhere. During a recent briefing, Howard Wilkinson, the English game's new technical director, listed 10 youngish ex-players, including Terry Butcher and Ray Wilkins.

Wilkinson's point was that if players are trained to be managers, they might survive the course longer. It is a curiosity of the English way that no formal qualification is required for management. With the profile of the job changing, as people are given responsibility for running teams rather than whole clubs, it is an area that needs looking at.

This column's point is that although there must always be room for the inspirational unqualified exception - as was Franz Beckenbauer for Germany - too many appointments are parochial, cheap and convenient, short-sighted and short-term in these post-Bosman days when knowledge of the European market and youth development is crucial. These days, more courses for coaches are being offered, more centres of excellence and academies for players springing up. Perhaps now is the time for some eye-opening tuition for boards of directors.

EXPECT an outcry from clubs still bemoaning the repeal of the Corn Laws after the inevitable announcement by the FA that the domestic system of transfer fees for out-of-contract players over the age of 24 is to be scrapped. There will be teething troubles as clubs panic and suddenly players realise that they can see out this season then move for free within England, and thus probably negotiate large signing-on fees and wages.

Feudalism and restrictive practice is dead, it seems. "Football is coming into the real world," says Ian McLuskie of the Players Out of Contract Association, who, having won the battle after five members threatened to go to law, will now act as an advisory service for players.

The change follows decades of players being exploited. There are concerns; for the smaller clubs, for the money not going back into the game. It comes back to more far-sighted management and a less selfish distribution of the game's wealth.

THERE is this theory that the only reason some clubs sign overseas players is for the length of their surnames. At 75p a letter on the back of replica shirts, it can be quite a money-spinner. It is fanciful, of course. Still, Middlesbrough would apparently like to hear from the former Plymouth Argyle player Forbes Phillipson-Masters. To name but three.

DURING a Spanish League match recently, a spectator trained a laser beam into the eyes of a goalkeeper in an attempt to put him off. On the evidence of last week at Winchester Crown Court it may seem that some goalkeepers in England need no such distractions, but it has happened here.

The copycat thought was clearly planted by the Spanish experience when, as I witnessed, a spectator in the front rows of the Aston Villa v Chelsea match on Boxing Day worryingly aimed a narrow red beam at the forehead of Gianfranco Zola near a touchline.

Beware, though; it can backfire. Was it the same person misdirecting the beam into Mark Bosnich's face as he slipped and conceded a goal while kicking the ball out against Newcastle last week?

As a rule: How skill can be rewarded

RYAN GIGGS takes a corner on the left, curls it in beautifully and the ball drops alarmingly for the defence into their six-yard area. Then up goes the linesman's flag to signal that the ball has gone out of play and a goal-kick is awarded. Thus a skill is negated. Is this what the laws intended? As everybody knows, the ball is deemed out of play when it crosses the byline or sideline, whether or not it has bounced. But why? In this age of lighter balls and improved techniques, more players can curl and bend the ball cleverly and should be allowed to do so without being penalised for it. Only if the ball has bounced or struck an object or spectator should it be deemed out of play. Skill is rewarded, play flows. One exception would have to be made: as is already the case, when the ball crosses the goal line, having bounced beyond it or not, a goal is scored.