Mourinho’s referee rancour failing football

JOSE MOURINHO is many things. Undoubtedly he is arrogant, a man not prone to shy from a fight.

He's an earnest football coach with huge ambition, even if his focus on defence is a mite negative for some tastes.

He's also an adept man-manager judging by the spirit and unity of his large and expensive squad.

And there's no doubt his wit and panache have enlivened the Premiership, regardless of whether you are one of those who believe the billions of Roman Abramovich are ultimately bad for football.

So how could a man with so many qualities be an 'enemy of football', as suggested luridly and ludicrously this week by UEFA referee chief Volker Roth? His comments followed the shock retirement of referee Anders Frisk, who received death threats following the Champions League tie between Chelsea and Barcelona.

Whatever prompted it, Mourinho's 'apologise or I'll sue' reaction did the game no favours.

It was that sort of reaction, coming at a time when Chelsea face an assortment of six charges from the FA and UEFA and on top of comments claiming they want to "annihilate" opponents, which is rapidly making them the most unpopular football club outside the immediate environs of the Fulham Road.

True, Mourinho cannot be held responsible for every demented supporter whose warped sense of morals prompts them to send vile correspondence to a football official whose only crime was to try to do his job honestly and fairly.

The manner in which a simple game has assumed such rabid importance in some people's lives is one of the most depressing features of modern football.

Perhaps there are always going to be such nutters.

After all, Frisk is by no means the first referee to receive threats. It is almost a matter of course in Italian and South American football where referees need hides like hippos and tin hats to match. Others might remember Football League official Malcolm Ibbotson resigning back in 1988, proclaiming the violence he faced week in and week out had become intolerable.

"I love football but I have my wife and family to support," said Ibbotson.

"And I can't do that from a hospital bed."

However, it was Mourinho who accused Barcelona coach Frank Rijkaard of visiting Frisk in the referee's room at half-time.

He might not have expressed it in so many words but the inference was that something underhand was afoot.

It was Mourinho who used his criticism of Frisk's performance in the first leg as a tactic to ratchet up pressure on the officials for the crucial home tie.

That was at the heart of UEFA chief executive Lars-Christer Olsson's sentiments when he proclaimed: "We will not allow the slandering of match officials to become part of pre-match tactics."

That surely must be right.

Not that football will ever stop managers criticising referees for their performances. Nor, when it's done calmly, fairly and objectively, should it try.

Modern technology means a referee's decision invariably has been seen by millions in slow motion and from every conceivable angle before he even leaves the field.

To deny a blatantly poor performance would be crass, especially when a referee's decision can be the difference between a coach keeping or losing his job.

It is when the abuse becomes personal or the criticism overtly tactical, mind games in the current vogue, that problems arise.

Of all the ills which currently beset football and that list alone could cover the new Wembley arch disrespect for referees is by far the most damaging to the game.

More so than money worries or grasping agents or diving. And far more so than whether Arsenal's Ashley Cole was 'tapped up' by Chelsea or initiated the clandestine London meeting himself.

Never have players been as venomous in their abuse of referees as the current season. Wayne Rooney's F-word assaults captured the headlines and David Prutton's mad rant reaped high-profile punishment, but it is worse than that. Disrespect for officials has become endemic.

It does not take a rocket scientist to correlate such abuse on the field with the threats of a sick minority off it.

The irony is that it could be stopped at a stroke with the will of managers such as Alex Ferguson, Arsene Wenger and Mourinho.

Incidents of dissent were as rare as August snowflakes in teams managed by Brian Clough, when offenders were swiftly fined or rapidly shipped out and the manager reaped the benefits of fewer disruptive suspensions.

Mourinho has been described as the most dynamic young manager in English football since Clough.

There's no doubt he shares the same utter conviction that even when he's wrong he's right.

But Mourinho should not be threatening to sue. He should not be pouring more fuel onto a fire largely of his own making.

Because on this one Mourinho is wrong.