That arse Mathew Norman

To be a decent press reporter requires a degree of neutrality. Journalism is not ostensibly about saying what you want but is more about reporting on an event. We all take for granted that there will be a little bit of bias creeping in around the edges, particularly when reading the less worthy organs of the 5th estate like the Evening Standard, Sun and Burn The Witches (sorry... Mail on Sunday).

That he should become a regular sports writer is neither here nor there, the obvious thing is he should suspend his own prejudices to report in as unbiased a fashion as possible. His article however commenting on the Carling Cup final is, how can I say it nicely, slightly unfair to Chelsea.

A quick resume of procedings would note that Chelsea played their full squad and Arsenal put out a fairly young side bringing on some more experienced players late in the game. Arsenal were the better side in the first half and Chelsea were lucky to come in at half time at 1:1. As a neutral (rabid Chelsea fan) I accept that MN is right to suggest that in the future Arsenal will be a team to be reckonned with if their existing exceptional talent stays at the club. No dispute with that point either. MN mentions that he felt cheated as Didier Drogba's first half goal was "nearly off side". Nearly off-side of course is not actually off side and the goal stands, even in the eyes of post match tv refereeing!

In a slower second half Arsenal started brightly but after 10 or fifteen minutes the pendulum swung in favour of the more experienced Chelsea team. John Terry, Frank Lampard, Micheal Ballack, Andrey Shevchenko, Didier Drogba, Arjen Robben, Ricardo Carvalho, Diarra, all began to play together and Chelsea hit the cross bar twice. Arsenal began to fade and in a goal mouth scramble Terry, diving for a header meets an Arsenal boot and is knocked unconcious. After 10 minutes when the players had recovered from their shock at Terry's injury, the tempo built back up and Chelsea appeared to be dominating. Suddenly, from a sloppy pass Robben picks up the ball in the Arsenal half and sweeps a magnificent cross to the very head of Didier Drogba who has slipped away from the woeful Senderos and scores the winner five or six minutes from time.

This is followed by a bit of handbags from both sides (not so much Arsenals youngsters but their more senior stalwarts) sparking off a bit of a brawl. Three players are sent off, the game ends Chelsea win. Now that is reported in a relatively unbaised fashion. MN however simply ignores what was a fascinating match of two different styles of football, and a legitimate win for Chelsea but prefers to describe the game as a one sided romp by Arsenals' boys who were unlucky to lose against a thuggish Chelsea with no talent or imagination.

Thanks. That MN is not fit to write about sport is obvious. He ascribes a hated of Jose to Arsene Wenger that can only reflect his own impoverished opinion, ascribes a moral victory to Arsenal which fails to reflect that this is not a political point but a football match which Chelsea won decisively by scoring more goals than the other team and fails to spot that Jose may have been employing tactics that may not have been too pretty but which, within the laws of the game, entitle him to be called the winner.

That MN also tries to create, as with much of the press, a fued between Jose and Abramovich to sell more papers and undermine his position is no more credible than his laughable attempt to write about sport in an unbiased way. I am not however constrained by the need to remain neutral and can state quite frankly that I think Mathew Norman is a cunt. I do like his missus however.