Interview: Holt, Kay, Taylor and Winter on City, Pellegrini, Predictions, Twitter and More!

Over the past couple of years, you’ve had to write about various off-field matters, whether that be related to owners, racism or other stories that hit the headlines. Do you enjoy the variety those different cases offer in terms of what you cover, or would you prefer to concentrate on purely footballing matters?

Ollie Holt, Chief Sportswriter for the Daily Mirror: I enjoy them up to a point. I’m a columnist as well as a football reporter and by their nature, columns tend to be issue driven. Sometimes, the most satisfying type of sports writing is the kind that allows you to attempt, at least, to address wider social, political and moral issues. That’s also the kind of sports writing I enjoy reading, particularly when it’s written by people like Paul Hayward, Martin Samuel and Matt Dickinson. That doesn’t mean I don’t love the game and reporting on it but it’s good to have some variety.

Oliver Kay, Chief Football Correspondent for the Times: I enjoy the variety, but the reason I wanted to be a football writer was to write about football, funnily enough. There were times last season when you found yourself thinking ‘Can we not just have one week of writing about actual football without someone biting an opponent or getting in a ruck with a ballboy or accusing a referee of racism?’ When those things happen, you obviously have to report on them and, as a journalist, I enjoy the variety. But as a football fan, I’d be a lot happier if we weren’t writing about clubs in administration, clubs being chaotically managed, racism, biting, etc.

Daniel Taylor, Chief Football Writer for the Guardian: I know what you mean and I suppose, in an ideal world, it would all be purely about the actual football. But there’s a demand to know about the politics and issues and controversies and I must admit I quite like it. It’s a strange time for the newspapers and a lot of them are still trying to work out the right balance. These days, with the advent of Twitter, rolling 24-7 news channels etc, everyone knows what has happened in great detail during a football match. So the next morning’s reports can appear a little ‘old’ in the newspapers unless they are topped up with quotes. For Monday morning reports from Saturday games, a ball-by-ball match report can look positively ancient. So the papers need the issues and other stories, if that makes sense. To put it into context, if I tweet a match report it would maybe get a dozen retweets. If I tweet, ‘player A has put in a transfer request’ the roof comes off. So there is actually a bigger appetite for the other stuff.

Henry Winter, Daily Telegraph Football Correspondent: Enjoy the variety. I try to avoid personal stuff, family stuff, but with John Terry, for example, it impacted on the England dressing-room so was legitimate. Most of my pieces revolve around matches, but that can take in everything from the 90 minutes to youth-development problems, racism, owners, fans’ disenfranchising.

Do you ever temper criticism of someone or events at a club, bearing in mind the need/desire for access? 

Ollie Holt: Good question. I suppose the honest answer is that I try not to. In some ways, I’m in a position where I don’t have to rely on press conferences or access to them. I don’t think I was ever banned from a press conference by Sir Alex Ferguson, for instance, but I wouldn’t have known if I was because, aside from Champions League matches, I rarely went to them. Things get interesting when players you have had a decent relationship with stray into trouble. That happened with me with John Terry over the last couple of seasons. I thought I was fairly forthright in my criticism of some of his actions. A lot of people thought I was soft on him.

Oliver Kay: I’d like to think not. I don’t think I’m one to stick the boot in unnecessarily, but I’m sure I’ve upset people at most clubs at one time or other. At least I hope I have. I think there are times when you weigh up the pros and cons of writing a story, but those assessments are far more likely to be about your relationships with individuals than about jeopardising access in a wider sense.

Daniel Taylor: I think a bit of human nature comes into it. For example, if I’ve been to interview a player and really liked him then, yeah, maybe you would be more likely to support him if he was not playing well. That can also work the other way. But it should only go so far. I liked Mancini when he was managing City but I still wrote for the best part of six months that he was vulnerable to the sack. You shouldn’t ever be ‘bought’ with access.

Henry Winter: No! I’ve shellacked some of the people I get on best with in football. If it’s deserved, you can’t hold back. 

If you had the power, what changes would you introduce to the game?

Ollie Holt: I’d allow each team one appeal per half over refereeing decisions they disagree with. Referees need more help.

Daniel Taylor: I’m quite happy with the game the way it is (although I’d ban goal music, half-and-half scarves and a few other things) but obviously I’d like better access for journalists. I remember, in my first couple of years covering City, I pretty much had the number of every player. These days you just never see the players – or, more specifically, you’re not allowed anywhere near them. At United, it’s even worse when it would be better all round, in terms of forming relationships, if there wasn’t always this big dividing wall.

Henry Winter: Sin-bins for dissent. Clubs to provide free away travel. Winter-break between rounds 3 and 4 of FA Cup.

How important nowadays is social media in terms of breaking news or just interacting with fans? 

Ollie Holt: It’s an important news source and a means of journalists communicating with players in an era when contact between the two sides is more and more stage managed and diminishing all the time. Purely from my own point of view, it acts as a good check and balance, too. A lot of fans are incredibly knowledgeable about their clubs and they’re quick to point out my ignorance when it rears its head, which is often. I don’t mind that. It’s good to be corrected on something when you’re wrong.

Oliver Kay: I wouldn’t call it essential, it’s very valuable and very important not just in terms of breaking news, picking up news and driving traffic to your site (yes, even with a paywall) but in terms of being more in tune with more opinion beyond the football/media bubble. It’s good to debate and interact with people too. But it makes me laugh when people say “Newspaper journalists are redundant now. I get all my football news from Twitter.” Er, yes. Where exactly do you get it from? More often than not, it comes from newspaper journalists, whether you follow them or not. For journalists and newspapers, the challenge is about trying to use social media to strengthen their product rather than driving people away from the paper. That is the big challenge that the newspaper industry faces. In general, over the past 15 years or so, newspapers have been slow to rise to these challenges. I’d say that, rather than the papers themselves, it was individual journalists who led the way in showing how social media can work for them rather than against them, but the papers are pushing it hard now.

Daniel Taylor: Very important. I’m a newspaper man at heart and there’s still no better feeling than knowing you are going to break something in the next morning’s paper. But that’s rare these days, or pretty much impossible, given the way Twitter works. We (the Guardian) are digital-first now, so we tend to put everything out online to get as many views as possible. Things have changed and you have to move with the times. It gets complaints from other journalists but that’s just the way it is going and you can see the Mail, the Sun and a few others doing the same now.

The interaction is one part of it, but Twitter has also been a really good way of making new contacts. I’d say it’s pretty vital now for any journalist and there are very few who are stubbornly holding out against it. Obviously there’s a downside because, once you get to a certain number of followers, you can’t make a single comment without being jumped on. And almost always, it’s by people who have no understanding of the mechanics, politics, relationships of the job and getting upset because of their own club bias. Try criticising Suarez for racist abuse, or telling Spurs fans Bale wants to go etc etc (or City, Mancini/Tevez/Balotelli etc!). But there’s still more good than bad (even if it is a close-run thing sometimes).

Henry Winter: Twitter’s great for breaking news, team-news, injuries etc. I follow about 100 individual fans for insight into their clubs etc. I follow another 20 or so because I respect their views on football generally. But I laugh when people talk about using twitter to ‘interact with fans’; that happens walking into grounds and you can have a proper talk.

Was it the right decision to get rid of Roberto Mancini? Did he deserve more time after what he achieved in charge or was there too much anti-Mancini feeling from within the club/squad for him to continue? 

Ollie Holt: I think getting rid of Mancini at the end of last season was harsh. Winning the league then finishing second is a pretty good record. I thought he deserved another season at least but I guess the failures in the Champions League counted against him.

Oliver Kay: Yes, because by the end the tension between Mancini and his players was undermining a very strong squad. Even if he wasn’t to blame, he had become a source of weakness. To be honest, I think it was almost always a problem. Yes they won trophies under him, but that is one of the best squads ever assembled in the Premier League – and I wouldn’t say the same of the United squad of the past three years. You would expect a squad like City’s to win trophies under any good manager. I know City fans love him, but I think the club had to move on. I would expect Pellegrini to make it a more stable environment, to improve them tactically – maybe technically too – and to give them something they lacked last season. Whether he matches what Mancini did in 2012 or even what Mancini did last season – second place and an FA Cup final – is harder to say, but I believe they’ll do a lot better under Pellegrini than they would have done this season had Mancini stayed. Hypothetical, I know, but I think it would have been a mess this season had Mancini stayed.

Daniel Taylor: I couldn’t say if it was the right decision but it was extraordinarily naïve for anyone to think he wasn’t going to go. A few journalists, and an awful lot of fans, ended up looking pretty stupid, to be honest. At Wembley, for the FA Cup semi-final against Chelsea, there were City fans who spent pretty much the entire game shouting at me in the pressbox because of “all that bollocks about Mancini” etc. The simple fact was that a club with City’s ambitions want to be on a steep, upward trajectory. Last season City went backwards in everything – goals scored, points, everything. Then you throw in all the politics, the fact Mancini was permanently in dispute with Marwood and others, the fact the club had a new regime running it.

To be honest, I didn’t realise quite how bad the divisions were until after he had gone and the players said absolutely nothing. Not a single player mentioned it on Twitter and, really, I think that’s piss-poor. I lost a bit of respect for Vincent Kompany over that, for example. Whatever happened, Mancini had done well for those players and the club. Kompany tweets about all sorts of stuff to make himself look a great guy. I thought he might have been able to devote 140 characters to the guy who won City the title.

Henry Winter: Yes. He did well but the harmony had gone, the line had been crossed.

What have been your first impressions of Manuel Pellegrini? 

Ollie Holt: I haven’t had any contact with him. I’m aware of his reputation. I think he’ll do well.

Oliver Kay: Favourable, intelligent, measured, serene. But I’m more interested in the first impressions I’ve heard from players and others at the club, which have so far been universally positive. I can’t see him making many headlines or memorable soundbites, but that’s not what he’s there for.

Daniel Taylor: As I write this, I haven’t met the guy. I was on holiday during his press conference and I wasn’t on the summer tour. So I’m looking forward to seeing. The Spanish journalists all have a lot of respect for him and he comes across well in interviews. I think it will be a lot different with him in charge – less political, with much quieter press conferences.

Henry Winter: Good. Don’t know him really. Not sure he’s going to provide verbal pyrotechnics in press conferences but not important if team doing well. He’s so well-regarded as a man and a manager.

One of Pellegrini’s greatest achievements with Malaga was his success in the Champions League. Much depends on the draw, obviously, but how would you expect City to fare in that competition this season? 

Ollie Holt: I think City will do well in the Champions League this season. They’ve got an even stronger squad, they’ve got experience now, even if it was unsuccessful experience. Pellegrini’s know-how will help, too. I can see things going their way this season with doubts about how Bayern will react to Guardiola and the sense that the power of Barcelona may be waning slightly. I can see City in the final.

Oliver Kay: As you said, much depends on the draw. They’ve had very tough draws the last two seasons and they could end up in pot three this time, which would be a punishment for what was – despite the tough draw – an awful campaign last season. It’s not about avoiding Barcelona/Real/Bayern. It’s about avoiding PSG/Dortmund/Milan/Juventus type teams. If they get a soft draw, they’ll get through. If they get a tough draw, they’ll make a better fist of it than they did last season.

Daniel Taylor: I’m not sure you’ll be winning it but you surely have to do a lot better than last season. Clearly it was a very difficult group but the level of performance was poor, to say the least, and almost to the point when you wonder now whether it might have jarred the team’s confidence. Alternatively, it might be something that acts as a motivation this season – to show they can play well at that level.

Henry Winter: Can’t get worse to be honest. They’ll get another tough group but Pellegrini’s shown with his tactics and changes, he can inspire a team.

In contrast to last summer, City have acted swiftly in this transfer window. What do you make of the new additions to the squad? 

Ollie Holt: Their transfer dealings have impressed me because they acted swiftly and decisively and the players they bought are all quality. I’m excited about seeing how Navas, in particular, fits in.

Oliver Kay: I’m surprised they’ve spent as much money as they have on 27/28-year-olds (Negredo, Fernandinho, Navas), as I was expecting a more youth-centric approach. All four players, particularly Jovetic, have plenty to recommend them. Particularly with Navas’s pace and penetration and ability to stretch defences, they’ll give City some of what they lacked last season. I don’t think there’s quite the same quality or long-term value as the 2010 intake (Toure-Silva-Balotelli-Milner) but they’ll bring big improvements to what was already a very good squad.

Daniel Taylor: I’m still a bit surprised they didn’t go all out for Cavani but clearly they know the finances better than me. The forwards all look very good (though I’m not sure an upgrade on Tevez, ability-wise) and I’d say you definitely have the strongest squad in the country. At the same time, I feel you needed another top-quality centre half to compensate, say, if Kompany and Nastasic are both injured/suspended at the same time. United, for example, have Ferdinand, Vidic, Evans, Smalling and Jones.

Henry Winter: Good. Excellent width too.

City, United and Chelsea have all had changes of manager over the close season. Which of the three do you think is best equipped to cope with the upheaval?

Ollie Holt: I think Chelsea may just edge City, partly because Mourinho will have a galvanising effect. But my guess is it will be between them for the title. United won’t be far away but their lack of activity in the transfer market so far has surprised me and if they let the Rooney saga drag on any longer, it will destabilise. I like Moyes and I think he will succeed at Old Trafford but the club is bound to be a little disoriented by the departure of Ferguson.

Oliver Kay: I’m struggling with this one. I expect both City and Chelsea will improve, having underperformed last season. I’m not sure about United. Whether it was Ferguson, Moyes or anyone else in charge, I would say they need to add quality to their squad this summer, because they will clearly face a far stronger challenge this season. I don’t like suggesting it’s all down to what clubs do in the transfer market, because it isn’t, but if United go into the new season without strengthening, they’re going to find it a lot tougher than last term.

Daniel Taylor: I’m not sure ‘upheaval’ would really be the correct word for City. If anything, it’s been a very relaxed summer. I was talking to someone at the club and they were loving it, being out of the limelight, no controversies, no transfer sagas – everything in place. United, in stark contrast, have had a pretty complicated summer and been embarrassed a few times in the transfer market. Moyes is already coming across as a bit tetchy and Rooney clearly wants out, which is never a good thing. Chelsea now aren’t as good as Chelsea in Mourinho’s first season but, if they get Rooney, that’s a bloody good team.

Henry Winter: Chelsea. Mourinho knows the map of English football.

Are there any youngsters you’re expecting to make the step up for City this season?

Ollie Holt: I don’t know enough about them.

Oliver Kay: From the conversations I’ve had, not really. I know there’s this long-term drive towards youth, but, from what I’ve been told, they’re thinking the following season will be the one where they start to bring more youngsters into the squad. The ones they really have high hopes for are in the under-18 or under-17 age group. Beyond the odd League Cup appearance, I don’t think we’ll see much of them this season.

Daniel Taylor: No.

Henry Winter: Not many. But I like the look of Seko Fofana.

Finally, time for some predictions.

Ollie Holt
In order, top four in the Premier League: Chelsea, City, United, Arsenal
FA Cup winners: Arsenal
CL winners: Real Madrid (but I think City might have a real go at it this season). 

Oliver Kay:
In order, top four in the Premier League: It’s still too early to do them in top order. All I’ll say for now is that I think the gap between first and third will be tiny compared to last season. I won’t make my mind up until The Times put a gun to my head next week. I predicted United last August. Not sure I will do this time, but we’ll see.
FA Cup winners: Chelsea. Just for a change.
CL winners: Bayern.

By the way, Like a footballer plugging a computer game, I feel duty-bound to plug The Times’s Premier League goals package. More info here. 

Daniel Taylor:
In order, top four in the Premier League: Man City, Man Utd, Chelsea, Arsenal
FA Cup winners: Man Utd.
CL winners: Bayern.

Henry Winter:
In order, top four in the Premier League: Chelsea, City, United, Arsenal.

Follow @viewfromablue