Tangled Webster

AS any guru worth her mumbo-jumbo will tell you, even golden sticks have their limits. Rima, the “Lithuanian mystery woman” allegedly practising her mystical arts at Tynecastle, can tap Andy Webster’s pins with her wands all she likes. Problems in the defender’s Achilles tendon area will still flare up without warning. Baffling, isn’t it?

Mind you, some of us are prepared to give Rima the benefit of doubt. What else, apart from her healing powers, has blessed some Hearts players with the apparent ability to rise from the dead seconds after a feather-light contact with an opponent? The wonder woman can’t fix a broken relationship, though.

It may be that the problem picked up by Webster in training last week is as real and as painful as his estrangement from his club and its owner, the never-knowingly melodramatic Vladimir Romanov. Temporary coach Valdas Ivanauskas has not been able to say whether the injury is serious or trivial. Since it means the player will only miss his fourth game on the trot, however, there is probably little to worry about. Just Celtic to meet and second spot in the league to secure: no big deal.

An injury to Webster is easier to explain to the support, in any case, than last weekend’s Easter Road team sheet. Having doubtless communed with a higher power, Ivanauskas could find no starting spot for the defender, for Edgaras Jankauskas, Rudi Skacel or Julien Brellier. Romanov has a funny way of fashioning a team of European calibre. Funny, that is, if you happen to be a Hibs supporter.

The Tynecastle owner also has a distinctive attitude towards man-management. It is one thing for an employer and an employee to fail to resolve their differences, quite another for the latter to announce he can no longer trust the former to meet his obligations. In some circles, that sort of comment would have the lawyers on stand-by.

Such, though, is Romanov’s way. He owns and runs Hearts: there is no longer any ambiguity about that; no suggestion that a coach, however successful, has any special privileges; no question that a mere player can challenge the proprietor’s authority. Webster is now a servant of the club in name only, an asset to be disposed of as Romanov sees fit.

Once upon a time, such a state of affairs would have caused uproar among Hearts fans. These days, a large number are surprisingly tolerant of their eccentric Lithuanian benefactor. Perhaps they remember the alternatives they faced not so long ago. Perhaps, more to the point, they take note of achievements of which they once only dreamed. Managers and directors come and go; Romanov’s ultimate intentions remain obscure. Still Hearts go, more or less, from strength to strength.

What happens next in the Webster case is liable to be fascinating. Will Romanov make an example of the player to remind others of new real ities? It seems likely. If the owner feels especially bloody-minded, the defender could be kicking his heels from now until June 30, 2007, when his contract expires. If Webster’s real desire is a move to Rangers, meanwhile, as Hearts and others suspect, he is liable to be sorely disappointed.

Say what you like about Romanov – and I leave that pleasure to the amateur psychologists among you – he has changed football in Scotland. Hearts are no longer a feeder club for the Old Firm. They are under no pressure whatever, as we are reminded frequently, to sell anyone. Wages at Tynecastle are not governed by the sort of ceilings in place at other clubs. And the owner is perfectly serious, it seems, about his extravagant ambitions.

Tough luck on Webster, then, even if he is the sort of player Paul Le Guen were to be seeking. At Tynecastle, admired performances, great potential and a place in the Scotland squad no longer leave the club defenceless when an agent comes to call. Webster must do as he thinks best for his career: so much is obvious. But unless Hearts can discern a potential mutual benefit in his desires, trouble, of the sort we have been witnessing recently, is inevitable.

Romanov and his subordinates could have spared us their nonsense, of course. A club who find themselves in a tight and crucial league race do not “rest” their most important players. Equally, a club who have decided to realise the value of an asset, namely a restless player, should not indulge in public bickering.

Romanov, for better or ill, doesn’t care. He appears not to give a damn, for that matter, about Webster being portrayed as the victim of a ruthless foreigner with delusions of grandeur. When the dust has settled, the player will doubtless be performing in the lower reaches of the Premiership and no worse off for it. Hearts, clearly, will go on.

Behind the row, once you subtract the harsh words and the bluffing, you sense bafflement at Tynecastle. Why would Webster leave? Hearts pay good money these days. They are all but guaranteed European football. The lack of “ambition” often cited by discontented players is nowhere apparent. Aside from Rangers, Webster has been mentioned in connection with Everton and Fulham. He would do well at either club, but how well would those clubs do? For a Scottish observer, all this is refreshing.

Is the owner wrong? In one sense, the question is irrelevant. He can do as he pleases. If he chooses to run Hearts into the ground in the delusional belief – sincerely held, to read his comments – he knows as much about football as any coach, nobody can stop him. The customers can rebel, but that will not happen until such time as Romanov’s grand design begins to fall apart.

Last week’s result against Hibs showed what could happen. It did not quite amount to a final verdict on Romanov, however. For now, Webster is out of the picture. However sketchy, it is a big picture, at least in the mind of the master of Tynecastle.

30 April 2006

Taken from the Sunday Herald