“I think one of the players had a bit of a fight with a picture and unfortunately won.”
Hodgson added: “There was a slight contretemps at the end of the game with the player being upset with one of their players not wanting to shake hands and he was a bit emotional.
“I am pretty certain that a team that plays with so much heart and determination as Stoke will probably forgive us for breaking a picture.
“We will happily pay for [any damage] but I hope it will not take the gloss off what I think was a very good performance.”
Stoke boss Tony Pulis was critical of Olsson’s antics and said: “Olsson smashed some memorabilia and that is very disappointing when it happens.
He added: “If you can’t control yourself by not smashing someone else’s property because someone refuses to shake your hand, that is not an excuse.
“That has been paid for by this club and he has no right to break things like that.”
Comedy all around. “He has no right to break things like that.” Indeed not.
Interestingly, the BBC has removed the “contretemps” paragraph now. Had Hodgson used the word while at Liverpool he’d doubtlessly have been accused of alienating the fans with pretentious southern-speak, just another example of how he doesn’t “get” them.
Also, what is it with hand-shaking at the moment? I quite liked what Mark Hughes did at City on Sunday: I once read that baseball managers get themselves thrown out of games for arguing with umpires not because they think it will do them any good, but to establish some energy into the team, a sense of “us against them”; Hughes (like Jose Mourinho) seems quite good at this. He shows a steel, a passion, suggesting that his team won’t be walked all over by “the man”, whoever that man might be. It’s a bit silly, and it’s not like the team’s lack of outward shows of passion held us back under Hodgson, but it does add a certain something to the side.
(random and delicate excursion: Sidwell and Etuhu: ginger white man hurtles around looking very busy; laid back appearing black man is more languid but doesn’t obviously let us down – how much do these outward appearances colour our perceptions of their work on the field?)