Version 5 of the A League is only a week away today so it's time to make some assessments and predictions on the coming season.
ADELAIDE UNITED
The Reds will be looking for a new identity in many ways this year. They have lost names like Agostino, Beltrame, Costanzo, Salley, Spagnuolo and Valkanis. Names that had all become synonymous with United. But perhaps that was the problem. Last season was the first time in the history of the A League that they had won a finals series match, but they were still the bridesmaids yet again. It's a tag that nobody wants and maybe these changes are just the start of a new look Adelaide
Strengths - After a phenomenal performance in the Asian Champions League last season, the players that are left have gained some invaluable experience that will hold them in good stead for the new lengthened season. Lloyd Owusu also looks to be a good signing for them considering they still have space to add a marquee player to the roster. Provided he can stay injury free he provides them with an experienced proven goalscorer, which they need.
Weaknesses - As always new players need time to meld, and Adelaide's inconsistent pre season form is proof that they haven't quite gotten there yet. They have had some big wins over some state league opposition but have also drawn with one and had a couple of losses to Melbourne Victory and more worryingly newcomers North Queensland Fury. They've also conceded 7 goals in 7 games and not many teams go too far conceding a goal a game.
Best they can do - 4th
Worst they can do - 6th
BRISBANE ROAR
A new name, but the same old faces are in Brisbane for the Roar's attempt to continue moving up the ladder season after season. Frank Farina will be looking to continue with his attacking and speedy play on the shoulders of his young attackers who have the freedom to go forward with the strong and experienced defenders at the back
Strengths - This squad is almost the same as last year where they fell only one game short of the Grand Final. Also Farina's style suits the players that he has which is when Frank is at his best.
Weaknesses - They came out of the blocks firing this pre-season and were 11-0 up after 3 games, however they have gone stale since losing 4 of the next 6 matches. If it is because they have gone stale, I don't know how they will fix it. If it is because young players are inconsistent I don't know how they will fix it either. Whatever the reason, the top teams seem to have bolstered their hopes significantly in some way and I don't think that the Roar have
Best they can do - 4th
Worst they can do - 6th
CENTRAL COAST MARINERS
The always underrated Mariners come into this season rated even lower than normal. The disasterous Asian Champions League campaign has rocked their confidence and shown that they are struggling to match the standard of top teams. But at the same time I've heard (and said) similar things about the Mariners in seasons gone by and they consistently work hard for each other to get results
Strengths - They are going to improve. They had a late start to the pre season due to the ACL matches in the off season so they are bound to start the season a little slower than other teams, but they WILL get better. Any Lawrie McKinna coached side will guarantee you one thing. They will fight for each other and for the team. That is a quality every supporter wants.
Weaknesses - Their pre season has been dull and uninspired. They've played 7 matches and while they haven't lost a single match they only won 3. The 3 wins came against 2 local teams and the struggling Fury. Really missing Jedinak and don't have the quality to replace him.
Best they can do - 6th
Worst they can so - 8th
GOLD COAST UNITED
Aptly named because they have united a WHOLE BUNCH of talent with a huge ambition - to win the league undefeated in their first year. With the facilities at Robina regarded as possibly the best in the country the trip to Surfers Paradise could quickly become the toughest away trip in the league if the fans get behind their side.
Strengths - A playing squad that seems to defy the salary cap seems to have established themselves already, starting their winning streak before Jason Culina even arrived for training. On Jason Culina, is anyone going to be anywhere near as dominant as he will be this season? I really don't think so.
Weaknesses - The weight of expectation may get the better of them. If they lose a game will the wheels start to fall off? Miron Blieberg can be a great coach, but hes so tempremental that he can also be a liability. If nothing else he will be interesting
Best they can do - 1st
Worst they can so - 3rd
MELBOURNE VICTORY
The reigning premiers have had few major changes to their squad so they will have to be a threat again but they have a challenge on their hands, because nobody has yet successfully defended a title in this competition.
Strengths - As mentioned there have been few changes to the team that won the title which has to be a good thing for them. They do still have the most potent attack in the history of the league combined with the evergreen and ever niggling Kevin Muscat meaning that they have the foundations for a solid season.
Weaknesses - What can only be described as a disappointing pre-season (5 wins, 2 draws, 4 losses) can't be easily explained. Perhaps there are deeper problems than are at the surface. Or perhaps they will continue the pattern that they have had so far (which the media seems to forget when it is convenient for them) because in the off years where they haven't won the league, they have failed to make the finals. They have had trouble stringing togehter 2 decent seasons so don't be surprised if they don't live up to expectations.
Best they can do - 2nd
Worst they can do - 3rd
NEWCASTLE JETS
What can I say about the Jets that hasn't already been said. Con just keeps finding ways to let the wheels fall off his club and the club keeps finding ways to keep fighting.
Strengths - Not too many to be honest. If Branko can get the best out of his key players he may be able to get a few results through and give them a chance to get some confidence and go on a streak. The signing of Fabio Vignaroli could be the key to their whole season. If he can be the glue for this team they may get somewhere.
Weaknesses - Where do I start? The club is in trouble off the field, the owner is acting like a petulant brat and the coach walked out. Then on the field they have struggled through a shortened pre-season and haven't had much of a chance to learn Branko's style yet and by the time they do the season will likely be gone.
Best they can do - 7th
Worst they can do - 9th
NORTH QUEENSLAND FURY
They seem unable to get much support from the bookies and the newest boys on the block will be looking to prove people wrong and have a strong season behind one of the biggest names in the history of the A-League, Robbie Fowler
Strenghts - They have signed "God" and are looking to partner him up with David Williams which has the potential to net them a fair few goals
Weaknesses - Everywhere else. Recruiting players that are unwanted by a struggling Sydney FC team is not a great strategy. They have lost about 5 players before the season has even started, not a great vote of confidence. They lost 7 of their 9 pre-season matches. I just can't see how they are going to win games
Best they can do - 8th
Worst they can do - 10th
PERTH GLORY
The Glory are finally trying to return the Glory days of the NSL and have actually spent some money to have a crack at the title this year. For their sake I hope it can bring back the old fans and return Perth to the popular team they used to be.
Strengths - Have to be the big name signings. The squad they have put together should certainly be able to entertain their fans and in turn win some spectacular games. Mile Sterjovski has the potential to be a dynamic match winner and will be a class above alot of players in this league
Weaknesses - They are Perth Glory. They are old soccer in new football and year after year find new and interesting ways to screw everything up. If David Mitchell can't get this squad firing by the half way point it could spell the end of his tenure. He will have run out of excuses.
Best they can do - 4th
Worst they can do - 7th
SYDNEY FC
This is going to be a do or die year for the Sky Blues. There has been so much turmoil at the club and all the talk is that EVERYTHING has been fixed and it is now the chance for the club to get back to their top club status. But if they can't do it, the whole thing could fall on its face.
Strengths - A professional, hi-tech, experienced and world class coach could prove to be the difference in what's going to be a tight race at the top of the league this year. He has the team playing an attractive and successful style of football which has shown in the 14 match unbeaten pre season which included conceding only 2 goals. Also the recent addition of an experienced centre back in Keller looks to have rounded out the squad almost to perfection.
Weaknesses - Very few, but the pressure of being Sydney FC has seen the club succumb to so many losses in the past that it has become a curse, but outside of that I can't really see too many matches being dropped by this well rounded squad.
Best they can do - 1st
Worst they can do - 2nd
WELLINGTON PHEONIX
Another team that can't get any support from the bookies and really look to be up against it to repeat their best season from last year
Strengths - I honestly think Ricki Herbet is a good coach and if he can get the best out of his squad they are capable of causing some real upsets.
Weaknesses - They rode their entire last season on the back of 2 players, Moss and Smeltz, and they have both left the club leaving a massive hole in their ability to win! The Pheonix also have next to no depth in their squad and a bad run of injuries could see them putting up some disgraceful sides.
Best they can do - 9th
Worst they can do - 10th
One week to go.
Bring on the new season!
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Phil Rothfield. Fail.
So the sports blogging world has finally made it's way into the mainstream sports reporting here in Australia this year, and it's easy to see why advertisers love it. The blogs are linked to the popular internet sports news pages (SMH, Daily Telegraph, FoxSports) giving them a ready made market of readers to advertise to.
The problem has become more in the confusion over what is actually reporting and what is the opinion of the blogger. Particularly when the blogging is being performed by people who have long been journalists and the blog is being performed in the context of their daily job as a reporter.
The best example I can give is the 3 day per week blog on the Daily Telegraph website by Phil Rothfield.
For those who are unaware Phil Rothfield is the "Executive Sports Editor" for the Daily Telegraph, has worked there for 33 years (a fact he brags about, other wouldn't) and as of mid march this year he has been picking topics mostly on Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays for readers to email in their thoughts and Phil responds. Not your typical blog but it's billed as a blog none the less.
Now, for the previous 32.5 years he has been a reporter in some shape or form and therefore would be striving to provide "informative, accurate and unbiased reporting." I've put it in quotation marks as they are the words used by Phil Gould in relation to Phil Rothfield once (they appear to be bitter enemies)
To be honest that is what I would imagine is the aim of a reporter, but I truly wouldn't know, I'm just a blogger.
And that's the beauty - while writing under the guise of a blog, you don't need to do any of that. You can unashamedly state your opinion, right or wrong. It's not purporting to be anything other than your opinion. However if people have been reading your articles for 32.5 years, there is a certain amount of trust built there, and to the un web savvy, it can be a bit confusing.
But I digress, the point I'm trying to make here is that when you put your opinion out into cyberspace it's there forever, and if you get proven wrong repeatedly, it's bound to hit your reputation. By that I mean, it's hard for your employer to push you as an expert when your expert opinion is proven to be incorrect.
Now this is no attack on Phil Rothfield personally, but his reputation amongst league circles isn't exactly immense, none the less, at what point do his multiple indiscretions force his employers to re-think him writing anything on this blog, out of fear of losing a valuable reporters reputation? Or, as he has often been accused of through the blog, let his personal views lead to ruining the game he is meant to be promoting.
I'll draw your attention to some things that have been said throughout the year.
Firstly we'll go through the facts and figures.
As I write this there have been 53 blogs by Rothfield
52 of them have been on Rugby League
Of those 52, 19 have put the sport in a positive light, 31 have put the sport in a negative light. 1 equally brought to light positive and negative aspects, and 1 was a non existent live blog during origin 1 where nobody responded. (for anyone interested the one blog not about rugby league was a negative blog about football)
Throughout this season, Rothfield has gone out on a limb with his opinions about certain people in the sport that have come back to haunt him in the following ways.
Under the title "Why Big Ego's are Threatening Manly's Season" he said "The guy who is totally out of control is Anthony Watmough" and still on Watmough "he behaved disgracefully at the season launch and as I said earlier...he walks around thinking he owns the game"
Then after his Man of the Match performance in Origin 3 after he was goaded by some fans, bringing up his previous comments, he defended himself a couple of times without admitting the quality of Watmough's play seemingly trying to save face, then the following day after some more origin talk he eventually said "Anthony Watmough was absolutely sensational. He reminded me of Gorden Tallis and Bradley Clyde rolled into one. I’ve seen every origin game played and I don’t know if I can recall a more outstanding performance from a NSW forward"
To be fair, in the first instance he was talking about issues off the field, and in the second instance on field performances. But either way, it's quite a turnaround.
I'll move on to the next instance.
On May 5th this year he said of (at the time) Cronulla CEO Tony Zappia "You can’t blame poor old Zap for Cronulla’s current crisis. He inherited a basket case and his (sic) trying desperately hard to get them into reasonable shape. I actually think Zappia is one of the better operators in the NRL" Zappia has since been shamed and become almost unemployable in the Rugby League world for a range of embarrassing issues that I don't need to go into now.
Both of these things are personal opinions on people's characters, and we can all make mistakes on that front (a point Rothfield has been keen to point out) so I'll move on to some issues that deal more with analysis of the game
On April 15 he blogged who he thought were the biggest flops of the season.
They included the following
"Manly signing Tony Williams from Parramatta
(He’s only played one game. He’s a big log with little speed)"
Has scored 4 tries in the last 8 weeks as part of a resurgent Manly team headed for the playoffs
"Cowboys signing Willie Tonga for $300,000
(He’s missed a couple of games and hasn’t done a thing)"
He has since played in 2 Origin matches winning the series with Queensland and has scored 3 tries for the Cowboys helping them into the top 8.
He also blogged that NSW would win the first 2 state of origins which proved to be incorrect, but I'll forgive him that one as being a proud New South Welshman, but maybe the blog isn't the place for that.
Ok so he might not judge the game well, but he hasn't played or coached the game and let's be honest he's not employed to analyse the game so much as report on it.
So we'll look at his journalistic know how. In sports journalism you're only as good as your connections and Rothfield claimed to have a direct line to NSW coach Craig Bellamy, whom Rothfield claims picked the NSW teams, on 2 occasions leading into Origin One.
There we got these gems.
Firstly on April 13, "the Bulldogs’ Michael Ennis has snuck under his (Robbie Farah) guard – and is almost a certainty to be wearing the Blues No 9" then on May 7th he told us that "Coach Craig Bellamy and NSW selectors are poised to drop an Origin bombshell by naming both Michael Ennis and Robbie Farah in the 17-man Blues squad to play Queensland"
For those that are unaware, neither of these things happened for game one of the series as predicted by Phil Rothfield.
These are only some examples that I have remembered from glancing through the blog on occasion this year. I'm only left to assume that there have been other insances that I have missed.
But based on this evidence, would you continue to allow a 33 year veteran of your newspaper to go on reducing his dwindling reputation amongst your readers? I'm not sure I would
The problem has become more in the confusion over what is actually reporting and what is the opinion of the blogger. Particularly when the blogging is being performed by people who have long been journalists and the blog is being performed in the context of their daily job as a reporter.
The best example I can give is the 3 day per week blog on the Daily Telegraph website by Phil Rothfield.
For those who are unaware Phil Rothfield is the "Executive Sports Editor" for the Daily Telegraph, has worked there for 33 years (a fact he brags about, other wouldn't) and as of mid march this year he has been picking topics mostly on Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays for readers to email in their thoughts and Phil responds. Not your typical blog but it's billed as a blog none the less.
Now, for the previous 32.5 years he has been a reporter in some shape or form and therefore would be striving to provide "informative, accurate and unbiased reporting." I've put it in quotation marks as they are the words used by Phil Gould in relation to Phil Rothfield once (they appear to be bitter enemies)
To be honest that is what I would imagine is the aim of a reporter, but I truly wouldn't know, I'm just a blogger.
And that's the beauty - while writing under the guise of a blog, you don't need to do any of that. You can unashamedly state your opinion, right or wrong. It's not purporting to be anything other than your opinion. However if people have been reading your articles for 32.5 years, there is a certain amount of trust built there, and to the un web savvy, it can be a bit confusing.
But I digress, the point I'm trying to make here is that when you put your opinion out into cyberspace it's there forever, and if you get proven wrong repeatedly, it's bound to hit your reputation. By that I mean, it's hard for your employer to push you as an expert when your expert opinion is proven to be incorrect.
Now this is no attack on Phil Rothfield personally, but his reputation amongst league circles isn't exactly immense, none the less, at what point do his multiple indiscretions force his employers to re-think him writing anything on this blog, out of fear of losing a valuable reporters reputation? Or, as he has often been accused of through the blog, let his personal views lead to ruining the game he is meant to be promoting.
I'll draw your attention to some things that have been said throughout the year.
Firstly we'll go through the facts and figures.
As I write this there have been 53 blogs by Rothfield
52 of them have been on Rugby League
Of those 52, 19 have put the sport in a positive light, 31 have put the sport in a negative light. 1 equally brought to light positive and negative aspects, and 1 was a non existent live blog during origin 1 where nobody responded. (for anyone interested the one blog not about rugby league was a negative blog about football)
Throughout this season, Rothfield has gone out on a limb with his opinions about certain people in the sport that have come back to haunt him in the following ways.
Under the title "Why Big Ego's are Threatening Manly's Season" he said "The guy who is totally out of control is Anthony Watmough" and still on Watmough "he behaved disgracefully at the season launch and as I said earlier...he walks around thinking he owns the game"
Then after his Man of the Match performance in Origin 3 after he was goaded by some fans, bringing up his previous comments, he defended himself a couple of times without admitting the quality of Watmough's play seemingly trying to save face, then the following day after some more origin talk he eventually said "Anthony Watmough was absolutely sensational. He reminded me of Gorden Tallis and Bradley Clyde rolled into one. I’ve seen every origin game played and I don’t know if I can recall a more outstanding performance from a NSW forward"
To be fair, in the first instance he was talking about issues off the field, and in the second instance on field performances. But either way, it's quite a turnaround.
I'll move on to the next instance.
On May 5th this year he said of (at the time) Cronulla CEO Tony Zappia "You can’t blame poor old Zap for Cronulla’s current crisis. He inherited a basket case and his (sic) trying desperately hard to get them into reasonable shape. I actually think Zappia is one of the better operators in the NRL" Zappia has since been shamed and become almost unemployable in the Rugby League world for a range of embarrassing issues that I don't need to go into now.
Both of these things are personal opinions on people's characters, and we can all make mistakes on that front (a point Rothfield has been keen to point out) so I'll move on to some issues that deal more with analysis of the game
On April 15 he blogged who he thought were the biggest flops of the season.
They included the following
"Manly signing Tony Williams from Parramatta
(He’s only played one game. He’s a big log with little speed)"
Has scored 4 tries in the last 8 weeks as part of a resurgent Manly team headed for the playoffs
"Cowboys signing Willie Tonga for $300,000
(He’s missed a couple of games and hasn’t done a thing)"
He has since played in 2 Origin matches winning the series with Queensland and has scored 3 tries for the Cowboys helping them into the top 8.
He also blogged that NSW would win the first 2 state of origins which proved to be incorrect, but I'll forgive him that one as being a proud New South Welshman, but maybe the blog isn't the place for that.
Ok so he might not judge the game well, but he hasn't played or coached the game and let's be honest he's not employed to analyse the game so much as report on it.
So we'll look at his journalistic know how. In sports journalism you're only as good as your connections and Rothfield claimed to have a direct line to NSW coach Craig Bellamy, whom Rothfield claims picked the NSW teams, on 2 occasions leading into Origin One.
There we got these gems.
Firstly on April 13, "the Bulldogs’ Michael Ennis has snuck under his (Robbie Farah) guard – and is almost a certainty to be wearing the Blues No 9" then on May 7th he told us that "Coach Craig Bellamy and NSW selectors are poised to drop an Origin bombshell by naming both Michael Ennis and Robbie Farah in the 17-man Blues squad to play Queensland"
For those that are unaware, neither of these things happened for game one of the series as predicted by Phil Rothfield.
These are only some examples that I have remembered from glancing through the blog on occasion this year. I'm only left to assume that there have been other insances that I have missed.
But based on this evidence, would you continue to allow a 33 year veteran of your newspaper to go on reducing his dwindling reputation amongst your readers? I'm not sure I would
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
International Rugby League
"What's that?" I hear you ask.
"Exactly" you should hear me answer.
In the constant argument of "which footy code is the best" the same agrgument is repeatedly trundled out from each side.
AFL points to it's phenomenal crowd numbers at the game which can't be argued with.
Rugby League then points to it's strong television ratings and spectacular "State of Origin" success which can't be argued with.
Rugby Union then points to the fact that their sport is international which it is.
Each of these sports has levels of success in each category, but one excels in each as pointed out.
For example, AFL is only really played here in Australia, but it plays a hybrid game against the Irish Gaelic Football team to give it some level of international competition. Rugby League is played well in essentially 3 major countries. Rugby Union, for all it's bluster, is played well in about 5 or 6 major countries (although Union fans would have you believe that it's the second most wordly sport behind Football!)
But something that has struck me of late is that for all the arguments, the codes that are not leading in each category aren't really doing all that much to try and match the leading code.
Sure, League and Union are trying to increase their crowds all the time, but they're not even close to threatening AFL and they don't expect to get there.
And the same goes for each category.
It seems though, that the most likely option for one to catch the other is for Rugby League to catch Rugby Union in the way of meaningful international competition.
You'll note I said meaningful. By that I mean that in the Rugby Union World Cup, there are only 5 teams that can realistically win it.
In Rugby League, there are 3 teams.
So it begs the question, if Rugby League as a sport is to take that next step, what can they do?
Well if they wanted to go for a quick fix and try to get there soon, they could always look at making people actually play for the country of their origin which would increase the success of some of the smaller pacific island nations, but would weaken places like Ireland. It would also only help to a certain point. If the game is looking to the long term and to become a more genuine international sport then it needs to start with the youth, and it needs to be pushed through the NRL and or Super League clubs.
When you look at the major international team sports such as Football or Basketball, all of the players skill and improvement is done at the club level in the major competition(s).
Now I know this idea may seem a little out there, but hear me out.
There should be incentives for teams to bring players from overseas into their clubs at junior levels to help give them the skills development needed to play top class football.
A club could send a scout to a counrty that is not one of the big 3 (Australia, New Zealand, England). Let's say he goes to France (just to make it interesting and not too easy) and identifies that there is potential for say 10 players, that are between 16 and 18 years old, if given the right guidance to possibly be good Rugby League players. You might think 10 players is a large number but this is in the whole country not just some individual local club.
So scolarships are offered. At such a tender age there would likely be reservations from parents to send their children off, but obviously schooling would be offered at whatever level necessary along with a modest salary and housing etc as part of this scholarship.
So obviously you would be fairly unlikely to have all 10 willing to take up the offer, so we'll say we get 6 of them willing and able.
Going on with this example, we have 6 young Frenchmen who have a language barrier to cross. So anyone with a firm grip on the French language and an understanding of the game of Rugby League has just found themselves a great new job!
So they spend 2 years training and learning from some of the best and playing in the clubs junior sides or feeder clubs when ready and or necessary. Some would likely get a bit home sick, but there are 6 of them so they at least have each other. Also, at that age, Pre season all the way to end of season won't be any longer than 8 to 9 months, so they can spend a good chunk of the year back at home anyway.
Either way, for arguments sake, we'll say that one of them can't handle it and heads back home.
2 years later - we'll take some liberties and say that we've got 3 players that have been assessed as being probably good enough to play in the third tier of football here in Australia at the moment (Jim Beam Cup) but not likely to ever really make that step up to first grade. They can then choose to try and stay in the country and have a go at it or head back to their home country. Either way the club would have to approve any deal where they could simply release the player or essentially allow them to play for another club, while still holding the rights to the player for a period no longer than 2 years. If the player unexpectedly starts to come into his own, the club then doesn't lose out on the hard work they have put in and could reap any benefits. You would expect these players to go back to France for the most part where the ability to play even at the level of Jim Beam Cup would make them a good player in the French League, helping to improve the standard of football played there.
Of the other 2, we'll say that one has just turned 20 and looks like he may have potential but isn't ready for first grade yet. He could be sent on a year or two loan to a French side to be a team leader, if that is the type of experience that the club is looking for him to get, and then come back as a squad player ready to have a crack at first grade. If not, keep him here and monitor his progress in a feeder team, possibly in the QLD Cup perhaps. We'll also say that there is a very promising 19 year old, who could play in the Toyota Cup side for the next year and may be ready to play First grade the following year so he stays with the club.
Obviously alot of this will require some good talent identification, but I'm sure there are plenty of people who can do that job.
Now, I'm well aware that one of the big sticking points on this is the money it would cost to do this, and for that the only vague soultions I can come up with is an NRL incentive based payment (perhaps after a new TV deal is negotiated to get more money in the game) or to look at it another way if you could get a French player to come over and become a solid player, you would have a whole other nation ready to support your team. Make your jersey available to them and you have recouped a fair bit of money.
Also if you think about it, that example that was just given is only the class of whatever year it would be, there's another group coming through the following year. What that means is that each year you could be sending a few players back to the French competition much better than when they left the country. After only 5 years you could possibly have up to 20 players trained by NRL clubs running around in the French league for their clubs, sharing their knowledge with their team mates and I guarantee you'll have a much better French national team (particularly if you throw in one or two players that have made the NRL or English Super League)
I said at the start to hear me out and I'm aware just how outrageous all of this sounds.
Is this the final solution? Even I highly doubt it
Should someone be talking about it? Most defeinitely!
"Exactly" you should hear me answer.
In the constant argument of "which footy code is the best" the same agrgument is repeatedly trundled out from each side.
AFL points to it's phenomenal crowd numbers at the game which can't be argued with.
Rugby League then points to it's strong television ratings and spectacular "State of Origin" success which can't be argued with.
Rugby Union then points to the fact that their sport is international which it is.
Each of these sports has levels of success in each category, but one excels in each as pointed out.
For example, AFL is only really played here in Australia, but it plays a hybrid game against the Irish Gaelic Football team to give it some level of international competition. Rugby League is played well in essentially 3 major countries. Rugby Union, for all it's bluster, is played well in about 5 or 6 major countries (although Union fans would have you believe that it's the second most wordly sport behind Football!)
But something that has struck me of late is that for all the arguments, the codes that are not leading in each category aren't really doing all that much to try and match the leading code.
Sure, League and Union are trying to increase their crowds all the time, but they're not even close to threatening AFL and they don't expect to get there.
And the same goes for each category.
It seems though, that the most likely option for one to catch the other is for Rugby League to catch Rugby Union in the way of meaningful international competition.
You'll note I said meaningful. By that I mean that in the Rugby Union World Cup, there are only 5 teams that can realistically win it.
In Rugby League, there are 3 teams.
So it begs the question, if Rugby League as a sport is to take that next step, what can they do?
Well if they wanted to go for a quick fix and try to get there soon, they could always look at making people actually play for the country of their origin which would increase the success of some of the smaller pacific island nations, but would weaken places like Ireland. It would also only help to a certain point. If the game is looking to the long term and to become a more genuine international sport then it needs to start with the youth, and it needs to be pushed through the NRL and or Super League clubs.
When you look at the major international team sports such as Football or Basketball, all of the players skill and improvement is done at the club level in the major competition(s).
Now I know this idea may seem a little out there, but hear me out.
There should be incentives for teams to bring players from overseas into their clubs at junior levels to help give them the skills development needed to play top class football.
A club could send a scout to a counrty that is not one of the big 3 (Australia, New Zealand, England). Let's say he goes to France (just to make it interesting and not too easy) and identifies that there is potential for say 10 players, that are between 16 and 18 years old, if given the right guidance to possibly be good Rugby League players. You might think 10 players is a large number but this is in the whole country not just some individual local club.
So scolarships are offered. At such a tender age there would likely be reservations from parents to send their children off, but obviously schooling would be offered at whatever level necessary along with a modest salary and housing etc as part of this scholarship.
So obviously you would be fairly unlikely to have all 10 willing to take up the offer, so we'll say we get 6 of them willing and able.
Going on with this example, we have 6 young Frenchmen who have a language barrier to cross. So anyone with a firm grip on the French language and an understanding of the game of Rugby League has just found themselves a great new job!
So they spend 2 years training and learning from some of the best and playing in the clubs junior sides or feeder clubs when ready and or necessary. Some would likely get a bit home sick, but there are 6 of them so they at least have each other. Also, at that age, Pre season all the way to end of season won't be any longer than 8 to 9 months, so they can spend a good chunk of the year back at home anyway.
Either way, for arguments sake, we'll say that one of them can't handle it and heads back home.
2 years later - we'll take some liberties and say that we've got 3 players that have been assessed as being probably good enough to play in the third tier of football here in Australia at the moment (Jim Beam Cup) but not likely to ever really make that step up to first grade. They can then choose to try and stay in the country and have a go at it or head back to their home country. Either way the club would have to approve any deal where they could simply release the player or essentially allow them to play for another club, while still holding the rights to the player for a period no longer than 2 years. If the player unexpectedly starts to come into his own, the club then doesn't lose out on the hard work they have put in and could reap any benefits. You would expect these players to go back to France for the most part where the ability to play even at the level of Jim Beam Cup would make them a good player in the French League, helping to improve the standard of football played there.
Of the other 2, we'll say that one has just turned 20 and looks like he may have potential but isn't ready for first grade yet. He could be sent on a year or two loan to a French side to be a team leader, if that is the type of experience that the club is looking for him to get, and then come back as a squad player ready to have a crack at first grade. If not, keep him here and monitor his progress in a feeder team, possibly in the QLD Cup perhaps. We'll also say that there is a very promising 19 year old, who could play in the Toyota Cup side for the next year and may be ready to play First grade the following year so he stays with the club.
Obviously alot of this will require some good talent identification, but I'm sure there are plenty of people who can do that job.
Now, I'm well aware that one of the big sticking points on this is the money it would cost to do this, and for that the only vague soultions I can come up with is an NRL incentive based payment (perhaps after a new TV deal is negotiated to get more money in the game) or to look at it another way if you could get a French player to come over and become a solid player, you would have a whole other nation ready to support your team. Make your jersey available to them and you have recouped a fair bit of money.
Also if you think about it, that example that was just given is only the class of whatever year it would be, there's another group coming through the following year. What that means is that each year you could be sending a few players back to the French competition much better than when they left the country. After only 5 years you could possibly have up to 20 players trained by NRL clubs running around in the French league for their clubs, sharing their knowledge with their team mates and I guarantee you'll have a much better French national team (particularly if you throw in one or two players that have made the NRL or English Super League)
I said at the start to hear me out and I'm aware just how outrageous all of this sounds.
Is this the final solution? Even I highly doubt it
Should someone be talking about it? Most defeinitely!
Thursday, July 2, 2009
Why can't we just pick the best players?
There has been a lot of debate, including from myself, about what NSW should do with their lineup for State of Origin 3 and for the coming years. Alot of talk about who is a future Origin player and who isn’t.
I gave my two cents on what team we should pick if we were looking towards the future, but it didn’t quite sit right with me to write that article. The main reason for that is that I have a long held belief that all representative teams should be picked wholly on the basis of who is the best suited person for the job.
By this, I mean that we shouldn’t be picking someone to play in a representative team because in 2 years time he is going to be a great player. They call it “blooding”, and I hate it.
The first time I personally remember encountering it was with the Australian Cricket team. I was always brought up to believe that wearing the Baggy Green was the biggest honour you could have as a cricketer. And the selectors went around the country watching players and picked the country’s 5 best batsmen, 5 best bowlers, and best wicketkeeper to wear the Baggy Green. You had to be the best and you had to earn the Baggy Green. That’s the way it had always been, that’s the way it was always going to be. That’s why it was such an honour.
Then at some point during Australia’s reign at the top of world cricket, things changed. The selectors and Cricket Australia realised (through some media propagation) that the players in the team, while still the best at their jobs, were getting old and were possibly going to retire around the same time and we would lose a generation of players in a short period of time and be left with an inexperienced squad of players that may or may not still be great cricketers.
So the selectors started bringing through players that may not have been the best batsmen at the time, but had the potential to be. The biggest example would probably be Michael Clarke. Don’t get me wrong, he’s a great cricketer, and even had a great debut year with the bat, but when he got his first Baggy Green, he wasn’t one of the best 5 batsmen the country had to offer. He didn’t earn it.
The thing is that Cricket Australia went on such a media campaign with it that it almost because just accepted that we no longer picked the best 11 cricketers, we pick young players for the future too. If one of our best 5 batsmen was 33, he wasn’t going to be selected. And now nobody seems to remember the days when it was simply a matter of picking the best players.
Which brings me back to NSW Origin this year. The selectors and coach came out after selecting the team for game one and said they were going with a “Youth Policy”. The media said that some radical thinking was needed to beat this team of Queensland greats. Both were wrong. Is picking the best 17 players available now radical thinking? Is that what it has come to? Why do we need a youth policy? If the best available players are young, there is no need for a policy! We don’t need any policy other than PICK THE BEST AVAILABLE PLAYERS!!
This doesn’t mean that if someone had a brilliant game the weekend before, they get a spot, they have to prove that they are the best player in their position by producing performances over a period of time, and that they are still currently the best available candidate to play that spot. I really can’t stress this enough!
Don’t get me wrong, efforts should be made to help promising young players slot into a representative team comfortably once he is the best player for that position, but that doesn’t mean you simply give him the jersey now so that when he is the best available, he is not overawed! What is the point in weakening a current team to POSSIBLY make a future team better? Because let’s not forget how often the blooding of these you players goes wrong!
There are other ways to blood players to representative sports. The cricket has the Australia A teams for the one dayers, League has City v Country, or the Prime Ministers IX, or even tour matches back in the day where a Kangaroos team would actually tour. The Socceroos have friendlies, and Asian Cup qualifiers against weaker opposition. There are junior camps, senior camps, 40 man squads, Training squads. There are other ways to get these kids ready!
The sooner we remember that the better.
I gave my two cents on what team we should pick if we were looking towards the future, but it didn’t quite sit right with me to write that article. The main reason for that is that I have a long held belief that all representative teams should be picked wholly on the basis of who is the best suited person for the job.
By this, I mean that we shouldn’t be picking someone to play in a representative team because in 2 years time he is going to be a great player. They call it “blooding”, and I hate it.
The first time I personally remember encountering it was with the Australian Cricket team. I was always brought up to believe that wearing the Baggy Green was the biggest honour you could have as a cricketer. And the selectors went around the country watching players and picked the country’s 5 best batsmen, 5 best bowlers, and best wicketkeeper to wear the Baggy Green. You had to be the best and you had to earn the Baggy Green. That’s the way it had always been, that’s the way it was always going to be. That’s why it was such an honour.
Then at some point during Australia’s reign at the top of world cricket, things changed. The selectors and Cricket Australia realised (through some media propagation) that the players in the team, while still the best at their jobs, were getting old and were possibly going to retire around the same time and we would lose a generation of players in a short period of time and be left with an inexperienced squad of players that may or may not still be great cricketers.
So the selectors started bringing through players that may not have been the best batsmen at the time, but had the potential to be. The biggest example would probably be Michael Clarke. Don’t get me wrong, he’s a great cricketer, and even had a great debut year with the bat, but when he got his first Baggy Green, he wasn’t one of the best 5 batsmen the country had to offer. He didn’t earn it.
The thing is that Cricket Australia went on such a media campaign with it that it almost because just accepted that we no longer picked the best 11 cricketers, we pick young players for the future too. If one of our best 5 batsmen was 33, he wasn’t going to be selected. And now nobody seems to remember the days when it was simply a matter of picking the best players.
Which brings me back to NSW Origin this year. The selectors and coach came out after selecting the team for game one and said they were going with a “Youth Policy”. The media said that some radical thinking was needed to beat this team of Queensland greats. Both were wrong. Is picking the best 17 players available now radical thinking? Is that what it has come to? Why do we need a youth policy? If the best available players are young, there is no need for a policy! We don’t need any policy other than PICK THE BEST AVAILABLE PLAYERS!!
This doesn’t mean that if someone had a brilliant game the weekend before, they get a spot, they have to prove that they are the best player in their position by producing performances over a period of time, and that they are still currently the best available candidate to play that spot. I really can’t stress this enough!
Don’t get me wrong, efforts should be made to help promising young players slot into a representative team comfortably once he is the best player for that position, but that doesn’t mean you simply give him the jersey now so that when he is the best available, he is not overawed! What is the point in weakening a current team to POSSIBLY make a future team better? Because let’s not forget how often the blooding of these you players goes wrong!
There are other ways to blood players to representative sports. The cricket has the Australia A teams for the one dayers, League has City v Country, or the Prime Ministers IX, or even tour matches back in the day where a Kangaroos team would actually tour. The Socceroos have friendlies, and Asian Cup qualifiers against weaker opposition. There are junior camps, senior camps, 40 man squads, Training squads. There are other ways to get these kids ready!
The sooner we remember that the better.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Newcastle Jets Take A Backward Step. Again.
Just a kind of short one today.
Con Constantine hired Branko Culina to take over as the new head coach of his Newcastle Jets team.
Something about this doesn't quite seem like it's destined for success.
Is it that Branko Culina was an absolute bust at Sydney FC getting only 2 league wins in 9 matches before getting fired? No that's not it.
Is it that Branko Culina said only 24 hours ago that he didn't want the job? No that's not it.
Is it the eerily similar career path that he has had to a certain Nick Theodorakopoulos? Yeah! That's it!
And how did that work out for you last time Con?
Richard Money who was an experienced manager left for a better job (sound familiar?)and you decided to go for a manager with a proven record in Australia (The only limited success of both Culina and Theo is in the Mickey Mouse NSL. Yes it was a Mickey Mouse competition. I loved it, but it was).
How did he go Con?
Did he win any games? None? Really?
What about in the pre season, surely he won a pre season game or two? None? REALLY!?!?
So I have to ask Con, what are you thinking??
Fool me once shame on you, be a ridiculous fool twice, not my problem.
And just as a side note, Branko, if you had a bad taste in your mouth after coaching in Sydney, I wouldn't use all of the mouthwash just yet. You're going to need it again soon.
Con Constantine hired Branko Culina to take over as the new head coach of his Newcastle Jets team.
Something about this doesn't quite seem like it's destined for success.
Is it that Branko Culina was an absolute bust at Sydney FC getting only 2 league wins in 9 matches before getting fired? No that's not it.
Is it that Branko Culina said only 24 hours ago that he didn't want the job? No that's not it.
Is it the eerily similar career path that he has had to a certain Nick Theodorakopoulos? Yeah! That's it!
And how did that work out for you last time Con?
Richard Money who was an experienced manager left for a better job (sound familiar?)and you decided to go for a manager with a proven record in Australia (The only limited success of both Culina and Theo is in the Mickey Mouse NSL. Yes it was a Mickey Mouse competition. I loved it, but it was).
How did he go Con?
Did he win any games? None? Really?
What about in the pre season, surely he won a pre season game or two? None? REALLY!?!?
So I have to ask Con, what are you thinking??
Fool me once shame on you, be a ridiculous fool twice, not my problem.
And just as a side note, Branko, if you had a bad taste in your mouth after coaching in Sydney, I wouldn't use all of the mouthwash just yet. You're going to need it again soon.
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
2009 NBA Draft - What it means!?
So the NBA Draft has come and gone again. Will this be a great draft year or not, only time will tell. The early mail is that it is a shallow draft but the same thing was said about the 2001 draft and we've since got 3 all stars from the 28th pick or later!
There were some interesting picks and some interesting deals done, not the least of which saw the Timberwolves with 4 first round picks and 2 second round picks. They'll be hoping it's a good draft year.
We'll start at the beginning -
Clippers - Blake Griffin
Everyone thought this was a lock for weeks, but with the Clippers you just never know (after all this is the franchise that took Michael Olowakandi with the first pick in 98 over Mike Bibby, Antawn Jamison, Vince Carter, Jason Williams, Dirk Nowitski, Paul Pierce, the list goes on. They also took Lorenzen Wright at number 7 in 1996 while Kobe Bryant, Peja Stojakovic, Steve Nash and Jermaine O'Neal were still available)
Suffice it to say, they've had some talent idnetification problems as well as some bad luck. In 96 they needed a centre, so left the players I mentioned behind and in 98, due to the poor choice in 96, they still needed a Centre, and there simply were none that year.
Which brings me to this year. Blake Griffin is by far the most NBA ready player in the draft, but he is Power Forward, and they've already got players that fill that role - Chris Kaman and Zach Randolph. But as just mentioned, that type of thinking has not worked for them in the past. They did the right thing, take the best player available and sort it out later.
Grizzlies - Hasheem Thabeet
Really could have used a Ricky Rubio, but he was just flat out not going to Memphis after their poor treatment of the Spanish in the past. So the next best player is Thabeet. Unfortunately for the Grizzlies, they need scoring. But Thabeet is a REALLY good defender and will only get better.
Thunder - James Harden
They have a good point guard of the future and they were better off just taking a player they can fit in now and start building a franchise. Harden was the right man in this situation
Kings - Tyreke Evans
Short sighted from the Kings. Tyreke Evans will help them sooner than Ricky Rubio would have, and he will be a solid player for a long time if he stays injury free, but the Kings are a franchise that have gone close to greatness and lacked that killer punch. In 5 years time Ricky Rubio is more likely to be the killer punch than Tyreke Evans.
Timberwolves - Ricky Rubio/Johnny Flynn
I don't care what any expert tells you, the Timberwolves can not lose by making these 2 picks. They will not play together, at least not for long anyway. Flynn is too small to be a 2 guard. If Rubio goes back to Spain they have Johnny Flynn. If Flynn doesn't live up to his potential, they have Rubio to fall back on. If he becomes a superstar in a year or 2, they can offload Rubio who would still have the unknown quantity, would be a bit older and less of a gamble so they could get a good trade for him. Or if they decide that they still want to keep Rubio after a top season or 2 from Flynn, I'm sure they'd get a great deal for a player that is young and has had 2 geat NBA seasons! As it seems to be playing out at the moment, Rubio may be traded soon, and they still have Johnny Flynn. They just can't lose. Too many people have underrated their strategy here.
That's the top 5 (6 really) and her are some other intersting ones
Raptors - DeMar DeRozan
They took a risk and went for potential, but when you're the Raptors you have to take those risks. He had a great year for a freshman playing at the 2 and if this gamble comes off, it will look alot smarter in a few years. But that's if they can keep him, which they've had trouble with in the past. I wish them luck!
Bucks - Brandon Jennings
I have to say, I already hate Brandon Jennings. He comes across as an arrogant spoilt brat before he has even gone into training camp. He has trash talked other players in the draft (Rubio in particular), he didn't turn up to the draft because he wasn't guaranteed to go in the top 14. It's an honour and a privelege to be drafted at all. You need to pull your head in and get over yourself Jennings. Having said that, most of the NBA's best players have this attitude, so he could end up being a big star and with Andrew Bogut due to have a breakout year in the next year or two, the Bucks may have done well.
Nets - Terrence Williams
An interesting pick considering who was still on the board and it was a bit of a surprise for a player that was expected to go late first round, but he has 4 years college experience on what is now a fairly young team, so that will help. The Nets are rebuilding on a young backcourt now with Courtney Lee joining and are another team that will struggle for now but it will pay dividends in seasons to come
Spurs - DeJuan Blair
How the Spurs manage to get amazing late picks so often astounds me. not only have they got Ginobli and Parker later than 25th picks, now they have DeJaun Blair who was unbelievably still available at number 37! He is a great power forward that was unlucky not to go top 15, after a Sophmore season averaging a double double (15.7 points and 12.3 rebounds) He's only 6'7" but Barkley wasn't big either. Yet again the Spurs have got the steal of the draft
Trail Blazers - Patrick Mills
Patty is going to have to fight for his spot on the roster, but he will genuinely work his ass off and once given the chance to improve and then prove himself he will make teams wish they had taken him earlier. There's alot of talk that his passing isn't good enough, and he's too small to play the 2 guard. So teach him to pass better. Tony Parker still isn't a great passer, but he's a fast slashing player. Mills is as fast and once he does some work on his pull up jumper he'll be a worthy NBA Point Guard. And Portland is a great place for him to learn to play with this amazing young squad.
Overall it may be a shallow draft, but only time will tell us that...
There were some interesting picks and some interesting deals done, not the least of which saw the Timberwolves with 4 first round picks and 2 second round picks. They'll be hoping it's a good draft year.
We'll start at the beginning -
Clippers - Blake Griffin
Everyone thought this was a lock for weeks, but with the Clippers you just never know (after all this is the franchise that took Michael Olowakandi with the first pick in 98 over Mike Bibby, Antawn Jamison, Vince Carter, Jason Williams, Dirk Nowitski, Paul Pierce, the list goes on. They also took Lorenzen Wright at number 7 in 1996 while Kobe Bryant, Peja Stojakovic, Steve Nash and Jermaine O'Neal were still available)
Suffice it to say, they've had some talent idnetification problems as well as some bad luck. In 96 they needed a centre, so left the players I mentioned behind and in 98, due to the poor choice in 96, they still needed a Centre, and there simply were none that year.
Which brings me to this year. Blake Griffin is by far the most NBA ready player in the draft, but he is Power Forward, and they've already got players that fill that role - Chris Kaman and Zach Randolph. But as just mentioned, that type of thinking has not worked for them in the past. They did the right thing, take the best player available and sort it out later.
Grizzlies - Hasheem Thabeet
Really could have used a Ricky Rubio, but he was just flat out not going to Memphis after their poor treatment of the Spanish in the past. So the next best player is Thabeet. Unfortunately for the Grizzlies, they need scoring. But Thabeet is a REALLY good defender and will only get better.
Thunder - James Harden
They have a good point guard of the future and they were better off just taking a player they can fit in now and start building a franchise. Harden was the right man in this situation
Kings - Tyreke Evans
Short sighted from the Kings. Tyreke Evans will help them sooner than Ricky Rubio would have, and he will be a solid player for a long time if he stays injury free, but the Kings are a franchise that have gone close to greatness and lacked that killer punch. In 5 years time Ricky Rubio is more likely to be the killer punch than Tyreke Evans.
Timberwolves - Ricky Rubio/Johnny Flynn
I don't care what any expert tells you, the Timberwolves can not lose by making these 2 picks. They will not play together, at least not for long anyway. Flynn is too small to be a 2 guard. If Rubio goes back to Spain they have Johnny Flynn. If Flynn doesn't live up to his potential, they have Rubio to fall back on. If he becomes a superstar in a year or 2, they can offload Rubio who would still have the unknown quantity, would be a bit older and less of a gamble so they could get a good trade for him. Or if they decide that they still want to keep Rubio after a top season or 2 from Flynn, I'm sure they'd get a great deal for a player that is young and has had 2 geat NBA seasons! As it seems to be playing out at the moment, Rubio may be traded soon, and they still have Johnny Flynn. They just can't lose. Too many people have underrated their strategy here.
That's the top 5 (6 really) and her are some other intersting ones
Raptors - DeMar DeRozan
They took a risk and went for potential, but when you're the Raptors you have to take those risks. He had a great year for a freshman playing at the 2 and if this gamble comes off, it will look alot smarter in a few years. But that's if they can keep him, which they've had trouble with in the past. I wish them luck!
Bucks - Brandon Jennings
I have to say, I already hate Brandon Jennings. He comes across as an arrogant spoilt brat before he has even gone into training camp. He has trash talked other players in the draft (Rubio in particular), he didn't turn up to the draft because he wasn't guaranteed to go in the top 14. It's an honour and a privelege to be drafted at all. You need to pull your head in and get over yourself Jennings. Having said that, most of the NBA's best players have this attitude, so he could end up being a big star and with Andrew Bogut due to have a breakout year in the next year or two, the Bucks may have done well.
Nets - Terrence Williams
An interesting pick considering who was still on the board and it was a bit of a surprise for a player that was expected to go late first round, but he has 4 years college experience on what is now a fairly young team, so that will help. The Nets are rebuilding on a young backcourt now with Courtney Lee joining and are another team that will struggle for now but it will pay dividends in seasons to come
Spurs - DeJuan Blair
How the Spurs manage to get amazing late picks so often astounds me. not only have they got Ginobli and Parker later than 25th picks, now they have DeJaun Blair who was unbelievably still available at number 37! He is a great power forward that was unlucky not to go top 15, after a Sophmore season averaging a double double (15.7 points and 12.3 rebounds) He's only 6'7" but Barkley wasn't big either. Yet again the Spurs have got the steal of the draft
Trail Blazers - Patrick Mills
Patty is going to have to fight for his spot on the roster, but he will genuinely work his ass off and once given the chance to improve and then prove himself he will make teams wish they had taken him earlier. There's alot of talk that his passing isn't good enough, and he's too small to play the 2 guard. So teach him to pass better. Tony Parker still isn't a great passer, but he's a fast slashing player. Mills is as fast and once he does some work on his pull up jumper he'll be a worthy NBA Point Guard. And Portland is a great place for him to learn to play with this amazing young squad.
Overall it may be a shallow draft, but only time will tell us that...
Saturday, June 13, 2009
Craig Foster - You don't make the cut
Over the last week the Pim Verbeek critics have come out of the woodwork jumping on the Craig Foster bandwagon that states unless you have 8 one touch passes followed by a 30 yard screamer it's not worth wiping your arse with.
Unsurprisingly, most of the criticism has come from people who wouldn't know Lionel Messi from Terry McFlynn, and many wouldn't be able to tell the difference in their style of play.
I expect ignorant criticism from people who don't understand the game. They haven't spent years at the top of the game- playing or coaching or even analysing - to understand why their criticism of the Socceroos style is so ridiculous.
It got me thinking.
Craig Foster should know better right? I mean he's supposed to be a leading anayst of the game in this country so surely he can see how flawed his constant "Beautiful Football" argument is. Besides his long running agenda to get Socceroos coaches not named Guus sacked, his articles are fairly poor, at least from a journalistic point of view, so he can't have his job based on his journalistic merit's
He's very rarely fair and balanced. He tells us why beautiful football is the greatest and can never be beaten without explaining why it often fails (see Arsenal's last few season)
His articles contradict each other (on the rare occasions that he's not rehashing his beautiful football argument). He says in one argument that Guus had this same team playing a great brand of football, then in another article tells us that the current team has had alot of changes from the 2006 version and will struggle to make an impact on the world stage because of it.
So I thought, if an average football fan like myself can see this and Craig Foster can't, maybe he's not as qualified as we're all lead to believe.
I wondered if he'd make the current Socceroos team. I wondered if he'd even make the squad!
As a player Foster was an attacking midfielder, our current first choice attacking midfielders are Tim Cahill, Harry Kewell and Brett Emerton.
At his peak Foster managed to play 30 games (over 4 years!!!) for 5 goals in the second tier of English football. By that standard he'd be lucky to be an A League marquee signing!
Tim Cahill has currently played 131 games (37 goals) for Everton who are one of the best teams in the top tier of English football, he's been nominated for the ballon d'or, he scored Australia's first ever world cup finals goal and has even been described by one of Foster's peers Rale Rasic as the best Australian footballer he has seen in his lifetime. You're not threatening his spot Craig.
Kewell played 275 games (57 goals) in the English top flight, is currently in great form playing in the strong Turkish league, and is arguably the most high profile Socceroo ever. His spot is safe too.
Brett Emerton has played 190 games for Blackburn in England's top flight after 92 for Feyenoord in the Dutch top flight. He's a versatile player and has spent alot of time playing as a right back, he has been possibly the most consistent player for the Socceroos over his 69 caps and you couldn't find a player more willing to bleed for the jersey. Not many players in Australia's history could take his Socceroos spot.
Our next best options are Mark Bresciano and Mile Sterjovski
You could argue that Bresciano would be in any starting Socceroos team if fit after his past 10 years playing against the worlds best in Italy's premier competition.
Sterjovski has played in the top flight of leagues all over Europe including France, Switzerland, Turkey and England. He takes his place in the squad.
Jason Culina plays primarily as a defensive midfielder for the national team, but is equally good as an attacking midfielder and his years playing in Holland and in the UEFA Champions League give him his credentials.
In the Current Aussie squad, the other attacking midfielders are Richard Garcia and Nick Carle.
Richard Garcia made it to the English top flight this season, and has now been taken into the last few squads as Pim Verbeek seems to be impressed by him.
Nick Carle has had a very simlilar career to Craig Foster.
Both spent alot of time spent playing in Australia after short term early moves overseas, and Carle is currently in the English second tier, where Foster's career peaked. Carle is only 27 and his career can still see him reach greater heights, but for whatever reason, Pim Verbeek doesn't seem to be a fan. Maybe that's why Foster seems to have a problem with Verbeek, who knows.
But at this point Australia has 7 or 8 attacking midfielders that make the team before Foster comes into consideration.
So ultimately this man that seems to have such strong opinions on everything, this man who is meant to be one of our leading pundit's, this man who influences (or at least tries to influence) our opinions on football, if he was born into the current generation of players, may not have gotten a cap for the Socceroos. Would we take his opinion as seriously if that was the case?
I don't think so.
Free Counter
Unsurprisingly, most of the criticism has come from people who wouldn't know Lionel Messi from Terry McFlynn, and many wouldn't be able to tell the difference in their style of play.
I expect ignorant criticism from people who don't understand the game. They haven't spent years at the top of the game- playing or coaching or even analysing - to understand why their criticism of the Socceroos style is so ridiculous.
It got me thinking.
Craig Foster should know better right? I mean he's supposed to be a leading anayst of the game in this country so surely he can see how flawed his constant "Beautiful Football" argument is. Besides his long running agenda to get Socceroos coaches not named Guus sacked, his articles are fairly poor, at least from a journalistic point of view, so he can't have his job based on his journalistic merit's
He's very rarely fair and balanced. He tells us why beautiful football is the greatest and can never be beaten without explaining why it often fails (see Arsenal's last few season)
His articles contradict each other (on the rare occasions that he's not rehashing his beautiful football argument). He says in one argument that Guus had this same team playing a great brand of football, then in another article tells us that the current team has had alot of changes from the 2006 version and will struggle to make an impact on the world stage because of it.
So I thought, if an average football fan like myself can see this and Craig Foster can't, maybe he's not as qualified as we're all lead to believe.
I wondered if he'd make the current Socceroos team. I wondered if he'd even make the squad!
As a player Foster was an attacking midfielder, our current first choice attacking midfielders are Tim Cahill, Harry Kewell and Brett Emerton.
At his peak Foster managed to play 30 games (over 4 years!!!) for 5 goals in the second tier of English football. By that standard he'd be lucky to be an A League marquee signing!
Tim Cahill has currently played 131 games (37 goals) for Everton who are one of the best teams in the top tier of English football, he's been nominated for the ballon d'or, he scored Australia's first ever world cup finals goal and has even been described by one of Foster's peers Rale Rasic as the best Australian footballer he has seen in his lifetime. You're not threatening his spot Craig.
Kewell played 275 games (57 goals) in the English top flight, is currently in great form playing in the strong Turkish league, and is arguably the most high profile Socceroo ever. His spot is safe too.
Brett Emerton has played 190 games for Blackburn in England's top flight after 92 for Feyenoord in the Dutch top flight. He's a versatile player and has spent alot of time playing as a right back, he has been possibly the most consistent player for the Socceroos over his 69 caps and you couldn't find a player more willing to bleed for the jersey. Not many players in Australia's history could take his Socceroos spot.
Our next best options are Mark Bresciano and Mile Sterjovski
You could argue that Bresciano would be in any starting Socceroos team if fit after his past 10 years playing against the worlds best in Italy's premier competition.
Sterjovski has played in the top flight of leagues all over Europe including France, Switzerland, Turkey and England. He takes his place in the squad.
Jason Culina plays primarily as a defensive midfielder for the national team, but is equally good as an attacking midfielder and his years playing in Holland and in the UEFA Champions League give him his credentials.
In the Current Aussie squad, the other attacking midfielders are Richard Garcia and Nick Carle.
Richard Garcia made it to the English top flight this season, and has now been taken into the last few squads as Pim Verbeek seems to be impressed by him.
Nick Carle has had a very simlilar career to Craig Foster.
Both spent alot of time spent playing in Australia after short term early moves overseas, and Carle is currently in the English second tier, where Foster's career peaked. Carle is only 27 and his career can still see him reach greater heights, but for whatever reason, Pim Verbeek doesn't seem to be a fan. Maybe that's why Foster seems to have a problem with Verbeek, who knows.
But at this point Australia has 7 or 8 attacking midfielders that make the team before Foster comes into consideration.
So ultimately this man that seems to have such strong opinions on everything, this man who is meant to be one of our leading pundit's, this man who influences (or at least tries to influence) our opinions on football, if he was born into the current generation of players, may not have gotten a cap for the Socceroos. Would we take his opinion as seriously if that was the case?
I don't think so.
Free Counter
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
