They are killing the sport

[its called football]

I think you'll find that pre & post season marketing tours (not only to south east asia but also to the USA) have ALL to do with the greedy clubs (and their striving for more money) and LITTLE to do with FIFA.

There's got to be some reasonable balance struck between the needs of fans, players, clubs, national FA's, confederations, FIFA & sponsors.


When did I blame FIFA for pre-season tours? and THE SPONSORS NEEDS SHOULD NEVER BE ALLOWED TO CONTROL OUR GAME, as you suggest they should.

As a history student I will just give everyone a brief History lesson.
At the end of the middle ages a theologian called Martin Luther King decided that the Catholic Church contained people too focussed on financial gain, and that its dogma gave too much scope for corruption. He nailed a list of demands to the door of a church in Wittenburg, Germany. This led to the foundation of PROTESTantism in its many forms, and a degree of reform within the Catholic church as well.

Now, I have no interest in getting involved in a sectarian argument. I just want to see a Martin Luther King of football. A man who will found either an alternative to FIFA who will give the game its purity back, or will at least make the game clean up its act.

We need to take it back, anybody who has cried tears of sorrow or joy over a national or club team, any one who has felt the power of a football crowd, who has run his heart out for ninety minutes in hope (whether vain or realised) of glory, no matter how small that glory may be, a World Cup or a local league, we need to stand up together and stop the rot.

Unfortunately this board is not the place to start this revolution, because it contains to many people who are conned by the forces to blame for the problems.

[Excape Goat]

I think you meant Martin Luther. Martin Luther King was the civil rights activitist in the US.

[its called football]

True, its late, sorry.

[Andy TAUS]

When did I blame FIFA for pre-season tours? Mate, you seem to have some trouble comprehending English language posts, otherwise you may have read & understood my post (to which you are now replying) which contained the exact quote from yourself to this effect.

Here, I'll requote it for you:


Originally Posted by its called football
and getting rid of absurd marketing tours to south east asia in pre-season too. Or does this affect FIFA's world plan and reduce the number of prestigious and income raising matches?

Jeez !!!

:rolleyes:

[its called football]

your missing the AND, which suggests FIFA's plan and the money spinning are different.

just don't bring up the rugby this time!!!!

[SgtSchultz]

All this gloom and doom about the sport dying is usually from fans from established teams and countries. All of a sudden their sense of superiority is eroding with results of each passing tournament. Due to globalization, a new soccer world is emerging and Europe will no longer be its center. A day will come when Europeans will have to accept this reality. In an ironic twist neither the European or American sports journalists want to accept the changes taking place. They continue to hope for the status quo. Ahh, the times-are-a-changing. Get used to it.

I do believe, however, there are way too many games and players are tired.

[its called football]

also FIFA's world plan clearly includes the expansion of football into the US and SEA. I have no problem with this, but football needs to be grown from the grass roots up, not through getting peopel to support the elite European clubs. As far as I can see FIFA are failing in this respect, so are culpable.

[AFCA]

All this gloom and doom about the sport dying is usually from fans from established teams and countries. All of a sudden their sense of superiority is eroding with results of each passing tournament. Due to globalization, a new soccer world is emerging and Europe will no longer be its center. A day will come when Europeans will have to accept this reality. In an ironic twist neither the European or American sports journalists want to accept the changes taking place. They continue to hope for the status quo. Ahh, the times-are-a-changing. Get used to it.

I do believe, however, there are way too many games and players are tired.


The sport as it was and IMO should IS dying. And changing powers have nothing to do with it. But that's a whole different thread.

[Andy TAUS]

just don't bring up the rugby this time!!!!WTF would I bring up a game like rugby (a game the NH teams don't know how to play anymore) in this thread ?

:p

[Almogavar92]

Exhaustion and fatigue are valid excuses only to a point. As a person who plays this game (not on a professional or even Sunday league level) at least three times a week, I can buy into the argument that playing too much will tire you out. BUT, these factors are not the only explanation for the failure of the so called "superpowers" of football.

Out of the four remaining teams in Euro 2004 which team does not have players who play in European leagues? So the Czechs and Greeks advanced this far because many of their players play in the Czech and Greek leagues, respectively? Simple nonesense. Their top performers play in England (Baros, Smicer for the Czechs, Giannakopolis, Dabizas for the Greeks), in Italy (Nedved), in Germany (Charisteas for Greece and Koller and Rosicky for the Czechs). Did they play any less? How do we explain the performance of Portugal, a team having many of the players (such as Deco, Carvahlo, Costinha, etc) that led FC Porto to the Champions' League (thus having to have played 13 matches in the Champions' League to reach that point)? The Dutch squad have as many players who have fought a hard and long campaign during the season. Arjen Robben and his PSV Eindhoven teammates were in Korea last summer for a summer tournament in July right before the Dutch Eeredivie started in August but I'm sure you won't hear him complaining about fatigue. Mind you, that was at least 5 matches because they went on to win the tournament. Ruud van Nistelrooij was playing in the United States along with Manchester United during their summer tour. The list goes on and on. For every Real Madrid player that was forced to go on this Asia summer tour, there's a player who is still playing football right now who is equally tired or who would have a claim to be equally tired.

PS. The globalization of football as some call it is a positive thing for the game. I know there are some who want to see the inclusion of "lesser" teams only when they provide nominal opposition to magnify the performances of the so-called "bigger" teams. I don't necessarily want to see the limelight taken away from Europe. This is the hotbed of football with tradition and quality that shines for the rest of the world to watch. This applies for the national teams as well as the club sides. However, it would be nice to see this "we deserve to do better or to win because we're from Europe" mentality disappear. Clubs like Real Madrid should get their priorities straight. What good does it do to go to Asia parading yourself as the "best team" in the world, convincing people to buy your shirt (when they must know that they can buy a replica bootlegged one for much cheaper), and then finish fourth in La Liga. But then again, this is the club that went for David Beckham than for Ronaldinho because Beckham was more handsome than Ronaldinho.

[tpmazembe]

Out of the four remaining teams in Euro 2004 which team does not have players who play in European leagues? So the Czechs and Greeks advanced this far because many of their players play in the Czech and Greek leagues, respectively? Simple nonesense. Their top performers play in England (Baros, Smicer for the Czechs, Giannakopolis, Dabizas for the Greeks), in Italy (Nedved), in Germany (Charisteas for Greece and Koller and Rosicky for the Czechs). Did they play any less? How do we explain the performance of Portugal, a team having many of the players (such as Deco, Carvahlo, Costinha, etc) that led FC Porto to the Champions' League (thus having to have played 13 matches in the Champions' League to reach that point)? The Dutch squad have as many players who have fought a hard and long campaign during the season. Arjen Robben and his PSV Eindhoven teammates were in Korea last summer for a summer tournament in July right before the Dutch Eeredivie started in August but I'm sure you won't hear him complaining about fatigue. Mind you, that was at least 5 matches because they went on to win the tournament. Ruud van Nistelrooij was playing in the United States along with Manchester United during their summer tour. The list goes on and on. For every Real Madrid player that was forced to go on this Asia summer tour, there's a player who is still playing football right now who is equally tired or who would have a claim to be equally tired.Well said.

You are not alone in voicing this opinion. Here's an excerpt from The Guardian http://football.guardian.co.uk/euro2004/comment/story/0,14584,1249562,00.html article that attempts to draw a potential conclusion from these facts:

"The one characteristic shared by the survivors at Euro 2004 is that their players are drawn from clubs all across the continent, where travel has provided them with a football education and added maturity. By contrast, Germany and Italy drew their squads entirely from within their domestic leagues.

England's situation was similar, with just David Beckham and Owen Hargreaves working abroad, while Fernando Morientes, on loan at Monaco, was the one man who had to be summoned from abroad by Spain."

[its called football]

WTF would I bring up a game like rugby (a game the NH teams don't know how to play anymore) in this thread ?

:p
Well done, you have. 15, 51 is all right, but we're still world champions!

[Chris M]

16 teams? So is Madridforever going to tell four teams from each english league they are being relegated? Well I suppose it doesn't matter as long as the plastics can still crow about their "big" teams and expensive signings. After all if these big teams slip down the table most of their "fans" will jump ship anyway. And Coke's advertising money will still come in so FIFA will be happy too.
As a more radical suggestion how about only the Champions being in the Champions' League, and cutting down the numbers that way, and getting rid of absurd marketing tours to south east asia in pre-season too. Or does this affect FIFA's world plan and reduce the number of prestigious and income raising matches?

This is pretty much what I was going to say.

[Andy TAUS]

also FIFA's world plan clearly includes the expansion of football into the US and SEA.BUT NOT (exclusion logic) obviously into OCEANIA (I've got a whole bag of chips on both shoulders !). :mad:

[RichardL]

People are going crazy about the failure of the 'big' nations, but of the 8 expected to make round two, only 2 failed to do so. Only one of the quarter finals produced a shock victory. It's only Greece who have really come from nowhere.

I think the problem is more mental than physical. It doesn't matter how much players say they are going to treat a match against Albania (or whoever) like they are playing Brazil, deep down they are going to expect it to be easy and ease off. Now that's OK if you are playing Albania because you'll probably still be able to scrape a victory, but if you are playing a tradionally poor team like Greece it will be hard for players to raise their game, and they'll get easily demoralised when Greece don't just hand the game to them on a plate. Now Greece really aren't that good. They're not. But they are well organised and work hard. If teams with more talented players are prepared to work as hard as the greeks then they will most likely beat them, but getting them out of the "it's OK to play at 75%" mindset is not easy.

[Andy TAUS]

but getting them out of the "it's OK to play at 75%" mindset is not easy.RichardL,

I'd start by treating friendlies as NOT "meaningless". In other words, play them as if they "counted", then when one plays games that "do count", the mindset won't be so much a factor.

;)

[RichardL]

RichardL,

I'd start by treating friendlies as NOT "meaningless". In other words, play them as if they "counted", then when one plays games that "do count", the mindset won't be so much a factor.

;)
I'd agree to an extent, but it's not a modern thing. The same was true 20 years ago. And it's not that players think a game v greece or Macedonia or whoever 'doesn't matter', it's that they think they won't have to bust a gut to win. It would certainly be true that if players didn't play 30% of the international matches (friendlies) thinking 60% effort is acceptable then they might get it into their heads that playing at 100% every game is necessary.
I don't think it's just the bigger nations either. The Czech Republic had enough ability to beat Greece, but they didn't get going against them either. I think they'd have played better if they'd faced Portugal or Holland in their semi.

[MadridForever]

Irureta, manager of Deportivo, and winner of 2 ligas and named best manager of la liga several times speaking about EURO 2004 in his daily article in the most important newspaper of Spain, El Pais (29/06/2004):

"Ya han desaparecido de la competicion España, Italia, Alemania, Inglaterra y Francia, los paises con las cinco ligas mas disputadas y duras de Europa y probablemente del mundo. ¿Que ha podido suceder? Hay un factor claro que es el cansancio, no solo por el mayor numero de partidos, sino por la dificultad de conseguir puntos en esos campeonatos. Las fuerzas han llegado muy justas y los jugadores son incapaces de realizar el sobreesfuerzo que requiere esta competicion. Un estudio reciente revelo que la liga española había sido la mas disputada del continene, tanto por la diferencia entre los primeros como por el elevado numero de puntos obtenidos por los últimos. En la ligas de otros paises, como portugal y grecia , la vida es mas tranquila. Y el nivel fisico que han mostrado es una de las claves de sus buenos resultados."

Translation:
"Spain, Italy, Germany, England and France has disappeared of competicion, countries with the five most disputed and hard leagues of Europe and probably of the world. What have happened? There is a clear factor that is the fatigue, not only by the greater number of games, but also by the dificulty to achieve points in those campionships. The strength of the player was very tight and the players were incapable to make the extra effort that requires this competition. A recent study showed that la liga had been the most disputed league of the continent, by the difference between first teams and by the high number of points obtained at the last ones. In the leagues of others countries, like Portugal and Greece, the life is much more quiet. And the physical aspect that those teams has shown is one of the keys of its good results."
Well, he has the same opinion than Franz Beckenbauer and UEFA.

http://foxsports.news.com.au/story/0,8659,8050837-23210,00.html


It isn't so dificult to understand that playing less game you will improve the quality of the games at the end of the season, and in the whole season.

It isn't the same to climb Everest than climb to go uptairs to the roof of your house. He climb everest 5 times and you have go upstairs 5 times. Ok, but he isn't more tired than you because the number of times was the same. Very logic.
In a seson, we see many games that "finish" in the minute 60, because the players don't want to risk a injury or don't want to be more tired for the big game that they have to play two days later against Bayern Munich.
And we see bad second half of some game because three days before the team had player a very hard 90 minutes game against Bayern.

We are cleary sacrificing the quality by the quantity. It is better play 50 great games each year, than to play 80 mediocre games each year.

A marathon recordman only can run 3 or 4 marathons each year at a good level. He could run more, sure!!! but he will do worse times. Probably some people would be happy seeing him run at 60% of his level 10 times each year. Sorry, i don't. I want to see his real potential, his real quality.

[RandyNA74]

The bottom line is there is a little bit of truth to all these arguments. The reasons for the apparent "decline" or otherwise lack of form of the bigger players/teams are to be found in many places.

1) Yes, players play a lot of games. Too many, perhaps. And yes, playing 38 games in Spain isnt the same as playing 34 games in Portugal or Greece given the difference in quality of the opposition. But there are many players and teams out there that shoot this theory into the water. Fatigue is only one factor.

2)Effort is a major factor. In an ideal world, a player would consider playing for the NT a major honor. But, truth be told, in today's game, with all the special interests, sponsorships, etc. it is easy for a player to be "distracted." Does anyone think Beckham was in a position to give 100% in this tournament? Motivation is key. Greece is extremely motivated, as is Portugal. Hence the final match-up. Players from other NT's were clearly less motivated in some cases. If you have millions in the bank and you came from a tough season, there is a certain added stress to play with the NT and many people cant or dont want to cope with it. Maldini refused to play for Italy, even though he would have played every minute of every game (and gotten paid for it). So the idea that all players are honored to play for their country 100% of the time is a bit utopian. For whatever reason, there are cases where players feel less motivation to play for the NT than the club, regardless of how the fans at home see it. A Basque player at Bilbao might not put on the Spain shirt with the same mindset he puts on the Athletic shirt. In any case, each player is different. Also, regarding motivation, there are teams and players out there who think that they are somehow guaranteed a semifinal place based on their name and pedigree...

3) The quality of coaching has only been mentioned in passing. Its no coincidence that 3 out of the 4 semifinalists in Euro 2004 had excellent coaches (I reserve comment on Advocaat out of ignorance, leaving that to more knowledgeable Dutch fans). Italy on the other hand went out with the DinoTrap, and Spain was hindered by Saez. Ericksen showed he is still not a great tactician and England suffered because of it, not fulfilling their full potential. Voller is probably not a great coach, and Santini somehow isnt up to par with recent colleagues of his. But perhaps it isnt just tactics and knowledge, but the sheer ability to motivate players and get them going. Santini is apparently horrible at this since France played without any clear desire or motivation. Scolari on the other hand, or Rehaggel, now they know how to get a team going. A trend I notice is that it isnt always the premier coaches who end up getting the NT job. Italy gets stuck with a semi-senile Trap while Capello, Ancelotti, Prandelli etc. do their work with clubs. Now we finally get Lippi after he has spent a couple of decades with clubs. France is about to give Blanc the job even though Deschamps would be a safer bet, and in my ignorance of the French league, I would dare to venture that there are a few more qualified candidates hanging out with various clubs in Ligue 1. England resorted to a foreigner since all the best domestic coaches were too busy coaching clubs. Overall, as prestigious as the NT job is, most quality coaches still seem to prefer being hired by big clubs.

4) Miscellaneous other factors. Henry can score like crazy in the EPL where the quality of defending isnt always top notch, but struggles in a major tournament against better organized defences (now Im not saying Switzerland has a better defence than Newcastle, try to understand what I mean). Totti can perform wonders in a club and city where he is worshipped, but has yet to prove himself in a more "hostile" and tough environment like the NT in a major tournament. Weak character perhaps?

There are a million reasons why the "bigs" disappointed. Nobody on here has been 100% wrong, but no one has really been 100% correct either (including me probably! :rolleyes: ).

[tpmazembe]

The bottom line is there is a little bit of truth to all these arguments. The reasons for the apparent "decline" or otherwise lack of form of the bigger players/teams are to be found in many places.

1) Yes, players play a lot of games.
2)Effort is a major factor.
3) The quality of coaching has only been mentioned in passing. Its no coincidence that 3 out of the 4 semifinalists in Euro 2004 had excellent coaches (I reserve comment on Advocaat out of ignorance, leaving that to more knowledgeable Dutch fans). 1) Agree, and you do point out in your post that this is not reserved for just the players of disappointing teams. This could be an explanation for the poor quality of a tournament (I didn't say Euro was poor quality), but not for why certain teams don't meet expectations versus others whose players play under the same conditions.

2) Many of these guys want the glory that comes with national team success..they b**tch and moan when they don't start, and complain when subbed out of games in the balance. The effort is there.

3) This is a self-fullfilling arguement...any coach who makes it to the latter stages will be deemed excellent, and those who don't will be judged as poor. Felipao was one play (the Sol Campbell incident) away from being skewered...now he's being discussed as one of the all time greats. Most of these head coaches of the NTs with pedigree have proven to be successful at some level.

IMO the biggest reason they "disappoint" is that we pundits have yet to re-calibrate the perceived quality difference between international squads. And I also do think there is somehting to the hypothesis that near to 100% composition of a team from the same league is not an advantage in todays's game.

Anyway, in statistical circles, three successive points in the same direction signify a fundamental process change (rather than randomness). WC'06 will help clarify a lot of these assumptions we are all making.