I thought I made it pretty clear that I don't think a player should stay in the K-League if he doesn't want to. Whether even that notion of staying in the K-League would help the national team or not, gaining experience in other foreign leagues can be beneficial. Some might say that the quality of the K-League is on par with the J-League and to be completely honest, I'm not the most educated person to ask when it comes to comparing the two leagues. But if you're asking me on Ahn Jung-Hwan's situation and his decision to go play in the J-League I'll tell you this. It's his choice for a career move. Footballers don't make decisions for their careers based on the considerations of the national team. Footballers are very self-absorbed (but then again, so are a lot of us) when it comes to career considerations. Do footballers make moves so that they can perform better on the national side? Or do footballers aim to do well on the national side to draw the attention of high profile clubs and simultaneously far lucrative contracts? It's the whole "chicken and egg" question. Some footballers (a very small minority) may choose their clubs so that their performance on the national team will improve. But the vast majority of footballers hope to do well on the national side (especially during high profile tournaments) so that their market value will increase and to draw the attention of the Man Utds, Real Madrids and Barcelonas of the world. Why do you presume (rkim291968) that staying in the K-League would benefit the national team? Because that was the state of affairs prior to our successful run in 2002? I absolutely believe that the more diverse experiences our boys have in football, the better it is for our national side. Unless the K-League is of the same caliber as Serie-A, the English Premiership or La Liga, this belief that playing our best players within Korea is as insular and short-sighted as North Korea relying on their self-sufficiency ideology for economic growth. Our football in years to come will be as bankrupt as our brothers are above the 38th if we hold onto this blind belief that K-League players alone will improve the national side. J-League ain't Spain or England. It ain't even on the same level as Turkish football in my opinion. So why even have our boys over there (other than to satisfy their monetary desires)? The question is why not? It's not like J-League clubs exercise the same kind of miserly attitudes toward international matches like their European counterparts. Plus, the distance between Japan and Korea is akin from flying from New York to the midwest... so this whole idea that our players in Japan would have difficulty coming back to Korea to prepare is not the same as Brazilian players flying from Madrid and Barcelona back to Sao Paolo. Overall, in the cost-benefit analysis, keeping the boys in the K-League for the sake of the national team loses.
I am glad you asked. Here's my opinion on that. 1) Having popular players in K-league will promote soccer's popularity in Korea. More popular soccer becomes, more young players will go into soccer rather than something like baseball. Our top 10 players are scattered all over Europe and J-League. If some of them were to play in K-league, they will help improve soccer's popularity in Korea. I am being simplistic here because noone wants to read long posts. I hope readers get my gist. 2) Korea's position as and Asian elite soccer power has been forever maintained by 3 things (very IMO): physical endurance, speed, and teamwork. Given the lack of world class talent, it is amazing how these 3 qualities have kept Korea on top of Asia for so long. Much of teamwork have been possible because KFA can put together a long training session for important events. Unlike post WC02, Korean NT lived and trained together for months leading to a key event. By having key players playing abroad at the mercy of their club, a key component in Korean NT's success have been taken away. The only way to compensate for this loss is for Korean players to develop technical skills that can overcome teamwork. And that hasn't happened yet. So, my idealistic view is that, if Korean players who won't improve too much playing abroad, is to stay in K-league for reasons 1) & 2). Thanks for listening
To judge the improvement of performance over a span of two short years is somewhat harsh. There will never be overnight success. But that's the point. You need MORE and not LESS players playing in the highest caliber football leagues. Secondly, I agree with the merits and assets of our national team in the past years. Speed, teamwork and physical endurance were and have been our assets. But let me elaborate by saying that our players could use a bit more improvement on their technical abilities and tactical reading of the game. These are things you can pick up playing abroad. Why must we resign ourselves to only having speed, endurance and teamwork? We can add onto our assets and this will only come through outside influence on our game. I dream of K-League matches being played out in front of 50,000 fans week in and out. But even if key stars remain in Korea and raise the popularity of the game, it's not the same as improving the technical level of our players. We could have these sold out matches for years and years and simply play football that is entertaining to us but proves nothing on the international level. No amount of military style training would ever overcome that insular approach to international football. That was the way things were done for the 1990, 1994 and somewhat for the 1998 World Cup. I remember what it was like cheering on Korea during those World Cups. You probably remember as well. Do you want to repeat those feelings of inadequacy and embarrasment that I had watching our side being taken to school? Probably not. Cause we love our national side.
oops, didn't see this reply until now-- sorry, didn't mean to ignore your kind reply. My first reaction to the above is, how are you going to quantify "improvement/learning" in a human being's life? One of the biggest untangibles of players going to leagues abroad is the idea of growth and maturity. They are not there just "making oodles of money", but also face language/social barriers, physical/fitness differences, self-motivation/mental hurdles, etc. They are alone out there, putting their own lives in a risky challenge for the purposes of finding something in themselves that they might not be able to in the comfort of mother country. Not all will succeed in breaking through all those problems, but I think it is a very valuable time for them both as players and people (and inevitably for players going abroad in the future). But they first owe it to themselves and their own idea of what they want their lives to be; I don't think it's really reasonable to enslave them to our notions of their "duty" to the national team. Perhaps the crux of this whole thread is, why does the coach use players if they are not as sharp as other players or don't have recent game experience(compared to domestic players)? I'm more than certain that K-League offers many talented players, highly motivated, to take the spot in the absence of the FBPs. A coach could make an FPBs run of bad days even worse if he forces into a crucial match a FBP when he is not playing well -- the FBP has high visibility in the press and gets the brunt of the blame for the team's poor performance, in addition to missing opportunities to train/show with his club team, and the player loses more confidence or motivation, and the whole thing spirals downward. Having sensitivity to what would be best for each player should also be part of a coach's philosophy in order to deliver the best possible NT.
Don't you think that SK's success in 2002 was largely a result of: 1) Having a top coach in Hiddink 2) Having had months more than any country to prepare together. 3) Playing at home in front of partisan crowds giving very vocal backing 4) Getting a bit of luck and things just gelling right on the day Post 2002 you lost your coach and replaced him with lesser ones, you haven't had the same 'one big push for the tournament' mentality, the crowds have waned a bit and the 'special something' has disappeared. Leaving you with the same problems you had at WC2002 but managed to overcome....you have decent competent players but noone really special and noone who can stick the ball in the net. Your 'star man' Ahn also seems to spend more time thinking about haircare than he does thinking about how to score goals. Striker is the main problem....you have to find one. You don't have one now and there's nothing in the K-league at the minute. Have to get that sorted.
Yup. Very good points. I think one of my frustration is that Korea keeps playing these FBPs when they are not contributing too much to NT. You accurately pointed that out.
There's actually a really good side to FBPs not all performing well. After WC02, these FBPs became heroes, and they became untouchable. Other players couldn't dream of having a chance at taking their place as starter in the NT. However, with these problems, the other domestic players know that they have a chance. It's a great opportunity for Bonfrere to motivate the other players to step up and show their stuff. If he gives the message that "these FBPs are not gods, and you all have equal chance at playing if you show me you are better", then the other players I'm sure will be 150% during training and games. In the long run, thinking ahead to WC06, you end up with more good experienced players to choose from. So, if there are injuries and other problems like now, it's not such a worry.
He only didn't call up Lee Uel Yong. Rumor is that he will make big changes only after Maldives game. I hope the rumor is true.
I can understand his nervousness, given the position Korea is in for this game. But I'm sure things will go okay -- the odds are in your favor! And sometimes for these crucial matches, experience can go a long way.