I find all of the stick that footballers get in this country to be quite tedious. They get paid a certain amount for a reason. Playing for Chelsea or Manchester United is a bigger deal than being the talk of the town once every 4/8 years in the Olympics.
I honestly think the supporters of the England team need to take a long hard look at themselves as well. I had the feeling going into Euro 2012 that a lot of our 'fans' were just waiting for them to fail so that they could just berate them and come out with the same old boring argument of "overpaid, egotistical blah blah".
However, any of the athletes that have failed so far in the Olympics for Team GB aren't met with anywhere near the same abuse. They are given 100% support and affection.
Gary Neville summed it up pretty well when he said that playing for England was always uncomfortable because you got the impression that the supporters were never fully committed to helping out. I believe him too.
All this talk of how much they get paid has absolutely NOTHING to do with the players themselves, it's down to the BUSINESS of the game and 99% of fans don't seem to have the ability to get their heads around that when they go on their rants.
not a very intellectual view at all obviously its down to the business as to how much they are paid but attacks on how much footballers are paid is not a personal attack on footballers but the business as a whole. when an individual footballer is accused of being a thick git earning too much for doing too little 99% of the time its because they have done something stupid. Also unbelievable how u can defend how much they get paid it is clearly too much for what they give to society compared to soldiers and teachers who may earn less in a year than they do in a week. Some footballers do not appreciate how lucky they are and are greedy and selfish for example i dont know why tel ben haim hasnt cancelled his pourtsmouth contract if he doesnt and they go out of business that really would typify the modern footballer
Great thread. Agree with BFR on coaching, someone quoted the stats on another thread - can someone repost as the variation was truly staggering. Football cannot be directly compared to most of the other sports mentioned. On time based sports, or individual contests the selection process is simple but in football it is more subjective.
Some thought-provoking issues have been discussed here. Here's my 2p worth. Look at the two sports that the US are most successful at in the Olympic disciplines: swimming and athletics. Both these sports - and many, many others - including the US professional sports - rely heavily on the US colleges for bringing top-class sports participants to the fore. The colleges themselves, often on the back of donations from rich individuals set up the facilities, employ full-time top-level professional coaches AND organise huge series of intercollagiate competitions many of which benefit from income from the broadcast companies which show these competitions on TV. As we all know, college (american) football is big business with a huge following. Often, even High School basketball matches are shown on local TV channels. This means that, from an early age, prospective professional sportsmen and women become used to performing on a big stage with a large audience, both in attendance at the game and on TV. This doesn't happen here in the UK; either for football or other sports. So our 18 year-old footballers go from playing in a park in front of one man and a dog to being thrust into a massive stadium in front of a huge, baying, often hostile crowd. Some love it and cope others sink without trace despite having the necessary ability. So, I think we need a re-think on how competitive youth football takes place here. Would it not be better if Sky's money went, in part, towards sponsoring small but competitive local leagues for, say, under 21 football? By the way, I don't buy into this "playing too much football - getting knackered" thing. Just look at how many games professional basketball players participate in. Yet, it seems, it's okay for the US superstars to represent their country at the Olympic Games but not our precious footballers.
I think you are right cafcfan. Also the vast sums of money pumped into youth development must have a couple of impacts too:
1> The development would be better if there are significant resources available. 2> If there are many colleges that have the resources to scout and develop talent I would imagine that less gets missed. Who knows how many potential world class footballers we have in this country that never found their way into professional sport because their talent was never spotted or encouraged.
I find all of the stick that footballers get in this country to be quite tedious. They get paid a certain amount for a reason. Playing for Chelsea or Manchester United is a bigger deal than being the talk of the town once every 4/8 years in the Olympics.
I honestly think the supporters of the England team need to take a long hard look at themselves as well. I had the feeling going into Euro 2012 that a lot of our 'fans' were just waiting for them to fail so that they could just berate them and come out with the same old boring argument of "overpaid, egotistical blah blah".
However, any of the athletes that have failed so far in the Olympics for Team GB aren't met with anywhere near the same abuse. They are given 100% support and affection.
Gary Neville summed it up pretty well when he said that playing for England was always uncomfortable because you got the impression that the supporters were never fully committed to helping out. I believe him too.
All this talk of how much they get paid has absolutely NOTHING to do with the players themselves, it's down to the BUSINESS of the game and 99% of fans don't seem to have the ability to get their heads around that when they go on their rants.
not a very intellectual view at all obviously its down to the business as to how much they are paid but attacks on how much footballers are paid is not a personal attack on footballers but the business as a whole. when an individual footballer is accused of being a thick git earning too much for doing too little 99% of the time its because they have done something stupid. Also unbelievable how u can defend how much they get paid it is clearly too much for what they give to society compared to soldiers and teachers who may earn less in a year than they do in a week. Some footballers do not appreciate how lucky they are and are greedy and selfish for example i dont know why tel ben haim hasnt cancelled his pourtsmouth contract if he doesnt and they go out of business that really would typify the modern footballer
Thanks for calling out my intellect before referring to me as "u", very thoughtful.
Your argument is something which has been said about a million times by people on here, on radio phone-ins, in newspaper articles. It's also the millionth time it has completely contradicted itself. You state that the attacks are against the business, but yet go on to rant about the footballers themselves.
Ben-Haim is in a very difficult spot. Yes, he gets paid a lot of money but by contract he is owed it. That's not greed, that's just standing by principles. Whether you agree or disagree with that doesn't really matter. It's his decision to make and he has a right to it.
Do you really expect a football to turn down a 30/40/80/100k a week contract and say "Sorry, I don't deserve to earn this amount. Go and give it to a soldier or a nurse, even though it would make no business sense for you to do that."
Not sure how money that could be diverted from players wages into something else would make a difference. Football's problem is that everyone cares about it 52 weeks a year. It's already well funded, although the point about qualified coaches is a fair one. It is implausible that you could recruit someone who never kicked a ball 4 years ago and put them on top of the world of football by having decent facilities and coaches in a 4 year period, but it can happen in rowing a pole vault. But the Sun reader view seems to be pay them naffink, make em do it for the pride and they'll be like our wonderful rowers/cyclists.
One thing during London2012 that has stood out for me is the attitude of the olympians. Compare that to footballers.
Athletes train for four years solid, get a silver or bronze and come out and apologise to the nation.
Now I just look at the twitter feeds of the likes of john sullivan who will collect their thousands, do bugger all work, enjoy the banter with the lads, but does he really give a toss about our fans, or club? Doubt it, and that is the problem.
One thing during London2012 that has stood out for me is the attitude of the olympians. Compare that to footballers.
Athletes train for four years solid, get a silver or bronze and come out and apologise to the nation.
Now I just look at the twitter feeds of the likes of john sullivan who will collect their thousands, do bugger all work, enjoy the banter with the lads, but does he really give a toss about our fans, or club? Doubt it, and that is the problem.
Footballers couldn't care less.
Bit unfair to judge someone by what they talk about on Twitter compared to someone who is on live television in front of millions.
I think the reason many get the stick they do is the lack of peformances on the international stage where many more people who aren't that fussed about the game generally watch so sort of think these guys never play well.
Also the high profile players hardly help their own image and that of football itself with the behaviour on and off the pitch.
However I am sure if the press were bothered they'd dig up a few negative tales about the Olympic winners..but probably don't really care about most of them unless they are attractive marketing tools like Jess Ennis.
As for their wages..well its too much but that is down to the clubs not standing up for themselves against agents and the players themselves.
Ofcourse the vast majority care and want to do well as athletes like anyone else...afterall last season for you guys wasn't exactly a tale of no effort and little quality!
PR wise football needs a lot of work done to improve its image...
As for difference in success...again it probably comes down to the fact money in cycling is there to improve equipment and training standards whereas money in football goes to players and agents.
One thing during London2012 that has stood out for me is the attitude of the olympians. Compare that to footballers.
Athletes train for four years solid, get a silver or bronze and come out and apologise to the nation.
Now I just look at the twitter feeds of the likes of john sullivan who will collect their thousands, do bugger all work, enjoy the banter with the lads, but does he really give a toss about our fans, or club? Doubt it, and that is the problem.
Footballers couldn't care less.
Footballers do care...
What you have to bear in mind is that athletics has this one cup final every four years. Yes there are Grand Prix/Diamond League events and other meets and the rowers/cyclists etc have their world championships, these though are broadcast to minority audiences with a bit of coverage in the media but this is their FA Cup/World Cup Final moment. Look at footballer's faces after their team has just lost the WC Final/FA Cup Final or CL Final. I don't see much evidence of just another pay day there, far from it, those defeats are the one's that hurt. You can be paid a king's ransom and the same again bext week, but its the medals that people want. Back in the day when Liverpool were winning the European Cup and league on a regular basis they used to say to new signings - you'll get paid more at Man U but here'll you'll win things. Despite the riches on offer down the road a flood of talented players preferred to sign for them.
And for many sports at the Olympics they get little or no mainstream coverage - I've never seen women's boxing on TV before or Taekwondo and even with bigger sports like Track Cycling you have go scrolling through the minor channels to find the World Championships. These sports and many others, plus their participants are getting mainstream TV and media coverage for perhaps the first and only time and they are reacting to that.
One thing during London2012 that has stood out for me is the attitude of the olympians. Compare that to footballers.
Athletes train for four years solid, get a silver or bronze and come out and apologise to the nation.
Now I just look at the twitter feeds of the likes of john sullivan who will collect their thousands, do bugger all work, enjoy the banter with the lads, but does he really give a toss about our fans, or club? Doubt it, and that is the problem.
As someone earlier said, what's the incentive for most top players? The last time I can remember a British player playing for the sheer glory of winning and displaying the kind of guts and determination that all these athletes have shown was when Gerard pretty much won the European Cup on his own. Can't think of many instances in recent years that a footballer has done something that seemed to come from sheer guts. The money seems to come first for footballers, success, maybe, maybe not. I have no doubt Wiggins, Ennis, Hoy, Pendleton will all now make good money, but then they will have earned it and no-one will begrudge them.
One thing during London2012 that has stood out for me is the attitude of the olympians. Compare that to footballers.
Athletes train for four years solid, get a silver or bronze and come out and apologise to the nation.
Now I just look at the twitter feeds of the likes of john sullivan who will collect their thousands, do bugger all work, enjoy the banter with the lads, but does he really give a toss about our fans, or club? Doubt it, and that is the problem.
Footballers couldn't care less.
Footballers do care...
What you have to bear in mind is that athletics has this one cup final every four years. Yes there are Grand Prix/Diamond League events and other meets and the rowers/cyclists etc have their world championships, these though are broadcast to minority audiences with a bit of coverage in the media but this is their FA Cup/World Cup Final moment. Look at footballer's faces after their team has just lost the WC Final/FA Cup Final or CL Final. I don't see much evidence of just another pay day there, far from it, those defeats are the one's that hurt. You can be paid a king's ransom and the same again bext week, but its the medals that people want. Back in the day when Liverpool were winning the European Cup and league on a regular basis they used to say to new signings - you'll get paid more at Man U but here'll you'll win things. Despite the riches on offer down the road a flood of talented players preferred to sign for them.
And for many sports at the Olympics they get little or no mainstream coverage - I've never seen women's boxing on TV before or Taekwondo and even with bigger sports like Track Cycling you have go scrolling through the minor channels to find the World Championships. These sports and many others, plus their participants are getting mainstream TV and media coverage for perhaps the first and only time and they are reacting to that.
the bbc usually shows the world cups and world championship
I think Football could learn some manners and respect.
I've been lucky enough to have been to 7 different events at the Olympics, and there was no swearing in unison at the ref/ officials or abuse of the oppositions crowd, people were trusted enough to drink beer whilst watching the event ( ok there was that prat at the 100m final) but generally speaking people were a lot more relaxed, although rowdy ,and passionate about a / their country, but not abusive, why can't football be like this?
The main difference is that in football the main international prize is the World Cup, whereas in a lot of sports it is Olympic gold. This is why I question the inclusion of professional football and professional tennis in the Olympics.
I doubt any of the Team GB footballers will ever look back on their career and say their biggest regret was missing out on an Olympic medal.
Comments
not a very intellectual view at all obviously its down to the business as to how much they are paid but attacks on how much footballers are paid is not a personal attack on footballers but the business as a whole. when an individual footballer is accused of being a thick git earning too much for doing too little 99% of the time its because they have done something stupid. Also unbelievable how u can defend how much they get paid it is clearly too much for what they give to society compared to soldiers and teachers who may earn less in a year than they do in a week. Some footballers do not appreciate how lucky they are and are greedy and selfish for example i dont know why tel ben haim hasnt cancelled his pourtsmouth contract if he doesnt and they go out of business that really would typify the modern footballer
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/jun/01/football-coach-shortage-england
Only 2,769 English coaches hold Uefa's B, A and Pro badges, Spain has 23,995, Italy 29,420 and Germany 34,790.
Bear in mind since then Spain have won the Euro's aagin, beating Italy with Germany ko'd in the semi-finals.
Here's my 2p worth. Look at the two sports that the US are most successful at in the Olympic disciplines: swimming and athletics. Both these sports - and many, many others - including the US professional sports - rely heavily on the US colleges for bringing top-class sports participants to the fore. The colleges themselves, often on the back of donations from rich individuals set up the facilities, employ full-time top-level professional coaches AND organise huge series of intercollagiate competitions many of which benefit from income from the broadcast companies which show these competitions on TV. As we all know, college (american) football is big business with a huge following. Often, even High School basketball matches are shown on local TV channels.
This means that, from an early age, prospective professional sportsmen and women become used to performing on a big stage with a large audience, both in attendance at the game and on TV.
This doesn't happen here in the UK; either for football or other sports. So our 18 year-old footballers go from playing in a park in front of one man and a dog to being thrust into a massive stadium in front of a huge, baying, often hostile crowd. Some love it and cope others sink without trace despite having the necessary ability.
So, I think we need a re-think on how competitive youth football takes place here. Would it not be better if Sky's money went, in part, towards sponsoring small but competitive local leagues for, say, under 21 football?
By the way, I don't buy into this "playing too much football - getting knackered" thing. Just look at how many games professional basketball players participate in. Yet, it seems, it's okay for the US superstars to represent their country at the Olympic Games but not our precious footballers.
1> The development would be better if there are significant resources available.
2> If there are many colleges that have the resources to scout and develop talent I would imagine that less gets missed. Who knows how many potential world class footballers we have in this country that never found their way into professional sport because their talent was never spotted or encouraged.
Your argument is something which has been said about a million times by people on here, on radio phone-ins, in newspaper articles. It's also the millionth time it has completely contradicted itself. You state that the attacks are against the business, but yet go on to rant about the footballers themselves.
Ben-Haim is in a very difficult spot. Yes, he gets paid a lot of money but by contract he is owed it. That's not greed, that's just standing by principles. Whether you agree or disagree with that doesn't really matter. It's his decision to make and he has a right to it.
Do you really expect a football to turn down a 30/40/80/100k a week contract and say "Sorry, I don't deserve to earn this amount. Go and give it to a soldier or a nurse, even though it would make no business sense for you to do that."
Compare that to footballers.
Athletes train for four years solid, get a silver or bronze and come out and apologise to the nation.
Now I just look at the twitter feeds of the likes of john sullivan who will collect their thousands, do bugger all work, enjoy the banter with the lads, but does he really give a toss about our fans, or club?
Doubt it, and that is the problem.
Footballers couldn't care less.
Also the high profile players hardly help their own image and that of football itself with the behaviour on and off the pitch.
However I am sure if the press were bothered they'd dig up a few negative tales about the Olympic winners..but probably don't really care about most of them unless they are attractive marketing tools like Jess Ennis.
As for their wages..well its too much but that is down to the clubs not standing up for themselves against agents and the players themselves.
Ofcourse the vast majority care and want to do well as athletes like anyone else...afterall last season for you guys wasn't exactly a tale of no effort and little quality!
PR wise football needs a lot of work done to improve its image...
As for difference in success...again it probably comes down to the fact money in cycling is there to improve equipment and training standards whereas money in football goes to players and agents.
What you have to bear in mind is that athletics has this one cup final every four years. Yes there are Grand Prix/Diamond League events and other meets and the rowers/cyclists etc have their world championships, these though are broadcast to minority audiences with a bit of coverage in the media but this is their FA Cup/World Cup Final moment. Look at footballer's faces after their team has just lost the WC Final/FA Cup Final or CL Final. I don't see much evidence of just another pay day there, far from it, those defeats are the one's that hurt. You can be paid a king's ransom and the same again bext week, but its the medals that people want. Back in the day when Liverpool were winning the European Cup and league on a regular basis they used to say to new signings - you'll get paid more at Man U but here'll you'll win things. Despite the riches on offer down the road a flood of talented players preferred to sign for them.
And for many sports at the Olympics they get little or no mainstream coverage - I've never seen women's boxing on TV before or Taekwondo and even with bigger sports like Track Cycling you have go scrolling through the minor channels to find the World Championships. These sports and many others, plus their participants are getting mainstream TV and media coverage for perhaps the first and only time and they are reacting to that.
I've been lucky enough to have been to 7 different events at the Olympics, and there was no swearing in unison at the ref/ officials or abuse of the oppositions crowd, people were trusted enough to drink beer whilst watching the event ( ok there was that prat at the 100m final) but generally speaking people were a lot more relaxed, although rowdy ,and passionate about a / their country, but not abusive, why can't football be like this?
The main difference is that in football the main international prize is the World Cup, whereas in a lot of sports it is Olympic gold. This is why I question the inclusion of professional football and professional tennis in the Olympics.
I doubt any of the Team GB footballers will ever look back on their career and say their biggest regret was missing out on an Olympic medal.