I shall probably get lynched for this but can I be the only one who thinks that the standard of play by England at the World Cup was abyssmal. Everyone seems to be calling for the coach's head. Yes, it was his tactics and strategy planning, as well as some questionable squad selections, that didn't help but, at the end of the day, there were 11 men on that pitch, wearing the England colours, who are supposed to be the best this country has to offer.
Don't make me laugh! I've seen more enthusiasm at a Saturday afternoon kick-around on the local park. They all looked as though they had better places to be. I suppose when you earn tens of thousands of pounds each week no matter what the result is there's not much incentive to put heart and soul into it. I wonder what sort of win bonus would get their attention.
The people I feel most sorry for are those fans who spent thousands of pounds, possibly that could have been better spent elsewhere, to travel to watch the squad. I bet some of them spent as much as one of our 'footballers' earn in a week, PLUS these fans had to make their own travel arrangements - none of this first-class all the way malarky our boys expect and receive.
The media have their part to play. Not, though, for criticsing the team - because that was right and proper given the display - but for whipping up the public (like they do with every British sports man/woman/team who show even a hint of ability) into believing that the World Cup is ours for the taking. England were very good during their qualifiers so maybe this hype was deserved this time. The only criticism the media made that I think was out of order was their castigation of our poor goalie who fumbled the save against the USA. We all make mistakes. Do you hear them making the same hoo-haa about Wayne Rooney, who can't find the back of the net (his primary role in the team) with a map? No, of course not.
And who in their right mind picks players who are still recovering from injury, or are injury-prone? It's hardly rocket science, is it, to pick people who are on top of their game. You have to wonder what was going through Capello's mind:- let's pick strikers who haven't scored in 3 months; let's pick a goalie whose team has just been relegated - and as the last man before the net must have had a part to play in their losing so much; let's pick players who haven't played for their country in a while - because they have loads of international experience. If those sort of decisions are the 'right' ones then here's a quick note to the FA - if you would like to save a shedful of money AND allow the coach to make howlers like this, then pick ME. I promise not to ask for more than £50,000 per year plus expenses. I also promise to drop the big names if they play like they did in the World Cup, I don't care who they are. You'll find that this will give them an incentive to do the job they are paid to do.
Out here in the real world we get sacked or demoted if we apply ourselves to our jobs in that way. Maybe there should be a (very) basic salary with the rest of the pay made up of performance bonuses. That would also provide an incentive to 'get on with it', and would make the vast majority of the rest of us feel a little less aggrieved when, once again, our team is made to look less than ordinary.
No comments:
Post a Comment