-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Socceroos
- Thread starter Tigerfan
- Start date
It does in terms of fighting for infrastructure funding and just simply having enough pitches to cater for the huge growth we are seeing in participation due to (in part) the explosion of women’s sport.
But if there were sufficient training facilities and infrastructure for both codes and both were able to promote youth with no real roadblocks, and both sports had competent governing bodies, then both sports can achieve their goals IMO. It doesn’t have to be one or the other like some would have you believe.
But in my view, its not a level playing field due to goverment failure at all 3 levels... And I do to admit that Football Australia and the state associations don't exactly help themselves.
Sure, but the soccer uptake with kids is quite big. The FFA need to find a way to keep that interest up. But the FFA thgese days stands for "*smile*ing-up Football Again"
they barely have a profile and that reflects into the grass roots and the national team
Talent. It makes a huge difference in terms of talent. If Buddy had chosen soccer, he would be our greatest ever striker and one of the best in the world. I have little doubt of that. Dusty, when Cantona meets Ronaldo - at minimum another Bresciano. Pendlebury/Rogic.
We've produced one Brett Emerton. What if Brett Deledio and/or Chris Judd had succeeded him? Would we be complaining Japan were too fast for us if we had a raft of Boltons and Riolis to call on?
Matt Leckie plays soccer for Australia. He reminds me of Dan Butler.
Ah, that old chestnut. Do you really want to get into this?
Ron Barassi famously said in 1964 that VFL players can beat Sokkah at their own sport. Jack Dyer organised a match and lost 8-0 in a friendly against a local amateur side.
Nick Davis recently tweeted something similar. He claimed it would be easier for an AFL player to convert to the A-League and harder for an A-League player to convert to AFL.
Some of these naïve comments make me laugh sometimes.
My question to you is this: how many basketball players and sportsman that were poached from other sports (such as Gaelic football, rugby and so on) manage to make the grade in AFL? How many pure athletes with minimal footy skills are drafted? The answer is… a lot. In fact, many of these "imports" are actually better kicks of the footy than somewone who grew up playing the game.
Now let me ask you... how many sportsman convert to Sokkah at age 15-16, then becomes a star of the game? The answer is zero. The moral of the story is that it takes significantly more practice to be a professional Sokkah player compared to being a professional AFL player. Remember Usain Bolt at Central Coast Mariners?
Yet you think Buddy, Dusty and Pendles can make the grade in Sokkah? It takes a different type of athlete to play the game. you need to be quick, nimble and have a low centre of gravity. Perhaps a crumbing forward would fit that mould. Some indigenous players might. Dusty would be too big and wouldn't last 90 minutes unless he slimmed down. Buddy can’t even kick on his right foot. Pendles would have the best chance of the 3 to make it.
The biggest myth that AFL fans believe - and it actually makes me laugh - is the misguided view that AFL is the most skilful sport in the world.
Straw man, Ian. I'm talking about if those blokes had played soccer their whole lives, not if they came together for a friendly having never played it. Remember? We were talking about competition for talent.
Buddy Franklin is a better football athlete than anyone who has ever played soccer for Australia. If he had focused on soccer his whole life he'd be our greatest-ever player (unless Dusty and Ablett Sr had too, in which case we'd be having a debate.)
Soccer is a very technical game with skills that take many years to master, no argument, but it's the height of deluded arrogance to suggest the only athletes capable of doing so are the ones that have. Some superior football talents chose not to.
Not yet. Wales have got through Leg1, their 2nd leg is a playoff against either Scotland or Ukraine who's 1st leg was delayed until June for obvious reasons.
Strawman? but you’re painting a hypothetical scenario impossible to answer… and I provided you with my best attempt knowing what I know about the traits of these players.
Yes, it's a strawman when you tell me I'm arguing that Buddy and co. could "convert" at a late age, when I was clearly talking about if they'd played their whole lives. This idea that soccer is some special, magical game that only special, magical, pre-ordained soccer players would be any good at, is laughable. Buddy would have been a superstar. 6'6, runs like the wind, rocket of a leg. Best striker we never had.
I always thought Viduka would have made a great AFL Full Forward. Harry Kewell great outside mid. Timmy Cahill a mid-sized forward who plays tall.
They very well might have. Athletic talents are transferable. No one is born a soccer player.
I disagree and I'm not sure what focus you have on soccer, but for me you are making an argument that doesn't make sense.
Soccer isn't and never has been the most athletic sport when comparing to sports such as footy. So using more athletic sports stars as a reason why they would succeed is actually non-sensical.
Burly, 6 ft 6 players generally don't make good forwards so I totally disagree on your view of Buddy. Soccer is more about technical aspects and close control of the footy, something that inherently is more difficult the taller you get, its generally why the taller players became centre halfs rather than anything else, because the skill level declines.
Take a look at the best players in the game and tell me why there are very few players over 6ft 3 performing in them.
Your argument doesn't fit with the players that already play soccer at a high level and cannot actually be answered in the definitive way that you are trying.
I never get this self defeatist, "We have a small population" cliche Aussies always trot out. Seems a lazy excuse. It's not even that true. We are ranked 55th for population, out of 191 nations. That's a middle to high ranking - not 'small' in the over all context. Sure, population distribution around the world is skewed to a small number of giants, which makes us think 'small'. But it's not strictly true in the over all context of 191 nations.
Added to this, Australia ranks 13th of 191 nations for GDP. Actually a very high ranking.
Netherlands is a very comparable sized country to Australia in terms of population size and GDP. They are consistently competitive with the absolute best teams in the world. Croatia, considerably smaller (only 4mil) and far less wealthy than Australia (and Netherlands), are also consistently competitive at the pointy end.
And then in the next tier you have European nations of the likes of Portugal, Sweden, Belgium, Denmark and even Switzerland (all smaller than Australia in population, but with similar socioeconomics) that go through phases of being solidly competitive.
I think talent pool being spread and diluted across other prominent sports doesn't help, as Spook points out. And this feeds into resources being spread across those other prominent sports, as Ian discusses. So in part, you both are right. It also means cultural attention and how culturally ingrained the sport is in the community psyche is diluted. Never underestimate how important this final element is to ingrain superior coaching, administrative and playing habits across the entire system and sport in that community.
Last edited:
No, i am arguing the opposite. And I was pretty thorough about it too. So let me simplify it somewhat...
Its footy fans that think the game is superior, the athletes are superior and skills are superior. *smile*, I used to be one of those people who believes this back in the day.
Everyone on this forum complains about the direction of the game has headed over the past 15-20 years. But defend the game passionately when debating it with followers of other sports.
If you posted this stuff on a Sokkah forum as opposed to a Richmond forum, you would be laughed off the page.
Yes, the Netherlands don't play footy.
Buddy is burly because he's done weights for 18 years. Have a look at the skinny kid who came into the league in 2005. He's shorter than Peter Crouch, and roughly 17 times the athlete. But no, he couldn't have made it as a soccer player. Soccer's a magical mystery game and only soccer players can play soccer. But only if they're soccer players. If they didn't choose soccer they had no chance of being good at it if they had.
Matthew Leckie.
Buddy is burly because he's done weights for 18 years. Have a look at the skinny kid who came into the league in 2005. He's shorter than Peter Crouch, and roughly 17 times the athlete. But no, he couldn't have made it as a soccer player. Soccer's a magical mystery game and only soccer players can play soccer. But only if they're soccer players. If they didn't choose soccer they had no chance of being good at it if they had.
Matthew Leckie.
By arrogant, deluded, defensive zealots who can't accept that "the world game" is less popular in Australia than our indigenous sport.
Like I said, I think both you and Ian are each correct in part.
Talent pool being spread across other prominent sports is definitely an influence, as you point out. And this feeds into resources being spread and diluted across those other prominent sports (which was the crux of Ian's point).
It also means cultural attention and how culturally ingrained the sport is in the community psyche is diluted. Never underestimate how important this final element is to ingrain superior coaching, administrative and playing habits across the entire system and sport in that community.
Bringing these things together. With so much attention being on English football, one would be forgiven for thinking this is the most football (soccer) obsessed nation in Europe. We also hear about how passionate Brazilians and Argentinians are about the game and how it's a way of life. In the cultural stakes, the Dutch seem to sneak under the radar a bit. Perhaps because they give the impression of being more reserved. An impression of less passionate or emotive people. That kind of Germanic, analytical persona.
But from my observations travelling around the Netherlands it is very much an obsessively ingrained part of the community fabric. It's a highly urbanised, relatively densely populated country and never have I seen the concentration of football/soccer fields that I saw in the Netherlands. They are absolutely everywhere, squeezed into every nook and cranny of the urban and semi-rural landscape of the country. A lot of really good quality pitches and associated facilities even at the local village and suburban level too. It does look to be every bit a way of life as it is in Brazil or Argentina. But expressed in more of that Germanic highly analytical way, than the flamboyance of Latin America or the fanaticism of the English working class.
