Club or Country?

[argh1]

As , well a couple of us seem to disagree!(African Nations Cup).

I was wondering if any-one else wanted to get in on the Club vs Country discussion and maybe broaden the discussion to other events?

Personally , I understand that the team pays these players but I always admire players who put their country 1st.

Mr. Blatter seems to have views on clubs and clubs have views on FIFA interference , if you like,! In any case most of us have no votes on these matters only opinions , which are free.

[canadiankick97]

It seems to me that Blatter is much more concerned about international gameplay than domestic play. Personally, if I was ever in the position to choose between club or country, I would choose my country. I know they say club before country, but I would be like Kanoute who is choosing to play for Mali in the African Nations Cup over his club.

[bettermirror]

country!

[amacpher]

quote:Originally posted by bettermirror

country!

So if you were all in Zidane's shoes last June and had to choose between La Liga's last month or Confererations Cup, you'd choose the latter?? Or lets say you're Kanoute (who's probably about 5% Mali), you'd still choose country??

The question should be, if you had to always choose country or always choose club, which would it be? I would always choose club because that way you still wouldn't ever miss any important games.

[beachesl]

Interesting Guardian article on this issue:

http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,9753,1114105,00.html

[Mimglow]

Another interesting article on the issue. I've included the relevant parts here.

Controversies over Frederic Kanoute and Jay Jay Okocha have overshadowed this tournament before it has even begun. The haves of the European leagues have not been slow in levelling criticism at the have-nots of the African federation.

With the big European clubs' often open disdain for international football, this comes as little surprise and is all really rather predictable.

A tournament which rarely receives positive coverage in the British press, the African Cup of Nations is actually an older competition than the European Championships and has been played every two years since 1957.

In recent years African players have become far more prevalent and successful in European football and since Italia '90, African national sides have been making significant waves in World Cups.

In such a light the complaints and disdain that many a Premiership boss or pundit has greeted mention of the competition is somewhat misplaced. Any manager who buys African internationals should always be mindful of his new player's commitment to his country and that this competition is going to take place every second January.

A player is always likely to want to play in his continental championship - usually the smaller the country, the more he will want to play. The English media, ever the John Bulls when it comes to national pride, seem conveniently to forget patriotism's existence whenever non-European competitions rear their heads.

Arguments about playing the tournament post-season instead are rather shot down by the climatic differences in playing in African mid-summer. The competition is here to stay at this time of year, and its existence is fully supported by FIFA. The world governing body's leadership cannot afford to do without the support of the African confederation (CAF).

The likes of Sam Allardyce, open dissenters speaking in their own self-interest, would do well to remember such factors before they dismiss this tournament as players 'swanning off to Africa', or some such barb.

For the whole article, read here: http://soccernet.espn.go.com/feature?id=288449&cc=5901

[amacpher]

quote:Originally posted by Mimglow

Arguments about playing the tournament post-season instead are rather shot down by the climatic differences in playing in African mid-summer. The competition is here to stay at this time of year, and its existence is fully supported by FIFA. The world governing body's leadership cannot afford to do without the support of the African confederation (CAF).

"Climatic differences?" What the heck does that mean? Other continents don't have to deal with this issue I suppose, thus, the ANC must be held in January. Whatever.

Besides when is mid-summer in Africa?? Isn't it always summer in most parts and, in fact, probably better soccer-playing conditions (ie. cooler) in June in other parts (like South Africa). Whatever the conditions, the players involved in the ANC are talented enuf that they must have played football year-round (in all playing conditions) when they were growing-up in Africa. So they can handle it!

The climate argument is weak.

[Mimglow]

But you chose to nit-pick on one of the minor details of the piece. Am I to infer that you agree with the rest of it?

[canadiankick97]

quote:Originally posted by Mimglow

A player is always likely to want to play in his continental championship - usually the smaller the country, the more he will want to play.

So true. I admire the pride in these type of players.

[beachesl]

quote:Originally posted by amacpher

"Climatic differences?" What the heck does that mean? Other continents don't have to deal with this issue I suppose, thus, the ANC must be held in January. Whatever.

Besides when is mid-summer in Africa?? Isn't it always summer in most parts and, in fact, probably better soccer-playing conditions (ie. cooler) in June in other parts (like South Africa). Whatever the conditions, the players involved in the ANC are talented enuf that they must have played football year-round (in all playing conditions) when they were growing-up in Africa. So they can handle it!

The climate argument is weak.

African climatic conditions are extreme and unique.

It's always been a tradition to have the ANC in the "winter" (November to March), mainly because it's the ideal time for weather. And, now that it is a tradition, they probably are too proud to switch. "Why should we always have to change just because it inconveniences the European leagues?" Although I have been a big proponent of standardization of the international calendar, they do have some valid arguments.

In the Arab states, it is too hot to have it in the summer (it could be minimized somewhat by having the matches at night, which is the attempted argument used by the World Cup candidates from North Africa). Even when night falls, the heat can be stifling.

In most of Equatorial Africa, our "summer" is the rainy season, when travel and the condition of the pitches (bad enough in most of Africa) is horrendous. I saw a Champions league match in Doula where the water piled up in huge puddles, and despite a delay of an hour to try to vacuum the water off the pitch (drainage of pitches is not a concept that has caught on in this very wet part of the world), the game was a comical play of the ball squirting slowly through the water.

Only in the very south of Africa is the weather ideal in the summer months, which is one advantage of having the World Cup (which has to be held in June-July, unless FIFA is prepared to do an unlikely quantum shift) in South Africa.

The timing is also better for the African leagues, the majority of which have their breaks at the end of the calendar year (except for the extreme North and South). Also, the CAF international cup competitions start in February, and end in November-December, so a date two to three months after is ideal.

Of course, CAF may have official reasons to FIFA justifying the timing (FIFA HAS said that international tournaments should be in the January-February or June-July timeframe, and have supported CAF in this issue), but I am unaware of what they may be. The above is just a common sense answer... perhaps those more knowledgeable than I can enlighten us...

The unfortunate thing for the African player (apart from the conflict which hinders all) is that his market value is depressed compared to players of similiar skill from elsewhere, as a potential club has to factor in probabilitly of missing a significant part of the season (as well as the work visa problems many African players have in Europe, and to a lesser extent, in Asia and North America).

[DJT]

Club vs. country. As long as it comes down to pride, it doesn't matter either way. It seems that most people equate pride with national teams, but it is possible for a player to have just as much or even more pride for his club, and I think no less of such a player. All things being equal, there's no reason why playing for your country should be more important than playing for your club, in my opinion.

The problem is that these days most players don't seem to have much pride for their club, and to them club soccer is more about the money. You know that when a player chooses his country over his club he is more than likely doing it out of pride for his country, but when a player chooses his club over his country he is more than likely doing it for personal gain. [V]

[amacpher]

quote:Originally posted by DJT

The problem is that these days most players don't seem to have much pride for their club, and to them club soccer is more about the money. You know that when a player chooses his country over his club he is more than likely doing it out of pride for his country, but when a player chooses his club over his country he is more than likely doing it for personal gain. [V]

Hmmm... "more than likely", perhaps. But there are a lot of Owen Hargraeves out there. Especially in the African Nations Cup. I like the story of one Francileudo dos Santos. He was born in Brazil, grew-up in Brazil and played at Sampaio before moving to Standard Liege in Belgium. He now plays in France for Sochaux. Somewhere between Belgium and France he spent two seasons with the Tunisian club Etoile Sahel. In other words, if he’s Tunisian then Hargraeves is as English as a crumpet sitting next to a spot of tea!

But the personal gain potential for a decision like the one by Francileudo could be huge! As Christiano proved last summer, the difference between being arguably the World’s most popular 18 year-old soccer player and a virtual unknown, is playing well in one pre-season match being watched by a big-club’s manager!

[argh1]

quote:Originally posted by DJT

Club vs. country...............................................

The problem is that these days most players don't seem to have much pride for their club, and to them club soccer is more about the money. You know that when a player chooses his country over his club he is more than likely doing it out of pride for his country, but when a player chooses his club over his country he is more than likely doing it for personal gain. [V]

As much as I love to view playing for one's country in idealistic terms. I'm not naive to the point of thinking that there is no benefit in playing for your country in a high profile tourney.

A well placed performance in a meaningfull game , could I suppose mean extra money in endorsements , personal appearances , and soccer schools for example.The reverse could be said ,maybe , for a bad performance on the risk side.

As far as players' loyalty or pride in the club, isn't that given in exact proportion to the amount of loyalty given to the player by the club? In the the 21st century in pro sports it's hard to pick examples of clubs' loyalty.(I'm sure there are exceptions to the rule) It's a what have you done lately world.

Ask former Dundee players (administration)or current Leeds players (deferral of wages)about club loyalty.

I do agree with the clubs who were blind sided by the new FIFA ruling, regarding players changing nations, you'd think these players and clubs could have been given more time. At least a season in the future before the rule takes effect.

I will now go back to my idealistic view of players giving of themselves to answer their countries call;)

[Mimglow]

quote:Originally posted by argh1

El-Hadji Diouf is the example that jumps immediately to mind. Here's a guy who wan a virtual unknown before WC 2002, has a fantastic tournament, and gets picked up by one of the biggest clubs in the world, where he promptly crashes and burns.

[amacpher]

quote:Originally posted by Mimglow

El-Hadji Diouf is the example that jumps immediately to mind. Here's a guy who wan a virtual unknown before WC 2002, has a fantastic tournament, and gets picked up by one of the biggest clubs in the world, where he promptly crashes and burns.

Good example. I've been thinking that the scouting by EPL teams must be pretty bad. I mean signing a guy cuz you see him on TV have a decent game (he still didn't score) against France doesnt mean he'll rip-up Arsenal! Common!

And don't bother going to Argentina to check-out the next Thierry Henry (Carlos Tevez), just grab some ordinary guys (like Chelsea did) from a lower division in England for the same transfer price as Tevez would cost!

Arsenal has done an increadible job finding superstars in the making, but I'm not too sure about much of the rest of the EPL teams! Chelsea has to be the worst. Spend $200 million to go from 4th place to 3rd! Nice.

[DJT]

quote:Originally posted by argh1

Hmmm... "more than likely", perhaps. But there are a lot of Owen Hargraeves out there.

quote:Originally posted by argh1

As much as I love to view playing for one's country in idealistic terms. I'm not naive to the point of thinking that there is no benefit in playing for your country in a high profile tourney.

A well placed performance in a meaningfull game , could I suppose mean extra money in endorsements , personal appearances , and soccer schools for example.The reverse could be said ,maybe , for a bad performance on the risk side.

Alright, fair enough. The main point of the second paragraph was to say that, even though I think club loyalty is just as significant as national team loyalty, I'm more cynical about players choosing clubs in that they usually do so for personal gain. You guys are right, the same can happen with national teams, but surely to a lesser extent (as they usually say, "the club pays the wages").

quote:Originally posted by argh1

As far as players' loyalty or pride in the club, isn't that given in exact proportion to the amount of loyalty given to the player by the club? In the the 21st century in pro sports it's hard to pick examples of clubs' loyalty.(I'm sure there are exceptions to the rule) It's a what have you done lately world.

Ask former Dundee players (administration)or current Leeds players (deferral of wages)about club loyalty.

Hmm, well I think this is different. How does a club show loyalty towards players? By keeping them when they aren't good enough any more? By paying them amounts they can't afford? As a fan I put the well-being of the club first.

I don't know the specifics of the Dundee and Leeds situations, but last season Lazio was on the verge of bankruptcy and told players they had to either accept deferred (multiple times) and reduced wages/club stocks in place of wages, or leave. This was not a lack of loyalty on the part of the club, this was reality, there just wasn't any money to pay them. (In a rare show of loyalty on the part of the players towards the club, almost all of them agreed to the offer and were hailed as heroes by fans --- that they went on to have such a tremendous season in the midst of all this was a huge bonus.)

[drewsome]

Think a lot here depends on your perspective.

A guy whose club are fighting for the championship and thus european club play may say it's more important to be with his club; as I'm sure the club's supporters would say so too.

A guy who is in a lesser division (Ian Hume for example) can get a huge amount of exposure playing for his country (even in a losing game) and thus better his career.

From my own standpoint, I am on the fence. I want the Canadian National Team to do well, but would hate to see a Club lose out because a guy was on National Cap.

[beachesl]

The pride of the African players is one reason I will be cheering for the African teams during the World Cup.

---------------------

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/piersedwards/2009/12/cup_of_nations_clash_creates_f.html

---------------

Cup of Nations clash creates friction

Post categories: football

Piers Edwards | 12:13 UK time, Thursday, 24 December 2009

If there's one Christmas present all football managers across Europe would probably want, it's undoubtedly a change in the scheduling of the African Cup of Nations.

Every other year, the club-versus-country row routinely dominates the back pages as Africa's premier sports event approaches and clubs lose key players for around a month.

And the row seems to grow with every passing year as Africans become increasingly pivotal in world football.

Premier League leaders Chelsea, for example, must continue their title chase without Didier Drogba, John Mikel Obi, Michael Essien and Salomon Kalou, while Portsmouth's relegation battle is not helped by losing a similar tally of players.

The story is the same across Europe. The French and Belgian leagues are always hardest hit, while Spanish leaders Barcelona must do without midfield duo Yaya Toure and Seydou Keita. In Serie A, table-topping Inter Milan must do without Samuel Eto'o, but not, surprisingly, Sulley Muntari.

The Cup of Nations storm is such that even the normally placid Roy Hodgson has been caught up this year. The Fulham coach angered Ghana's FA by labelling their request for John Pantsil's release - they wanted him to leave on Sunday, 27 December - as "disrespectful".

Hodgson's comments are not without irony since this is the day that players must be released anyway according to world giverning body Fifa. The normally mild-mannered former Switzerland boss clearly cannot see past Monday's West London derby against Chelsea.

In any case, sympathy is limited, for the oft-repeated cry has been, quite rightly, that Hodgson and other coaches knew they would lose their African players every other January when they signed them.

Chelsea will be without the services of stars Salomon Kalou and Didier Drogba

Some players even make it crystal clear they will not join a club unless they can be released for the tournament.

"An important English club once offered me a good financial and sporting deal, but I was honest and explained my commitments with Cameroon, especially the Nations Cup, so I lost the deal," Patrick Mboma recently told the BBC. "But I have no regrets. I was a Cameroonian before becoming a footballer, so my country comes first."

On the face of it, it does border on the insane to stage a continental finals during the European season - even if it made little difference prior to the mass influx of Africans in the 1990s.

Although it now affects some of the world's top clubs, the Confederation of African Football (Caf) still dismisses all requests to change the timing, always claiming that Africa's weather in June is too severe, whether through excessive heat or unplayable rain.

But this is not the most convincing argument, especially considering that the prospect of hosting the World Cup in June 2010 sparked a bidding frenzy across the continent. Many matches at next year's finals will also be notable for the cold, but no one is saying the tournament shouldn't be held because it's the South African winter.

Furthermore, Africa staged vital Cup of Nations and World Cup qualifying matches in June 2008 and June 2009, when more than 100 games were played in 47 countries.

I can't, off the top of my head, recall too many complaints about the conditions then.

So should Caf do the unexpected one day and reschedule the competition to June, as repeatedly requested by the likes of Eto'o, Essien and El Hadji Diouf, the year would also have to change.

It would have to be an odd year - just like it was when the tournament first began in 1957 - to avoid clashing with the World Cup and, to a lesser extent, the Olympics and European Championships, too.

This would surely benefit Africa, as the Cup of Nations could snag an uncrowded slot in the football calendar, thus increasing worldwide attention.

It would also silence European calls for the event to be staged quadrennially, which are clearly the result of vested interests. Did the off-season Copa America receive such vociferous criticism when it was regularly played every two years?

It's important to see things from an African point of view. Staging the competition biennially means the infrastructure in one of the continent's 53 nations improves cyclically - as seen most clearly by Mali 2002 and Burkina Faso 1998.

In addition, the Cup of Nations largely keeps Caf afloat since it provides around 80% of the African body's revenue.

Yet with Caf showing little political will to pander to European calls and move the finals, perhaps the opinions of Abedi Pele may engineer the first step towards a different scheduling.

The Ghanaian advances one of the more relevant arguments for moving the tournament, highlighting the difficulty of performing at a World Cup for Africa's finalists after a challenging European season, during which they've also had to contest a Cup of Nations. Indeed, the Cup of Nations is the only continental finals to be regularly played in a World Cup year.

Pele's view is shared by former France coach Gerard Houllier, but if the three-time African Footballer of the Year is to get his way, all African teams would seemingly need to fail in South Africa, save for the hosts themselves who won't be in Angola.

The problem is that Pele has been telling all and sundry that the continent can lift the World Cup next July.