Jump to content

Club vs Country Conflict, continued


beachesl

Recommended Posts

Craig Moore

Rangers have put captain Craig Moore on the transfer list after the Australian defender opted to play at next month's Olympics instead of leading the Glasgow club's Champions League qualifying campaign.

"Both myself and Craig had a discussion regarding his current situation at Ibrox and his desire to play for his country in the forthcoming Olympics," manager Alex McLeish said in a statement.

"Each of us have our own objectives and I have decided to appoint a new captain for season 2004/05 which I will announce imminently with such important matches at the start of our season.

"The club will now make Craig available for transfer at the correct fee."

The 28-year-old will miss several Scottish premier league matches in August to feature as one of three over-age players for his country at the under-23 soccer tournament in Athens.

Rangers also need to negotiate the final round of qualifiers to reach the Champions League group stages.

Moore has spent 10 of his last 11 years as a professional at Rangers. He rejoined them in 1999 after seven months at Crystal Palace and is now likely to miss out on a testimonial.

Moore missed the last four months of last season with a knee injury and was entering the final year of his contract at Ibrox.

He was part of the squad that equalled Glasgow rivals Celtic's nine successive Scottish titles in 1997 and also helped them win their seventh treble of league, League Cup and Scottish Cup in 2003.

[xx(]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by beachesl

Craig Moore

Rangers have put captain Craig Moore on the transfer list after the Australian defender opted to play at next month's Olympics instead of leading the Glasgow club's Champions League qualifying campaign.

My sympathies lie with Rangers on this one. Moore is 28, and the Olympics are an U-23 tournament with a stupid rule to allow a handful of older players aboard, but only if the team has qualified for the Olympics with a pure U-23 team. Playing in it does nothing to advance Moore's ability and relative value to the club. Champion's Laegue qualifying strikes me as the more worthy pursuit of the two. Ranger undoubtedly expected that he would gone for WCQ games, but the Olympics too? Sorry, but I don't see this as the actions of a "professional" footballer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, and have always said, that the "three overagers" rule is stupid, especially since the qualifying teams all have to be under 23. There are issues about the whole Olympic tournament, but for a club to singlehandedly attack it in this fashion is unacceptable.

However, if a veteran player wants to represent his country at a prestigious events under FIFA rules that all the clubs in the world are bound by, then the retaliation by Rangers, especially on a player that has done so much for them (enough to warrant a testimonial at the end of his spell there, which for the club to expressly derail is totally classless), is very bad form.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The purpose of the U23 rule is because FIFA didn't want the Olympics to simply be another senior team World Cup and therefore have the Olympic tournament (an IOC event) rival FIFA's World Cup. That's a view I can sympathize with. However, I would like to get rid of the three overagers rule, as I don't understand the purpose of that (other than to allow Totti to serve out the rest of his spitting suspension in the Olympics rather than have him miss important an World Cup qualifier in August.)

My understanding is that FIFA wanted to get rid of soccer at the Olympics altogether but the IOC wanted it there because soccer is the #1 revenue-generating sport at the Olympics (despite what Olympic soccer tv coverage in North America would suggest). This was the comprimise. It probably shouldn't come as a surprise that FIFA told clubs that they didn't have to release players for Olympic qualifiers (thereby screwing Canada pretty badly earlier this year) as they don't think much of this tourney, historically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The overagers rule was brought in for 1996 as a compromise between FIFA and the IOC, who wanted full natioal teams to increase TV revenue. It is a cash grab motivation and nothing else. Having said that, I see nothing wrong with some overagers who jump at the opportunity to appear at the Olympics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca

The purpose of the U23 rule is because FIFA didn't want the Olympics to simply be another senior team World Cup and therefore have the Olympic tournament (an IOC event) rival FIFA's World Cup. That's a view I can sympathize with. However, I would like to get rid of the three overagers rule, as I don't understand the purpose of that (other than to allow Totti to serve out the rest of his spitting suspension in the Olympics rather than have him miss important an World Cup qualifier in August.)

My understanding is that FIFA wanted to get rid of soccer at the Olympics altogether but the IOC wanted it there because soccer is the #1 revenue-generating sport at the Olympics (despite what Olympic soccer tv coverage in North America would suggest). This was the comprimise. It probably shouldn't come as a surprise that FIFA told clubs that they didn't have to release players for Olympic qualifiers (thereby screwing Canada pretty badly earlier this year) as they don't think much of this tourney, historically.

That is exactly my understanding as well. Except that "August" should be replaced by "September". :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by Krammerhead

It's still silly.

Yes, it is a silly rule, although they really don't have a U-23 competition, so why not (but then don't augment with seniors)? Nevertheless, given that it is silly tournament because of a silly rule, I think Rangers have every reason to dump the twat. Its not like he is some young guy on the cusp of a full national team appearance (in which there are at least some benefits to the club). If Moore wants to be in the Olympics so be it, but if the Rangers want a defender who is serious about being a professional footballer, they have every reason and right to dump him.

I have a problem with clubs not letting national teamers go to age specific tournaments, and if he were 22, I'd see it different, but letting a 28 year old go to a U-23 tournament? Well, I just don't see the obligation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca

My understanding is that FIFA wanted to get rid of soccer at the Olympics altogether but the IOC wanted it there because soccer is the #1 revenue-generating sport at the Olympics (despite what Olympic soccer tv coverage in North America would suggest).

I believe that it is actually Track & Field that is the biggest revenue generating sport at the olympics. Why else would the T & F events take place at the Olympic Stadium which is always the largest venue. The fact that T & F events take place every day of the olympics is also beneficial to the bottom line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by beachesl

Actually the track events usually take place in the last half of the Olympics. This year, T & F goes from from August 18 (7 days after soccer starts) to 29 (rest day on August 19).

Oh yeah, the Swimming events take place during the first half and the T & F during the second half. But I still believe that T & F are a bigger revenue generator at the Olympics than Soccer. I'm not too sure about Athens, but in Sydney the Olympic Stadium held 110,000 people. T & F tickets aren't cheap either, so T & F would'be generated tens of millions of dollars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Couple of thoughts.

Olympics. Who cares? I don't. And neither should have Craig.

Nothing else matters at Ibrox except making it into the tourny which lays the golden egg, Champions League. That, and making sure Celtic don't progress any further into the tourny than Rangers. The vast financial gap between the two clubs cannot continue to grow as it already borders on fatal for Rangers.

So one convienent excuse to shed Mr. Craig Moore. Very nice.

McLeish already knows eastern Europe is crawling with talented footballers who'll work on the cheap. Relatively speaking of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...