With our Olympic athletes and administrators returning to deserved accolades and applause from the Australian public, the conspicuous silence from FFA and the coaching team of Graham Arnold and David Mitchell continues.
Far from continuing to leave an Olympic legacy, our FFA has set football development in Australia back at least two decades. No results, no player development, no “feel good” factors, no accountability.
What we got was debasement of a generation of younger players, additionally with spurious doubts cast over the abilities to play in the heat and, even more ridiculous claims that they lacked the maturity to play at the elite level.
Throughout the Olympics, Arnold was very coy at specifying why his team (or was it FFA’s?) were not only consistently outplayed, but always out-gunned.
Which brings me to the latest (that is most recent) deflecting technique of Graham’s. As if name-dropping Harry Kewell in every other press conference (was he ever REALLY a contender for these Olympics?) and bigging-up the numbers of A-League players in his squad were tediously insufficient, he has now stooped to an all time low.
“We’ve had problems scoring with this team. This is generally a problem with all levels of Australia’s national teams.” This was his assessment post-Côte d’Ivoire game, where Australia was dealt the knock-out blow, to an embarrassingly tepid campaign.
What burns me the most about Arnold’s comment is what relevancy has it with this Olympic tournament? He left the developing squad players Vidosic, Burns and Djite in preference to completely untried, untested Rukavytsya, and Thompson, just coming back from injury, and a superfluous North.
The immediate lead-up campaign in Asia offered very little in terms of goals for Arnold. And despite the qualifying rounds producing scoring efforts from the Sarkies and Milligan combination, in China, Sarkies found the pine more often than not, and even more so did Arnold’s “goal machine”, Mark Bridge.
The “ring in”, Matt Simon, was even more rarely sighted.
Was this statement meant to placate us Aussie fans? We who had to sit through his squad selections, and had to watch all the tactical fumbling? If it was, it was not only cruel, but an errant observation and a more errant justification.
Now I may have only started following this game at the Arok era (the 80’s for those not in the know), but I do recall many great strikers of the ball even in that era. Maybe Arnold should be kinder to his teammates of the day? I recall many splendid wins, gutsy defeats and goals, goals, goals!
But in any case, now, in our Qantas era, especially, we do score goals.
We must have had the players in the lead-up to that World Cup in 2006 that could (and did) score goals. Otherwise we would not have got there. And I recall only losing to Italy by a last-minute penalty, in the round of 16 in Germany.
What is most concerning is the level of professionalism that Arnold must have, to use comments like these, apparently to save his own job or international managing reputation. This type of revisionism, and outdated attitudes will hold Australia back, and has already.
Will we see Carney hold back from putting his laces through the next long-range attempt?
I would love to hear Arnie’s explanation and clarifications of this latest justification.
Yet, those words of his have been left unsupervised, to bounce around in the eerie media vacuum left by the FFA. Five weeks, now, of ordinary football-loving Australians just trying to work out what it is that Graham Arnold would have us believe, now.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Football articles
- Phoenix need more than flash in the pan crowds (133)
- ‘New football’ fans may help save the game in Australia (124)
- Does Tasmania have a case for A-League inclusion? (119)
- What happened in Port Said was not a football riot (118)
- Magilton struggling to make a mark (68)
- Socceroos screwed over by FIFA, again (41)
- Gulf influence cripples the FFA again (40)
- Melbourne Victory vs Central Coast Mariners: A-League live scores, blog (95)
- Liam Miller: Bargain buy of the A-League season? (8)
- Zambia plays Cup of Nations final in memory of their fallen (6)
- Capello’s resignation ends an awkward marriage (8)
- Does the A-League need an injection of humour? (44)
- Redknapp the best bet to clean up Capello’s England mess (2)
- Redknapp tight-lipped over England job
- Melbourne Victory vs Central Coast Mariners: A-League live scores, blog (95)
- Liam Miller: Bargain buy of the A-League season? (8)
- Zambia plays Cup of Nations final in memory of their fallen (6)
- Capello’s resignation ends an awkward marriage (8)
- Redknapp the best bet to clean up Capello’s England mess (2)
- Melbourne derby reveals tale of two journeys (3)
- O’ so close for John: How JON almost landed the biggest job in sport (16)
- Explore:
nomad3 said | September 17th 2008 @ 1:00pm | Report comment
Hi bear, I dont disagree with anything you have said … and it has been five weeks and no word from GA..more importantly, there has been no one in the media these last 2 weeks to even ask the question of his whereabouts…not one mention on au.foufourtwo.com and not a word from the SBS commentators about the Olympic team and GA this last week… instead the emphasis has been on the socceroos win against the Uzbeks….. where is GA ? is he in the country ? why doesnt he front the media and the fans? ..we want answers !!!!
do you know Bear ?
Slippery Jim said | September 17th 2008 @ 2:41pm | Report comment
“I recall many splendid wins, gutsy defeats and goals, goals, goals! But in any case, now, in our Qantas era, especially, we do score goals.We must have had the players in the lead-up to that World Cup in 2006 that could (and did) score goals.”
Firstly, Les murray in his article “Wanted:Socceroos strikers apply now” made the point that we are facing a crisis in finding world class strikers for Australia. Sounds exactly like what Arnold is saying, doesn’t it. Les had this to say, in part:
“We don’t have such a man [a central striker] in this squad [the Socceroos]. And worse, the talent terrain suggests we are not likely to have one anytime soon. In terms of producing forwards of genuine ability and scoring punch, Australia is in deep crisis.
The A-League website lists 28 players as designated strikers, seven of whom, one quarter, are foreign nationals. That leaves 21 eligible to play for Australia, for us to bank on. Of that 21, four (Agostino, Thompson, Allsop and Aloisi) are already tried and tested, leaving just 17 prospects with whom to look to the future.
It’s not a great report card and not a sweet prospect.
Whittling down those numbers further, only four of the 17 tally up as genuine talents with whom we could do something, at least in the short term future: Matt Simon, Jason Hoffman, Mark Bridge and Nikita Rukavytsya.”
Should we be fair and consistent, then, and in the strongest terms accuse Les of a lack of ‘professionalism’, some sort of “revisionism”, or of making sly accusations to save his “job and reputation”?
Obviously nothing of the sort.
Like Arnold, he is point out what he sees as an area of needed improvement in Australian national football team development.
Interesting, too, to note that Les Murray, a member of the football hall of fame, has singled out Simon and Rukavytsya as two of only four “genuine talents” strikers capable of being important in Australia’s national team setup, yet this article singles the same players out as bizarre choices, and belittles their efforts for the Olyroos.
I would also add that Archie Thompson is hardly “untested” either as a striker, or in the national squad.
Yet again we see the red mist descending and clouding both judgement and logic. Taking the easy option of laying the boot in Arnold any time he dares to raise his point. As with most Arnold haters, very little attempt is made to be proactive or optimistic, as the preference is for destructive negativity. Rather than offering solutions, it is preferable to crush Arnold ‘for what he has done tp us.’
Yet what has he done? His best, in a difficult situation. Nothing more, nothing less. How terribly offensive of the man.
Secondly, the FFA has not been “conspicuosly silent” on the Olyroos and Arnold post-China.
Both FFA CEO Frank Lowy and Ben Buckley met with Arnold in China after Australia’s exit from the football tournament.
Arnold stated for the public record;
“I have a contract (with FFA) until 2010 and I know I have 100 per cent support of Mr Lowy, (CEO) Ben Buckley, the board, (national coach) Pim Verbeek and (technical director) Rob Baan.”
Buckley issued a statement saying that Arnold is a contracted Socceroos assistant;
“He is a valuable member of our national team set-up, given his recent experiences and his knowledge of football in Australia…in a group that included the runners-up in their age group from Europe (Serbia), the defending champions and eventual gold medal winners in Argentina and one of Africa’s best in Ivory Coast, our performance should be seen in some context.”
Not exactly silence is it? What do you want, a public execution? Arnold’s head on a platter?
So why not put away the hatred and negativity surrounding the perception of Arnold and celebrate the great results Australia has had recently, with Grame Arnold as assistant manager no less, in defeating the fourth ranked nation on their own soil, as well as our first win of the second stage of WC qualification.
As my mother always says, if you haven’t got anything nice to say, don’t say anything at all.
Graciously,
Slippery Jim
Millster said | September 17th 2008 @ 2:51pm | Report comment
My only observation is that the “Arnoldgate” saga played out in the media was probably a premature delivery, and has resulted in some more recent shyness.
That said, personalities aside, I hope that when elite development is next reviewed in depth by the FFA that some specific parameters are put around the Olympic tournament every 4 years in terms of what we want it to achieve in the bigger picture of Football’s development in Australia. What struck me most of all was the lack of clarity expressed by any official on what we actually wanted from the Olympics – and therefore the debates that we had as pundits about whether we were there for immediate success or as part of a bigger picture. The schitzophrenic team choice that we went with in my opinion reflects this tension, and that’s not only Arnold’s fault.
dasilva said | September 17th 2008 @ 3:11pm | Report comment
Slippery Jim
The problem most people have with Arnold commenting on lack of strikers and the inability to score goals is that when he said that Djite and Burns were in Europe scoring goals for their club during the preseason. So who’s fault is it that they have trouble finishing sides in the Olympics. Now it can be argued that they wouldn’t made any difference if they were pick (especially as both are quite overated) but everyone now thinks “What if?” when they look back at the olympics due to non-selection of Djite and Burns.
“Secondly, the FFA has not been “conspicuosly silent” on the Olyroos and Arnold post-China.”
The criticism of the silence is that Arnold has not have a press conference discussing the performance from the Olympics. Yes Arnold went out and said I’m not going to be sack and that’s about it. Arnold hasn’t faced up to the press about the olympics performance. So I don’t believe your quotes really address any criticism that has been made.
Slippery Jim said | September 17th 2008 @ 3:41pm | Report comment
dasilva, you are ignoring Ben Buckley’s media release as well as the FFA’s statement along with seperate statements from Bonita Mersiades in addition to Graham Arnold.
The fact that the FFA has not, a) held some sort of drawn-out ongoing media dialogue after the event is done and dusted and b) the FFA’s media statements do not proportionately match the amount of relentless media-driven frenzy that came before and after the event (which is always going to be the case) does not mean that they have been “silent” which is what this article states in its first paragraph.
Regardless of quantity, the FFA HAVE NOT been silent, this statement is false and misleading and is used at the start of this piece in attempt to fashion a straw man argument as if some sort of guilty secret was being kept from the Australian public. This is simply not the case.
Come on, folks, lets move on, there are more important things to look forward to without regressing or demeaning ourselves in finger-pointing vitriol.
dasilva said | September 17th 2008 @ 3:54pm | Report comment
The criticism is that Arnold hasn’t faced up to the media about his performance. I don’t really care what the FFA say about Arnold performances because they are covering for things that Arnold should have said himself in person. Arnold to date hasn’t discuss the olympics. Yes the FFA have but (is it really Ben Buckley responsibility to talk about Soccerroos performance in the Olympics?) really that’s not the point and you are ignoring the reason why people are still angry.
We just want Arnold to come out and talk about the olympics and get some damn scrutiny like every other manager does after a failure or success (although a public execution doesn’t sound too bad
) .
The perception from the public is that Arnold is untouchable and that is reinforce by how FFA handle this. It seems like FFA plan of silence of Graham Arnold is working. The olympic is slowly fading from memory as the Soccerroos is back in public consciousness. It’s like the Olympics debacle never happen. Well done FFA and Arnold
nomad3 said | September 17th 2008 @ 3:59pm | Report comment
Jim,
As fans dont you think we have a right to know from the coach of our Olympic team why they performed so badly? Dont you think he owes it to us aussies to give us his version of events as to team selections, and the rather bland style of defensive play which may be a portent of things to come? Do you think we deserve an explanation of what his intentions with regard to team building for the future ? Do you think he should have the opportunity at least (under the scrutiny of the public and the media) to give us his version? And i am not referring to saying “hey guys our teams have always had problems scoring goals” … For heavens sake hes the coach !!!!! Comments like that suggest abrogation of responsbility to this nation and suggests he has no faith in his team … if I was a player and a coach said that abut the team I played in ..I would be furious !!!!! im not calling for his head but he owes us (like it or loathe it) an explanation.
Baan wrote a technical report on the performance of the Olympic team … which will not be made public ..someone made the comment ” the heady stench of whitewash ” ..very apt
Slippery Jim said | September 17th 2008 @ 4:23pm | Report comment
nomad3, to address your questions,
1. You are presupposing the Olroos did perform badly; I disagree with the basis of this supposition and therefore the question is meaningless.
As Ben Buckley said above, “in a group that included the runners-up in their age group from Europe (Serbia), the defending champions and eventual gold medal winners in Argentina and one of Africa’s best in Ivory Coast, our performance should be seen in some context.”
2. He has already.
3. Not especially, no. To the FFA, yes.
4. He has the opportunity, so whether he should have it or not is not in question. He chose not to comment on the criticism, which is a dignified response in the circumstances.
As for your last point, Arnold, as was Les Murray, trying to help us see the big picture of football in Australia, something which Mr Buckley acknowledges he is in a good position to know about, it was not an “abrogation of responsibility” as coaches cannot turn plodding no-hopers into Thierry Henry’s overnight, or in fact, at all.
The Arnold/Olyroos situation is all old news anyway, to continue obssessing about it is just, well, creepy…
Pippinu said | September 17th 2008 @ 4:52pm | Report comment
Bear
are you still going on about GA and the Olympics? It was a tough group and we weren’t quite good enough – let’s move on! Let’s worry about getting to South Africa in 2010!
We must have had the players in the lead-up to that World Cup in 2006 that could (and did) score goals.
To be honest, once you exclude the traditional pummeling of our oceanic neighbours, we didn’t score all that many goals in the lead up to the WC at all. We continued our record of not scoring goals in Montevideo, and then we scored a solitary goal on home soil, which was enough to take the whole shebang to penalties.
Our whole forward division in the lead up to 2010 is going to look remarkably similar to what we had in Germany. Macca is a welcome addition (but not necessarily a godsend); Dukes is a few years older; Djite is still developing; a few Olyroos might make an impression, but maybe not.
If that aspect worries anyone, that’s fair enough, but that has nothing to do with GA or even the FFA – that’s something that goes back to the deterioration in our U17s and U20s over the last decade.
The Bear said | September 17th 2008 @ 6:29pm | Report comment
Just popped my head in, and it seems a few have forgotten that it was Arnold’s decision to leave out the players that were most likely to get the team goals, either on the pine or in some cases out of the squad altogether. And now to overlook his comments in question – well it’s one hand washing the other.
Graciously,
The Bear