Questions burn following Joeys Mexico failure

Off topic but about the only football thread running ... so will post here... Just wish to convey my huge thanks to that great supporter of the A-League and the Mariners especially SBS... just looked at TWG site... I guess they must have just taken it down.... but I could not find one mention of the Celtic match... in fact the past two weeks I have not found a SBS article ......RRRRRRRRR sorry they reported Musty was not playing within minutes of it be announced ... so no flies on them when comes to keeping up to date.... So Les when you rubbish your next Socceroo and claim how much you love and support football .... I will remember how SBS again dug deep to support the Mariners and football generally when a top international side comes to play .. Thanks.... SBS ... and you wonder why as I do some are losing their love for you...

Yes, wonder if the trend of champions one season, wooden spoon the next will be replicated with the Roar this season? I don't think that will be the case. Nearly forget about Durante and co - most of those players of 2008 champions were owned by another team within a week post grand final.

Good article to the point without being hysterical. The headline speaks volumes "Questions burn following Joeys Mexico failure". In the past questions burnt & mostly they were hot & painful,we never found the right ointment,because we wernt serious about looking. Easier to chuff of overseas & let the old hands take over. Now we will look to find the best way to treat the burn,thats the key difference between the past & present approach to football in Australia.

The following was written by Frank Farina. I don't know the history but it's hardly a ringing endorsement of Les. Time moves on and it doesn't really sound like he was too hard done by to me. Let's turn our focus to Les Scheinflug. On SBS's discussion of the views expressed by Foster, Scheinflug assassinated many of the people involved in today's development system. He was involved in the coaching system at the highest level for more than 20 years. Yet to the best of my knowledge he never wrote a technical report on his players, teams or tournaments. Worse still, he left no intellectual knowledge of his experiences as a football coach with the FFA to pass down to generations of players or to the next line of national youth coaches. Poor young Ange Postecoglou came into the role of national youth coach stone cold, with no reports, no written reconnaissance, no background information on countries or tournaments. Is that what Les means by leading the way or lending a hand? Scheinflug also threw some live grenades at Ron Smith and the state development coaches. Let me tell you one thing, it was the hard work of guys like Ron Smith at the AIS that set up national systems and then developed the player talent identified for our national teams, players like Viduka, Skoko, Moore, Bresciano, Grella, Emerton etc. Just ask the players who had more of a hand in their development: Ron Smith and the AIS or Les Scheinflug? There is the well-known story of a current Socceroo selected for inclusion as an AIS graduate, but Scheinflug flatly refused to agree to his inclusion. Luckily for Australia the AIS won the argument; the player went to Canberra and is now playing in the top league in Europe and with the Socceroos. Les also talks constantly of the need for a technical director – maybe we should use his appointment as technical director in 2000 as a template for how not to define any future role. Again, to the best of my knowledge, he did not produce a single blueprint for the sport at the time. His interference with my work as national coach was not what a technical director should have been about. I can't recall one single suggestion or observation from Les that actually helped me during my tenure.

Yeah .. so what? I think you're reading too much into the objectives of the u17 FIFA World Cup. The u17 WC is NOT meant to be an "academy" for future senior international stars; rather, it's simply meant to be a competition for the best u17s footballers in the world. No one is saying these u17s will necessarily be the best adult internationals. Some will, but history indicates most will not. The Aussie lads were simply been judged to be the best u17 footballers in Australia and, b/c football has a strong international competitive structure in place, the lads have the opportunity to play against the best u17 footballers from the rest of the planet.

Rubbish. There would be plenty of guys out there who only get good in their late teens, some in their early 20s while these 'underage internationals' crash and burn.

A performance almost replicated by Lavicka last season. To be fair to Van Egmond, his champion side was hollowed out by departures at the end of the season. Strange to think what losses players like Musialik and Bridge were considered to be back then - a reflection of the rising standard of the A League. Musialik can't get a contract and Bridge can barely hold his own. And Nick Carle has had mixed run too.

That is undoubtedly true, AF, but Les and his methods did not move with the times. I have more faith in the current coaching set-up.

From memory the AIS prior to the National Curriculum was seen as producing/nuturing footballers with designs on professional careers in football, but lacking in tactical development necessary at this age and fairly uniform and uninspiring in technical ability. Much has been made of the 2011 Joeys being familiar together as a unit and the advantages it brings, but the big question is how good a footballer are they when they graduate at 17/18? To me there has been little improvement (of graduates) within the early contexts of the National Curriculum and the 4-3-3 system taught there. Perhaps it is personnel implementing the program but I am also thinking it is the AIS itself. I agree with others here that the AIS is too narrow in focus on such a small cohort of talented footballers; that it is time the A-League clubs have their own youth academies that teach a larger number of youngsters so the talent pool isn't so limiting. How A-League clubs can do this now, with limited facilities and funds, remains to be seen. At least some have started and are further ahead than others. And what role will the AIS play then? Ben of Phnom Penh's idea has some merit - certainly rural talent is a key area the FFA has identified that needs addressing in talent identification and training. The AIS will have to improve though as a youth academy.

Realfootball, not that it matters in the overall context of this discussion, but Gary Van Egmond had two full seasons in charge of the Jets (plus two-thirds a season before that, and left prior to his 'fourth' season) - first full season was Championship, second was the wooden spoon...

Given the sheer numbers of juniors one could well argue that the AIS will struggle with its mandate of nurturing the elite of youth football simply because it is so difficult to identify them. I would prefer the AIS to play a role in identifying talent that exists in rural areas and other remote locations and bringing the best of these to clubs academies on a scholarship basis. The best talent in the cities is already being identified and nurtured by well developed club based systems. These systems quite simply are not available in many rural and regional centres. Then again I do not fully appreciate the full scope of work that the AIS undertakes, so take all this with a wee pinch of salt.

I question whether the AIS model is appropriate to develop our juniors. I would like to see a review of the AIS and AS models. Do the AS selections occur too early, with an undue emphasis on big players? Are the AS squads shielded from competition - is it harder to get in than to get out? Is AS involvement a de facto requirement for AIS selection? Are the Nationals an appropriate basis for AIS selection? Do the AIS players play enough games in a meaningful competition? I know these players are young and must be shielded from criticism. However, I question whether the best boys nationwide were selected, and I cannot understand why the quality of their play appeared to be so limited.

This is a really good piece, Davidde. Thanks for sharing.

Thanks for the link Fuss, I had not seen it before I wrote my comment. I can't blame Les Scheinflug feeling the way he does----he had been an inspiration at this level and was hard done by the old sokkah admin. I reckon he should be heard and brought back into the fold at some level in the FFA. He has enormous passion for the game.

Thanks for the thought provoking read. The conclusion was fantastic.

Interesting that you bring up Les Scheinflug. Ray Gatt has reported in today's Australian newspaper Scheinflug's scathing critique of "the Dutch mafia, who are in control Australian football"! Source: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/sport/scheinflug-fumes-get-dutch-mafia-out-of-australia/story-fn63e0vj-1226085154407 Of course, historically, the Germans & the Dutch have always had their "disagreements" ... on & off the pitch! ;-)

We had some good campaigns under Les (and produced some good players) but really the result of an under 17 tournament means little other than giving us a peek at the future. Yes Scheinflug made the final of the Under 17 world cup....but that side only produced 2 Socceroos (Kennedy and Macdonald) which is surely much more important than chest beating about our kids beating someone elses kids. It's like still celebrating their spelling bee victory and ignoring the fact 5 years on they are unemployed and live with their mum. All for the scruitiny though but from people that have the ability to tell..... and hopefully aren't Dutch mates.

I think we have to compare these kids to what Les Scheinflug did with his group of kids with less resources. "Versleijen’s contract will expire soon" For me that is good news---I don't want to be too hash on our guys, but analyse what went so terribley wrong. Yes the abandon game may have been the cause of the dismal performance against the Uzbeks at the end result. However, I just would like to say that we should not be making too many excuses and ask why our 17s are not as good as the other 17s in this WC; when this was suppose to be our best prepared group of lads to date. Questions have to be asked----have we got the right national coach in charge. I think we need to try another manager to get the next generation taking the next step up. The next manager has to work on technical skill above all, and over the system we play. Because, if there is no technical skill, how on earth can we play this 4-3-3 attacking system. Let's get the basics right first. Clearly our basic ball skills were lacking and after 2 years of hard work one would have expected that our players would know how to protect the ball, pass the ball, and above all control the ball at their feet. These kids may only be 17 yrs old but they are playing kids that are also the same age with better ball skills that's what we need to fix----the ball playing skills.

Questions must be asked of Gary Van Egmond. I was skeptical of the wisdom of his appointment, given what a mess the Jets were after his first full season in charge, and his abandonment of a sinking ship. Has he got what it takes to nurture these kids at the AIS? On this evidence, no. But there is an underlying question: does the AIS model work? How can one national organisation realistically hope to identify the best talent in a country as big as Australia. Personally, I think it is a deeply flawed model, and the money would be better spent at State level academies, spread among more players. Choosing a small group of players at such a young age is effectively rolling a dice. As for Versleijen, his litmus test will be the U20s, who have very real talent in the squad. If they don't perform creditably, he has to go.

Well done Davidde, have really enjoyed your articles and twitter coverage from the WC17 (big well done to SBS) Overall we were poor but showed signs that we may be making some basic changes to the way we play. the first half against brazil was some of the finest football I have seen a Australian team play. I think we people were kiddign themselves if they thought we were somehow going to magically transform our style of game in 4 years. That doesn't mean a critical assessment shouldn't be done, of course it should be hopefully some reality is applied to the results. I personally would like to see Versleijen given another 4 years, I still think is the 12-13 year olds that have lived the SSF system from the start that will truly show the change in style and Berger and Versleijen should be given the chance to see it through.