I keep on hearing that the standard of the A-League is less that that of last season; that the league is “harmed by a decline in on-pitch quality this season”.
I often read these comments on this site. There’s only one problem. I don’t believe they’re true.
It annoys me that the case is never made as to why it is worse this season. It is just stated and assumed, with no evidence whatsoever to support it.
Here’s why I think otherwise.
The performance and style of the teams is not worse
Attractive, attacking, possession-based football has never been more evident in the A-League than this season as possession-based attacking is now a more dominant coaching philosophy.
Now if it was by a team from Sydney or Melbourne, the comments would no doubt be that this was the best season ever. But when this style of play comes from Brisbane, Adelaide and Wellington, the standard is obviously lower, right?
Let’s break it down team by team…
Brisbane Roar
Playing markedly better than last season. They are exercising better use of their whole squad than they did under Ange Postecoglou, with goals coming from all over the park rather than relying on a single striker.
Mike Mulvey is bringing out the best of youth players who noone had heard of before in an exciting way. Apart from the disturbing anomaly of losing out to Jets more often than an aerial firing range, it’s been a truly great season.
Conclusion: Playing much better.
Western Sydney Wanderers
With the possible exception of their marquee, the Wanderers are playing a similar style of game at a similar standard with the same coach as last year. I reject the notion that Wanderers are playing manifestly worse this season.
Opponents have adapted to counter the Wanderers strong counterattack of last year. That’s life in football. The reality is that teams adapt to other teams systems over time.
Conclusion: Playing similar, but with not quite the same results.
Adelaide United
Don’t get me wrong, I like John Kosmina. But bringing in Josep Gombau is the best thing that has ever happened for the future of Adelaide United – and yes, I’m including their amazing run all the way to runners-up in the AFC Champions League.
They are playing beautiful attacking football and have developed a great club philosophy around playing football right, and expecting the results to come. And come they have.
Conclusion: Playing much better.
Melbourne Victory
While Kevin Muscat did more hacking than most cyber-terrorist groups as a player – and he’s no Ange Postecoglou as a coach – Melbourne Victory have a good team, performing similarly to last year.
A few substandard results belie the fact that their team is a really positive one. I’m enjoying Tom Rogic for the Victory also.
Conclusion: Maybe slightly worse, but not by much.
Central Coast Mariners
While selling off the talent pool and the coach has finally caught up with them, they still play great football, find great talent and have great systems.
Conclusion: Maybe slightly worse, but not by much.
Sydney FC
Despite the brouhaha about Frank Farina, the Sky Blues are doing better this season. The owner and board just need to realise they can’t just win because they’ve spent more money, often unwisely. And the club actually needs a playing philosophy.
But they are playing better this season. Farina is a reasonable coach with a great assistant, even though he shouldn’t be allowed as head coach again.
Conclusion: Slightly better.
Wellington Phoenix
Like a phoenix rising from the ashes, Ernie Merrick’s amazing work has positively transformed this team into one that is amazing to watch and playing beautiful football.
The self-belief and skill of this team makes me want to watch them, rather than poke my eyes out with rusty sticks to avoid the pain that was watching them last season. Their fluidity in attack, unique structure and counterattacking flair are a pleasure to watch.
Conclusion: Playing much better.
Newcastle Jets
A great team to watch earlier on in the season, until they fell apart. Giving Gary van Egmond the heave-ho hasn’t helped either.
The Jets have struggled since, though three wins against Roar are nothing to sneeze at. They haven’t played as badly as their position on the table suggests.
Conclusion: Not quite as bad as last season.
Perth Glory
Good on them for building up youth, but the quality of their squad is a bit down on last year. And sadly, coach Ali E is no longer indahouse.
Conclusion: Worse than last season.
Melbourne Heart
Though they are in last place, they are now playing great football. With John van’t Schip back at the club, I suspect they’ll finish strong.
Conclusion: Playing better than last season, particularly now they’ve replaced Aloisi.
The coaching is not worse
Lots of complaints have been made about the coaching. It’s really a mixed bag, but most of the time I’ll take this season’s coaches over last season’s.
I’d take Mike Mulvey over Rado Vidosic, Josep Gombau over John Kosmina, Frank Farina over Ian Crook, Ernie Merrick over Ricki Herbert and John van’t Schip over John Aloisi.
Sure, I’d pick Ange Postecoglou and Graham Arnold over Kevin Muscat and Phil Moss, but then again the teams are effectively being managed in the same systems and procedures of their predecessors – and reasonably well too.
Tony Popovic is obviously as good as last season’s Wanderers coach.
This only leaves Perth – where Alistair Edwards seemed to be doing a good job apart from literally having jobs for the boys – and Newcastle, where van Egmond seemed to if anything do a slightly better job this season until things went sour with some players.
Market value of the players in the league
I sought to get a quick and easy estimation of the value of squads and players in the A-League this season, so I went to a reputable worldwide source of players and their market value.
Their assessment? This season all clubs except the Central Coast Mariners and Melbourne Heart in fact increased the value of their squad, at an average 8.1 percent increase from last season, from €72.65 million to €78.5 million in total value.
The non-marquee foreign players in our league are also better this season.
Miscellaneous
This season has had some really close, enjoyable games watched by more people on free-to-air television and at the stadium.
You still have a whole generation of great young players coming through – how good has Taggart been for the Jets or Dimi Petratos for the Roar, or Mooy for the Wanderers or Rogic for the Victory?
It’s great to see players like Stein Huysegems from the Phoenix step up as well.
The scoring stats are more even all round, and the trend away from a few strikers dominating the score sheet is really positive.
Conclusion
Until I hear good reasons rather than rhetoric that this year’s A-League is worse than the last, I will reject it and the doom and gloom merchants of 2013/14.
Why talk down the awesome league you have rather than sing its praises?
Da`
Roar Rookie
+1
JohnL
Guest
Sorry, Ian.... just saw your reply... not big money - $10 for each bet. And yep - championship being GF winners.
Da`
Roar Rookie
Just looking at Wikipedia, though, the players you mention don't make your case at all for you. Sure Sydney FC has numerous former youth team players in their squad. But the extent to which the youth team (performing so well in this year's NYL) has been called up to step up in this year's A-League is actually quite low, which was my original point. The fact that you have a glut of old former youth team players in your squad many years later actually shows poor youth development, not good youth development, as this means your players are not going on to other opportunities in better footballing locations and developing further; just atrophying in place. Powell and Gligor have played for the senior team for the last few years. Naumoff, Petkovski and Triantis have been playing for the senior team since 2012 Chianese hasn't played for the youth side since 2011; Grant since 2008. Mallia played for CCM Youth, Antonis went straight into the senior side, not the youth. Of those players you mentioned, that are new to the senior side this season... Urosevski played for 17 min this season Calver played for 88 Caton played for 56 minutes according to transfermarkt.com. Thus The only ones stepping up this season from the NYL have been Urosevski (17 min), Claver (88 min) and Caton (56 min). This is in sharp contrast to other teams. Pick a top team that is still giving this year's NYL players a chance, eg. at Brisbane, Yeboah (313 min.), Borello (78 min), Clut (72 min), Ingham (18 min) and who let players not valued at Sydney FC (eg. Petratos) have game time (962 min. so far cf. 51 min last season with SFC). Or pick a team that is focused on youth development. New players from the youth side with lots of game time at Perth Glory are Davies (1055 min), Woodcock (917 min), Makeche (149 min), Clisby (845 min) etc. Speaking of myths, just because former youth players stick around the club for many years, this does not mean that they are good at youth development. Conversely, clubs like CCM that get their players taken by teams from around the world would be a good example of youth development, though it hurts their senior squad. Having more former youth league players in their senior team than any other (if true) would actually be a stinging indictment of the clubs INability to develop players and particularly youth, and is possibly one reason why they are struggling so much.
Da`
Roar Rookie
Sorry, mate. I was asking a genuine question because I didn't know the answer, not saying anything about Sydney FCs youth development strategy. Just noting the contrast with CCM, who is doing really poor in the NYL, and so wouldn't seem to have players to draw from, but seeing SFC do so amazing in the NYL was thinking that one thing that could work for them was to draw from the NYL side. It's great to hear that they are. Not being a SFC fan, I wasn't aware of the injuries, and am really glad to hear about players being given a chance Certainly not wanting to start any myths here :)
Batou
Guest
Da, can you tell me one single A League team that has more former youth league players in the senior team than Sydney FC??? Sorry, but if you want to write an article about myths then the one about Sydney not giving youth players a go would be a good place to start. Unfortunately a number of them are currently recovering from injuries, but the idea that they aren't given a chance is completely wrong. Off the top of my head: Grant, Triantis, Gligor, Calver, Chianese, Urosevksi, Petkovski, Jurman, Antonis, Caton, Powell, Malia and Naumoff are all former youth league team members. All have had their chances in the first team as well. Some have taken them and others haven't or have yet to, but they are definitely given a chance.
Da`
Roar Rookie
Firstly thanks for your 2 cents Postecoglou and Arnold are great coaches, to be sure, and I agree with you that MV and CCM would be doing better this season if they had stayed. Personally I was looking forward to see MV finish implementing the AP style and skill set. As a BR supporter, I can really appreciate the genius of AP and what he would have brought to MV this season, and suspect if AP had stayed MV would be giving us more of a run for the title this season. I think you're right that some sides would be doing better under other coaching circumstances, namely if they had their coaches from last season. But I think they should be compared against last season, not how they hypothetically would have gone this season. And it also has to be weighed against the positive changes in other clubs. I think that Merrick, Gombau & JVS have taken really poorly performing sides and made them really good. And Mulvey has taken all that I loved about BR under AP, and then done better youth development and injury management. The fact that WSW are playing similarly to last season (which they won) and yet BR are 7 points clear of them suggests an improved comp, as does the fact that the teams in 7th and 10th (WP and MH) should come home strong as drastically improved contenders. I agree also that Del Piero (and Ono and Heskey for that matter), have not been as good this season and have been ordinary in attack. But Huysegems, Berisha, Taggart, Williams and Troisi have been much better in attack than last season I guess its swings and roundabouts. Some teams are better, some worse this season. Same with players. I made the argument in the article above that it's not worse like many people have been saying, if anything it seems to lean towards being better this season. But by no means am I saying everything is better. It isn't. I guess the problem is that all of us see different aspects of games and players so our judgments about quality are always subjective. But I really appreciate the fact that in a few lines, that you've stated more solid arguments about declining standards than all those who've stated it as an uncontested fact all season. Thanks mate :) I appreciate your thoughts as what is better and worse each season is a key debate we should be having.
Panto
Guest
League loses best coach - Ange Postecoglu (replaced by Kevin Muscat) = instant decrease in quality League loses second best coach Graham Arnold (replaced by lesser quality coach) = decrease in quality (arguably) League's best individual player Del Piero has dip in form = loss of quality You may argue that Mulvey has stepped up (i believe he has) or that Gombau is playing great football (which is true) but are both playing better than Victory and CCM would have if they had kept their coaches? Also for mine less magical moments this season for individual players - but hey that's a subjective opinion. For someone who attributes quality to the coaching of a team (structurally rather than aesthetically) and someone who prefers seeing individual brilliance (eg a run past 3-4 players a dribble and then shot/goal) this season has dropped in standard. just my 2cents
Fussball ist unser leben
Roar Guru
That's good. Every competition cannot appeal to everyone. Hope you enjoy whatever takes your fancy. Above all, I hope we don't hear from you about HAL now that you don't watch it.
Fussball ist unser leben
Roar Guru
@AustralianRules If you have 19 inputs of data, it is mischievous & irrational to only use 2 points to suit the narrative you've chosen. The average ratings on Friday nights over 19 matches are: FoxSports = 76k SBS 5-city only = 109k We only have accurate regional data for SBS Friday Night ALeague for 7 matches out of 19. In these 7 matches, regional viewing numbers added an average of 35% more viewers (which is in line with other shows when regionals are added), so it is reasonably to say SBS Regionals = 35% x 109k = 38k Hence we now have National AUS TV ratings on Fri for HAL FoxSports = 76k SBS = 147k Total = 223k SBS's share of the total viewing audience on Friday for HAL = 147/223 = 66% Alternatively, if you want FoxSports market share of the Friday HAL audience = 76/223 = 34% Note: I haven't even bothered to adjust the SBS data to account for OzTAM bias against SBS viewing households.
qwertyuiop
Guest
I've tried watching HAL but the quality really is quite poor and is frustrating to watch.The viewing stats are no surprise.
Australian Rules
Guest
First, you forgot c) general sport fans - and they're actually quite common you know, they're the equivalent to the 'middle class'. Second, if we take last Friday - 62k SBS and 52k Fox - you're basically saying that the 52k = 1/3 of the total Friday night audience...which it's obviously not. The WSW v BR game had a combined SBS audience of 116k, and Fox had 72k. Again, not one third. What these figures tell us is that despite the national penetration of Foxtel being around 30%, for ALeague fans, the Foxtel penetration would be much higher...say 60% or more. And whilst there's no specific "data" on this, it makes complete, everyday, logical commonsense. If I am a fan of the ALeague and want to watch it on telly, that becomes another reason for me to buy Foxtel (along with the other reasons like other sports, movies etc).
Da`
Roar Rookie
It's an interesting thing writing on this site. At the start of the season, I said that selling off the talent pool and other departures would result in the CCM doing worse this season, and I was loudly decried by all the haters. In spite of the fact that I'm a BR fan, I have a real soft spot for the CCM, as I like their playing & coaching philosophy, and focus on raising up youth, as well as getting the football systems right. I like the way that they have historically focused on creating talent rather than buying the talent others have created; and how they have achieved a lot as underdogs. But you guys are right. I was probably too generous in my above assessment of CCM; more out of my like of the team than anything else. And similar to wisey_9 above, I do look on them positively because their is such potential for improvement led by players like Roux, Duke and Kim. However, I am a little concerned about CCM's abysmal performance in the NYL, given their historical strength is raising up youth. Conversely, why aren't more youth given a chance for SFC, as they dominated the NYL.
Da`
Roar Rookie
Thanks, mate
kochie
Guest
i didnt mind it - it wasnt the greatest but it wasnt bad. Aussie soccer am if you will. Not as if Aussie Top Gear is better than the original is it..
kochie
Guest
rooster probably heard one of his mates with a slight interest in football say that that HAL is like the English 4th tier and recycled it. I love it when AFL/league fans come on football forums spouting supremacy. You dont see any football fans on their forums because, let's face it, football is massive and doesn't need boasting about. Closet inferiority complex perhaps? I dont mind either afl or league so not going to bag them. Apart from maybe the footy show which is just inane.
nordster
Guest
Well i see that model as a major negative long term. I wont harp on the moral hazard implications but hopefully u see my point. I appreciate the cross subsidising, bailout model had its place in the first decade of a new league. Beyond that, not so much. The funding sources can still come from a centralised point without needing all the strings attached and again the moral hazard in that. Although i do think from a sponsorship standpoint that needs to shift, and is happening already naturally. Tv money i agree should always be a central split but instead with minimal strings. The age of entitlement is over apparently, bailout mentality should go with it. The age of personal responsibility is here. ;)
nordster
Guest
The thing with guaranteeing that floor though, is that it is mandating how the TV money be spent. There is a moral hazard in dictating to this degree, assuming they ever want clubs to be able to manage their finances sustainably. And cash flow isnt the only issue as many are still running losses. Reducing wages can help some provided the arbitrary floor is removed. Imo the more sensible approach is to just allocate it to them and allow it to be spent as per needed at the individual club level. For some it will mean spending on wages, for others they will need it for elsewhere.
Ben of Phnom Penh
Roar Guru
The model allows for bailouts. Indeed the enitire model is based upon a mix of subsidies and obligations due to the centralised control of the majpr funding sources.
Ben of Phnom Penh
Roar Guru
As the salary is now covered by the media deal the floor and ceiling are less of an issue in relation to cash flows. Where I think you are correct though is that the band-width of subsidies and constraints within which the principle of equalisation resides needs to be widened to allow for the entrance of viable, smaller clubs. This will need to be considered if the A-League is to expand as we are a little short on remaining big cities in which to place a team.
nordster
Guest
But Ben he is forgetting the fact that the HAL clubs could be broke many times over without bailouts.