Tag Archives: Mihir

Posted on by

Don’t have too many hopes of Olympic spirit in football

It's not easy to make Club England like Team GB

Reply

So goodbye Team GB and welcome back club England. The timing of England’s match against Italy, three days after the end of the Games, was very telling. For while this pre-season friendly – albeit it showed English football is not quite bereft of ability – is no time to make judgements about the post-Euro 2012 state of the game, it does allow us to assess the lessons the Olympics holds for the national game.

The first thing we have to avoid is a knee-jerk, exaggerated response that the Olympics and the wonderful glow it has created could now bathe English football in a new light. The idea that the spirit generated by Team GB could be taken and just bolted on to football and all other sports is nonsense.

The fact is, as far as this country is concerned, there are severe limitations as to what the Olympics can do. This reflects the unique nature of sport in this country, a legacy of the fact that this country invented most modern sports. We can talk as much as we like, as various opinion formers and leader writers have done, about making sure that everything is done to ensure Team GB is honoured and valued. But the fact is, Team GB as a sporting concept only comes together for the Olympics.

Outside the Olympics, in most of the major team sports, certainly the ones that dominate the media: football, rugby, cricket, even a relatively minor sport like hockey, there is no such thing as Team GB. Sport is the preserve of the various home nations and indeed, the next time we have an Olympic style festival of sport, two years from now in Glasgow, there will be no Team GB. There cannot be.

At the 2014 Commonwealth Games, the gathering together of what were once the colonies of the British Empire will see lots of Team England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and many other dominions that once flew the Union Flag, but no Team GB.

The contrast here with Italy is telling. In Italy, which learnt many of the modern sports from this country, the Italian Olympic Association, the Comitato Olimpico Nazionale Italiano (CONI) has, since 1914, been responsible for the development and management of sport in that country. And the Italian Football federation is part of CONI. In contrast, the British Olympic Association for many years was little more than a glorified travel agency that made sure athletes and officials got to the Games. It has come a long way since those days and it can say with justifiable pride that at London 2012, it sent out the greatest team in the sporting history of this country.

But for all its achievements at these Games, outside the Olympics it has no say, for instance, on how football is run in Great Britain. This was vividly demonstrated in the all mighty struggle it had to wage to even field a Team GB football team, with the Scottish Football Association determined to resist.

Now you will say all this is mere structure. But structure matters. In a country like Italy, because CONI controls all federations, it can lay down the law on how the various sports operate. Outside the Olympics, any attempt by the BOA to do that would be met first with derision, and then anger. Yes, the various sports can still learn a lot from the Olympic spirit, but that will depend on how each individual sport reacts to the London Games.

As far as football is concerned, I hope the sport would learn from how top Olympic stars conduct themselves. They may be great performers on the field of play, but they do not behave like Maradonnas who have a god-given right to an exalted status.

Not even Usain Bolt, undoubtedly one of the all time greats of athletics exudes such an air. For all his showmanship, he comes across as very much a down-to-earth man who has not forgotten where he emerged from.

But for our footballers to learn such lessons in personal conduct, it would have to come, not just from the FA, but from the clubs. This is where much of the education of our footballers begin. Sad to say, not many of our clubs go in for wider education of the players under their charge. And for all the talk of the Olympic spirit, I cannot see that changing. The dismal conclusion is that, in the end, it may prove easier to win 29 golds, and come third in the Olympics, than change the behaviour of our footballers.

Follow Mihir on Twitter @mihirbose

 

 

 

Share


Posted on by

Let the London 2012 party begin

London gets everything, moans the rest of the country. Mihir Bose explains why this has to be the Olympic case

Reply

London-Olympics.jpg

The start of the Olympics, with the women’s football match between Great Britain and New Zealand at Cardiff’s Millennium stadium, has ignited the old controversy: why are the Games given to a city and not a country? Why does the International Olympic Committee not follow FIFA and take its events round the country?

When you put this argument to the IOC, their answer is always the same: the format works so why change it? That is exactly what Sir Craig Reedie, the Briton who sits on the executive of the IOC, said to me. I had prefaced my question by making the same point that quite a few critics have made: that the IOC format of one city takes all, devised back at the end of the 19th century, does not work for the 21st.

His answer was interesting, “I don’t think there’s a basic flaw at all. The IOC have an emphasis of awarding the Games to a city so that all of the sport takes place in that city, excluding sailing. That should be beside the sea so Sydney and Athens could do it, but Beijing and London could not.”

As it happened, for various reasons, Beijing could not cope with the equestrian events and they were held in Hong Kong.

Yes, he agreed, football moves around the country. “From the size of the football footprint in most countries, it’s wise from their development point of view to go around. But, if the IOC spread it around lots of cities, effectively you’re dissipating the enthusiasm of the athletes of the world to stay in the Olympic Village and to be all part of the same show. Until somebody proves to us that it is different, then I think that’s the way that we will stay. Mr Platini’s idea of running a European Championship all around the place doesn’t apply to the Olympics. He runs one sport and much of it is driven by television. The Olympic Games with 26 sports [it will be 28 in Rio], almost all in the same place, is a different animal. As far as the IOC are concerned, we have been delighted over the years that a number of cities are prepared to bid for the Games.”

Now you could say there is a touch of self satisfaction in the answer but I must say I agree with Reedie. What makes the Olympics unique is that it is a festival of sport, often sports that most people do not see, might never have seen and indeed, after the Olympics, might never see again. And festivals, by their nature, are held in one place. The fact that the athletes all live together in a Village gives the festival an extra touch. To distribute the sports round the country would destroy the very idea of the festival. It would be like saying the Edinburgh Festival is so big that it needs to be spread all over Scotland.

Now critics will argue that that is missing the point. The Olympics are costing the British taxpayers not far short of ten billion pounds. Yet all of it, or nearly all of it, is being lavished on London. So why should the rest of the country subsidise London which already has a lion’s share of almost everything?

One answer to that is before London won the bid to stage 2012, Manchester bid twice and Birmingham once and failed. The IOC made it clear that, if the British wanted to be considered serious bidders, they had better come with their capital city. London did and, prompted by Ken Livingstone, it has used the grant of the Games as a catalyst for regenerating a part of the east end of the city that had not seen any investment for a hundred years.

It does mean London is getting even more money and attention than it does already but that reflects the nature of this country. Unlike many other European countries where there are strong regional governments and thriving regional cities that almost rival their capital city, London is unique. No other British city can match it or even comes close. This is where the media is concentrated and all the government machinery that matters. That this should be the first city to ever host three Olympics is no surprise.

Let us celebrate that and stop moaning that London gets everything. London gets it because it deserves it.

Follow Mihir on Twitter @mihirbose

Share


Posted on by

Spain 2012 vs Brazil 1970- the greatest team ever

By Mihir Bose

3
Spain_vs_Brazil.jpg

Spain 2012 or Brazil 1970

There is nothing more satisfying in all sport than to proclaim a player or a team as the best ever. But the clamour for saying Spain 2012 is the best team the world of football has ever seen raises all sorts of issues. Not least, how do you compare teams and players from different generations?

In my memory, and I admit it goes back a bit now, no football team will ever compare with that of Brazil in 1970. Yes, you could say that this is my memory playing tricks and a reluctance on my part to shed the romantic images I carry from my youth. I shall grant you that.

It must also be said that the game has hugely changed since 1970. The players are fitter and faster and the grass, while not greener, is also much better maintained. Indeed, the dreadful pitches that the heroes of my youth played on, like black and white television, have all been consigned to history.

As Denis Law, gazing across the immaculate turf of modern day Old Trafford told me recently, “If you could play on that pitch like that throughout the season, how great a player can you be? We got to November and it was mud for the next five and a half months. Can you imagine George Best playing on pitches like that every game? You just wonder how good they would’ve been. The facilities the modern players have got, gives them the opportunity to be fitter, but some of the players in the old days would be as great today. Stanley Matthews would be a great player; Tom Finney would be a great player.”

And that is just the point about the Brazil team of 1970.

Here it is worth dwelling on that team, and both the similarities and the contrasts between Brazil 1970 and Spain 2012. Brazil, like Spain, had been the great underachiever of world football for more than two decades. Then suddenly, in Sweden in 1958, led by Pelé, they burst through and became the first non-European team to win a World Cup in Europe. They retained it easily enough in 1962 and were kicked out, there is no other word for it, in 1966 in England with a particularly infamous match in Goodison against Portugal.

They came to Mexico in 1970 with Brazil fearful of a repeat of 1966, changing the manager just before the tournament. But from their very first match, when they recovered from going a goal down against Czechoslovakia, they showed how special they were and won all their matches. There was never any question of Brazil being boring or not being watchable as there was against Spain in this tournament at times. In 1970, Brazil lit up that tournament in a way no other team has ever done. I give two examples.

In the first group match against Czechoslovakia, Pelé lobbed the goalkeeper from his own half. In the semi-final against their old nemesis Uruguay (who had beaten them on home turf in the 1950 World Cup), Pelé dummied the goalkeeper as he was fed a ball over the Uruguayan defence. Neither led to a goal, the ball just eluding the net, but both were moments of magic and fantasy, moments I shall always cherish.

I would say, for all the brilliance of Spain in 2012, no such comparable moments have been produced at these Euros.

Yes, for all qualifications about not comparing different generations, I would happily agree that Casillas and his defence are far superior to Felix and Brazil’s defence of 1970. That Brazilian team still had the old mentality that defending was not something worth doing.

But after that, can we really say Iniesta, for all his brilliance, is better than Gérson, the man who ran Brazil 1970? Xavi better than Tostão, and David Silva better than Jairzinho?

And who in this Spanish team would even come anywhere near Pelé, surely the greatest player we shall ever see?

So for my money, great as this Spanish team is, I shall still go with Brazil 1970. Yes, Spain 2012 would score against Brazil as Italy did in that final in 1970, maybe even 4 goals, but then Brazil 1970 would reply with 5. What a match that would be.

Old memories die hard, but in this case this is a memory worth holding on to.

Follow Mihir on twitter @mihirbose

 

Share


Posted on by

Let us not exaggerate how tweeting affects media coverage

Barton’s tweeting may have given him power but not many footballers can follow his example

Reply

It is not often that you read an article by a football player that makes you sit up and say now this is something that is new, maybe I need to change my long settled opinion. But this morning, having read Joey Barton in the Times, I must confess I did a double take. Continue reading →

Share