England's national football issues

FA chairman Greg Dyke, who blames England’s woes on a lack of home-grown players in the Premier League. Photo credits: WIkimedia Commons

Inept, indisputably awful, woeful – all phrases used to describe England’s national teams in recent years due to underwhelming performances and bitterly disappointing showings in major tournaments. This was an all too familiar feeling this summer with the under 20s and under 21s, who crashed out of major competitions having failing to win a single game between them.

Football Association Chairman Greg Dyke has come out recently and blamed the success of the national teams on the under-representation of English players in the Premier League. The amount of English players in the top flight is declining, which is obviously going to have a knock-on effect on the national team.

After Spain’s continuing success in 2010, Jose Luis Astiazaran (President of Liga de Fútbol Profesional) indicated that Spain’s achievements across all age groups of international football is helped by the fact they had 77% of La Liga players eligible to play for Spain.

However, when you consider that talented national teams such the Netherlands and Belgium have all their top players playing abroad, the argument loses credibility. Surely the main question is why there aren’t enough home-grown players in the top tier of English football.

Dyke himself offered a few possibilities, stating: “Some say it’s because English kids are not good enough. Others say we haven’t got enough coaches trained to a high enough level. Another explanation put forward by a lot of people is that it is cheaper to sign overseas players.”

These are all logical points. In 2008, UEFA data showed that England had just 2,769 UEFA coaches, compared to 34,970 in Germany, 29,240 in Italy and 23,995 in Spain; evidently there does seem to be a lack of qualified coaches. And it probably is cheaper to buy foreign players if you’re willing to splash out £35m on Andy Carroll.

But saying our kids aren’t good enough is completely subjective. Although, maybe that’s the issue.

Before Liverpool went into their game against Southampton on 21 September, manger Brendan Rodgers referenced Rickie Lambert’s incredible rise to international football at the not-so tender age of 31, describing it as an example of clubs being too quick to throw young players “to the garbage.”

Lambert was dumped from the Liverpool academy aged 15 and had to work his way up through the leagues to become the first player since Peter Taylor in 1976 to score in his first two appearances for England.

There is no doubting the fact that Rickie Lambert is a terrific player. So why has it taken so long for people to notice? Why was he kicked out of a football academy at the age of 15?

Let’s use Spain as a contrast, considering they can currently boast the best national sides of any nation. Many people would have heard about their ‘tiki taka’ style of football – characterised by short passing and moving, maintaining possession and operating the ball into channels.

There is less of a focus on winning at such a young age, more a focus of going out, having fun and playing some sumptuous football. Does the result matter? No – as long as you are skilled and playing in the correct manner.

This country has its own philosophy. However, it is one of a more victorious mentality; doing whatever you can to win the game. Therefore, those players who are under-developed on a physical level at the age of 14 will probably be left behind.

They may have the technical abilities, but if there’s someone else bigger and stronger who can barge his way through opponents and bundle the ball in, then that’s they guy who’s going to stick around.

Obviously, when everyone catches up with puberty, these players who used to be bigger and stronger are now superfluous because they don’t have the skills necessary to drive them forward and can no longer rely on those assets which used to be a great advantage to them.

Many youth football coaches have denied this, saying ‘the score isn’t important, it’s all about technical progression’ – which is how it definitely should be – but if this was really the case, why are we not developing footballers as good as the Spanish, the Germans or the Dutch?

Judging by the type of players this country tends to produce, there is less focus on ‘tiki taka’ football and the skills that go along with it, and we are more consumed by a win ethic. I have no doubt this country is making strides in the right direction, towards producing more technically gifted players.

It will take a few years, but in order to start producing world class stars, you feel there has to be a change in philosophy at primarily the early stages of a player’s career.

Jordan Edgington

Football finally ready to fight homophobia

Justin Fashanu, the only ever openly gay English footballer, who died in 1998. Photo credits: Wikimedia Commons

Last weekend, professional footballers from all 134 pro clubs in the UK were invited to wear rainbow laces in their boots to show support for the ‘Right Behind Gay Footballers’ campaign.

The campaign came from Stonewall, the lesbian, gay and bisexual charity, who have teamed up with bookmakers Paddy Power in order to promote the drive. Currently, there are no openly gay players in English or Scottish football. Maybe there are none, however it seems unlikely.

Stonewall have helped by applying maths to the situation. There are approximately 5,000 professional players in England and Scotland. Assuming a likelihood that six percent of any random sample would be homosexual, the chance of there not being one gay person are minuscule.

You have a better chance of being killed by a mountain lion; a better chance of a meteor hitting your house; a better chance of shuffling a deck of cards and having them be in the perfect order of suit and number.

One in four fans feel football is anti-gay, compared to one  in 10 fans who think football is racist. It is down to the hard work of many campaigns in football that have helped suppress racism, but why has one act of hate been treated with greater significance than the other? There should be no room for any act of hatred, abuse or discrimination in the game.

Regrettably, homophobia has a long history within football. Justin Fashanu is the only ever openly gay footballer in this country – coming out in 1990, eight years before his suicide. The abuse he received was horrendous. From fans, colleagues, his manager Brian Clough and even his brother, publicly disowned him. This wasn’t the reason he committed suicide, but it could be accountable for his personal demise.

More recently, Robbie Rogers, ex-Leeds and USA midfielder, came out in February of this year. However he quickly quit the game, saying that: “Remaining in football after publicly declaring your homosexuality was impossible.”

Rogers has publicly said it is the fans attitudes which stop gay players from coming out. Sadly, it isn’t hard to see why Rogers felt this way.

Sol Campbell and Graeme Le Saux received homophobic abuse for years – despite both being openly heterosexual. It seems people in the past have just tried to think of something offensive to say and, disgustingly, we live in a society where the word ‘gay’ is a multipurpose sobriquet used, mainly, as an adjective insinuating something is bad. It’s incredibly sad to see people don’t see anti-gay words as an issue.

Rio Ferdinand was being interviewed by Chris Moyles on the radio back in 2006 and ended up calling him a f****t. After England’s exit from the World Cup in 2006, The Sun referred to Christiano Ronaldo as a ‘nancy boy’. Why is this deemed appropriate?

This is no different to using racial slurs towards ethnic minorities; they are words used to degrade another human being for matters that are out of their own hands. One can’t help being gay as much as they can help being white.

In 2002, Luiz Felipe Scolari said that if he found out one of his players was gay, he would throw them out the team. That type of vile rancour should have created uproar. This shows how far we have to go to create an environment where players can feel comfortable enough to come out.

Is football ready for a player to come out? The most depressing thing is, the answer is probably not. I do not intend to be rude or ignorant by saying that; I understand that hiding your sexuality, who you truly are can be a real burden, hurtful and emotionally tiring.

However, there are a few reasons why it may be best on a personal level. With the modern day media burrowing into each player’s private lives, it could be a distraction. We’ve seen it happen before in the past with numerous other players, offthe-field problems can have real consequences on someone’s form.

Football careers are short and delicate – could a player take the risk? They might be okay in this country, but what if they want to go abroad? Due to the differences in culture, some people may be more hostile. Now the rewards for a player could be huge.

Openly gay athletes over the world are respected for more than just athletic achievement, (I’m thinking Martina Navratilova, Gareth Thomas) and a player can become a real role model. Athletes are thrust into the public eye and it is thought they owe it to society to be good role models.

But is that fair? After all, it isn’t a footballer’s job to be a social pioneer – should they be judged on anything more than their talent?

Stonewall wrote a report four years ago highlighting huge issues within the game. Yet, it wasn’t until February of this year when the FA decided to issue a toolkit to all 92 pro clubs in England to help fight against homophobia in the game. Even sadder than this is that, a month later, only 29 of those 92 clubs were actively engaged in the campaign.

Your sexuality is a very personal thing – no-one should be able to dictate to someone when and how they choose to reveal their sexuality. The issue is football all around the world hasn’t created an atmosphere where players have felt safe enough to come out.

The rainbow laces won’t end homophobia, but it can be the start of something huge in the sport. After all, you have to make ripples before you can make waves.

Jordan Edgington

St. George's Park underlines football's place in society

Photo thanks to RedBox Design Group

The FA will struggle to justify the necessity of the all-new St. George’s Park facility, which boasts state-of-the-art facilities including 12 training pitches, a 3G artificial pitch with a 200-seater viewing gallery and an indoor senior pitch replicating the exact size, mix of grass and fibres as Wembley football stadium.

At a glance, the new £105 million Burton-based training complex is a centre of ‘excellence’ for those who have proved themselves anything but on the international stage – a facility propped up by a 1966 World Cup triumph and the repetition of abstract nouns such as ‘hope’, ‘faith’ and ‘progression’. But look beyond the Hilton Hotel and the multi-millionaires indulging themselves and there is something quite interesting infiltrating our national sport this time around: a sense of education.

Much like Exeter’s University Forum, St George’s Park is a symbol for a progressive future – a place for communication and centralised unity in the name of education. Football is generally disassociated from such ideals but the FA’s ambitions to create what is essentially a university for football education and make a subject of the sport should be applauded.

As an institution so embedded within English culture and ever-increasingly popular on the world-stage, it is right that it should be nurtured, and if nurtured successfully, education may see football relieved the negative realities such as thuggery and racism that shroud it. It is as FA Chairman, David Bernstein, suggests, “The teachers of the game [who] have the defining influence.”

Football is entertainment, escapism, a means of fitness, a healthy obsession for children and football is constantly rejuvenated by its expansive wealth. The FA can afford to dally on the concept of education because of its financial self-sufficiency with assets including its ownership of England international matches and the FA Cup which have secured TV deals with ITV and Setanta worth £425 million between 2008 – 2012.

The FA is often portrayed by the media as the organisation which bans and fines high profile players and managers who have broken the code of conduct, and in this sense the ‘men in suits’ can be easy targets for a public both opinionated and detached. But the FA’s commitment to society at grass roots level and in working with young people, often in less privileged urban areas of the country should not go unnoticed. The FA also gives to five selected charities a year.

On an opening day tour of the facility, President of the FA, Prince William, said, “St George’s Park is a concept totally new. It will provide more than just world-class facilities for our national team and more than a university from which hundreds of coaches will graduate. It will provide employment and a social hub for local people and will foster community spirit and purpose and hope throughout England.”

As a financial powerhouse of sport, football can also lead the way in an educational sense in fields of psychology, sports medicine, sports science and technology. St. George’s Park is equipped with an altitude chamber able to mimic the playing conditions of anywhere in the world, an indoor 60 metre running track which can measure running speed and style as well as numerous lecture theatres and conference halls. Then, by extension, it can be expected that the centre will provide scientific progression in fields such as medicine, psychology and injury rehabilitation.

St. George’s Park is undoubtedly a place to pamper the elite, but also a place to bring the elite and society together. The facilities are open to local schools and not only create a quantity of jobs on site but also the possibility to extend the number of paid coaches in England. Football gives to society in a much higher proportion than it takes, and if society can look past the pretentiousness of the facility, it can be an illustrious monument to a sport dedicated to its nation.

St. George’s Park may seem a large and expensive space dedicated to a simple game, but considering the continued significance and popularity of the sport, the FA’s focus on its educational possibilities, both in terms of creating coaching careers and in its scientific capabilities, can only determine the project as a positive undertaking.

Josh Poole