Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

"Football has no place at the olympics"

Announcements Posted on
    • 7 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Schmucks)
    I couldn't think of any other improvement that the Olympics could make than to endorse the professionals of Boxing, Football etc to compete for Gold. That would be a month filled with the ultimate sportsmen and athletes throughout the world competing not for money or for fame, but for passion and their country - For an olympic gold!
    Other than it wouldn't be because they didn't show up when they were allowed in and they certainly wouldn't now.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by py0alb)
    Not at all. For the vast majority of current Olympic sports, if you asked a top competitor what they would rather win, an Olympic gold medal or some other prize at another international competition, they would all go for the gold medal. Not a problem there - even with huge professional sports like basketball and ice-hockey, the top competitors enter and take it seriously, and see Olympic gold as the highlight of their international career.

    Footballers? Not a chance. They'd rather win the European Championship. Most of the professionals can't even be bothered to turn up - which was why they had to use the U23 smokescreen to avoid the embarrassment of admitting that no half decent international players can be bothered with it.

    Baseball quite rightly got kicked out of the Olympics because the top players didn't attend and the sight of the Olympic gold medal being competed for by a bunch of amateur hacks therefore tarnished both baseball and the Olympics. Its entirely inconsistent and hypocritical if the same thing doesn't happen to football. Didn't Iraq get to the semifinals in 2004 ffs? Its a farce and a disgrace.
    You can't just blame the players though, surely if there was more publicity in another event at the same time (or close enough to make attending both detrimental to your performance) as the Olympics, but meant you didn't have to travel half way round the world, any other Olympic event would start to lose competitors. Yet that is exactly what people would want to happen for their sport, Dai Greene would love to have all his 400m races watched eagerly by the whole country (and world) no matter what time of year, and if that were to happen he too wouldn't be as fussed about the Olympics. Yes that probably won't happen to 400m, but what if an Olympic event does become more popular outside it (maybe even directly because of the Olympics), attracting a large sport-specific audience rather than 90% of people present having just grabbed a ticket to whatever event they could? Does the Olympics throw a hissy fit and kick the event out because it isn't the pinnacle of the sport anymore?
    • 7 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hopple)
    You can't just blame the players though, surely if there was more publicity in another event at the same time (or close enough to make attending both detrimental to your performance) as the Olympics, but meant you didn't have to travel half way round the world, any other Olympic event would start to lose competitors. Yet that is exactly what people would want to happen for their sport, Dai Greene would love to have all his 400m races watched eagerly by the whole country (and world) no matter what time of year, and if that were to happen he too wouldn't be as fussed about the Olympics. Yes that probably won't happen to 400m, but what if an Olympic event does become more popular outside it (maybe even directly because of the Olympics), attracting a large sport-specific audience rather than 90% of people present having just grabbed a ticket to whatever event they could? Does the Olympics throw a hissy fit and kick the event out because it isn't the pinnacle of the sport anymore?
    If the players don't take it seriously to the point where the good players won't even turn up, and the fan's don't give a monkeys (football was by far the slowest 2012 olympic event to sell out), then it obviously isn't working as an Olympic sport.

    Lets also be real: there are only a handful of sports anywhere near big enough that the Olympics might be irrelevent to them. The Olympics is the only time anyone ever watches the majority of the sports featured - thats one of the greatest things about it, the fact that random stuff like curling and field hockey gets on the tv.
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by py0alb)
    Other than it wouldn't be because they didn't show up when they were allowed in and they certainly wouldn't now.
    Some of the biggest names in Britain have backed playing in the Olympics, whilst others have only opposed due to their own team commitments (remember now the Olympics is on whilst the major leagues throughout Europe have already started). This has been the main stumbling block for years and years and has usually come down to management conflictions rather than the opinions of the players.

    At the end of the day, it's about a month's commitment. In the early stages of a league campaign, that can equate to, what 6 or 7 games? That's almost 20% of a season. Not just that, but it's usually a month that these footballer's would have to go without pay from their club to be released to play in the Olympics. Doesn't sound like much with the wages that they're on, admittedly, but they're set in stone to their wages and live their lives accordingly with it. A month's pay is a blow to themas they have to have upkeep of what they live on, which is obviously significantly higher. Not only are you taking a month's hit to be elsewhere, you're also taking losing your spot in your side throughout one of the most important periods of the season. If that was a regular job, you'd be lucky to ever get back into it. Why shouldn't footballers hold the same opinion as that?

    Quite harsh to just brush off footballers for having their reasons to not compete, especially when the vast majority of players can't get past their own management to join up. Also remember that the Olympics is an Under-23 event for football, with the exception of about 3 or 4 players IIRC. It's not as if there's many places up for grabs. Is that worth risking your current career for?
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by py0alb)
    Lets also be real: there are only a handful of sports anywhere near big enough that the Olympics might be irrelevent to them. The Olympics is the only time anyone ever watches the majority of the sports featured - thats one of the greatest things about it, the fact that random stuff like curling and field hockey gets on the tv.
    That theory would suggest a Marbles Round Robin would be more suited to the Olympics than Football.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    No it does not: :2012:
    • 7 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Schmucks)
    That theory would suggest a Marbles Round Robin would be more suited to the Olympics than Football.
    Do 3m people worldwide participate in organised marbles round robin tournaments? If so I would back its proposal to join the Olympics.
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by py0alb)
    Do 3m people worldwide participate in organised marbles round robin tournaments? If so I would back its proposal to join the Olympics.
    Yet seem to frown upon football?! Words fail me.
    • 7 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Schmucks)
    Yet seem to frown upon football?! Words fail me.
    I've already explained it clearly: if it was actually a serious tournament with all the top players playing and taking it seriously, then I wouldn't have a problem at all. But its not. Its an embarrassing farce and the Olympics would be better off without it. The Olympics is meant to showcase the best a sport has to offer, not some bunch of third raters.

    I take it you're busy campaigning for the reinstatement of baseball into the Olympics seeing as you consider the reasons it was kicked out to be irrelevant?
    • 7 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Remember: this is not about favourite sports. This is about being clear and consistent and unbiased and designing an Olympic games that actually serves a useful purpose as a celebration of the best that sport has to offer.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Maybe the football players dont turn up because they haven't been allowed to participate for so long?

    Anyway the South American countries always field strong teams, as will GB this time, if it happens, the competitiveness of the football at the olympics will grow, surely?
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by py0alb)
    Remember: this is not about favourite sports. This is about being clear and consistent and unbiased and designing an Olympic games that actually serves a useful purpose as a celebration of the best that sport has to offer.
    Considering the implications it has against it's best and brightest, I think football in the Olympics has actually been fine. You seem intent on discussing reasons why it should be irrelivant, yet seem incapable of udnerstanding logical reasons that hold back Football at the Olympics. I've already listed them, how about going back and giving them a whirl?

    Also, considering the likes of Guiseppi Rossi, Carlos Tevez, Ivan Zamorano, Hernan Crespo and Romario have been key figures of the most recent Olympics for football (all top scorers in their years at the Olympics, hardly a bad list of footballers there, eh?)

    Infact, lets look at the sort of players who competed in the last Olympic Games, seeing as it's not about the best and brightest...

    Ustari, Garay, Zabaleta, Lavezzi, Riquelme, Di Maria, Mascherano, Messi, Aguero, Banega - That's just the Argentina side!!

    Thiago Silva, Pato, Diego, Lucas, Anderson, Ronaldinho, Diego Alves, Rafinha Marcelo, Ramires, Hernanes - That's just the Brazil side!!

    From the Ivory Coast, we saw Gervinho, Kalou, Coulilbaly and Kone. From Serbia we saw Tosic, Rajkovic, Kolarov, Jovanovic and Stojkovic. Japan took Keisuke Honda for crying out loud.

    The Dutch side saw de Guzman, Evander Sno, Ryan Babel, Royston Drenthe, Pieters, Zuiverloon and Emanuelson. Even Roy Makaay went. Holland took some of the most exciting youngsters in world football at the time (to an Under 23 competition, might I add).

    Belgium included Vertonghen, Fellaini, Vermealen, Kompany, Dembele, Martens, Pocognoli etc. The vast majority of the Belgian side are well known world-wide now, part of their emergence coming from the Olympics.

    Most of the Honduran team played in the World Cup recently, and are now well known players throughout their continent (they recently reached the Semis of their version of the Euros with Ramon Nunez taking player of the competition).

    Italy took some of their brightest yougnsters available, Rossi, Montilivo, Abate, Di Silvestri, Rocchi, Dessena, Marchisio, Criscito etc. Considering the aging problems the Italian team has faced in the past 5 or 6 years, having such a young and talented squad to pick from for an Under 23 competition shows how they were actually competent and competitive.

    Teams like Korea and New Zealand, the sort of sides you'd find in the World Cup the pinacle of World Football, were just as strong as they could have been. Nations like England didn't compete for obvious reasons, though that wasn't without effort - A GB side had been in the pipeworks for nearly a decade. That was always going to cause friction and need an Olympic occasion on home soil to push it all through, though.

    Seeing as this is an Under 23 competition, I don't think the nations could actually be taking it much more seriously. Do you?
    • 7 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Schmucks)
    Seeing as this is an Under 23 competition, I don't think the nations could actually be taking it much more seriously. Do you?
    You're entirely missing the point. It is an under 23 competition precisely BECAUSE no-one takes it seriously.
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by py0alb)
    You're entirely missing the point. It is an under 23 competition precisely BECAUSE no-one takes it seriously.
    That's not entirely true though, and has sort of proven how little you know on it.
    • 7 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Schmucks)
    That's not entirely true though, and has sort of proven how little you know on it.
    Yes it is, mr knowitall.

    "For the 1984 Los Angeles Games, the IOC felt a change was necessary to bring interest back, and decided to admit professional players. FIFA still did not want the Olympics to rival the World Cup, so a compromise was struck that allowed teams from Africa, Asia, Oceania and CONCACAF to field their strongest professional sides, while restricting UEFA and CONMEBOL teams to players who had not played in a World Cup. Many teams fielded young teams, including France, who won the 1984 Olympic title.

    Young teams were favoured by FIFA and the IOC, and since 1992 male competitors must be under 23 years old. Because of the unusual format, several of the historically strongest footballing countries have unimpressive Olympic records, in Europe, Olympic soccer struggles to get serious attention."


    Scottish Football Association's Chief Executive, Gordon Smith said:
    "On a personal note, I feel that the Olympics should be the pinnacle of any sport and it is doubtful as to whether an age restricted football competition in the Olympics would ever be able to rival the World Cup."
    • 7 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Even people involved in football feel it has no place in the Olympics.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    If its a sport (that dosn't involve murdering animals), it should be in the Olympics. End of.
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    You failed to notify the planned petitions from Central Europe and South America (separately) from the past decade trying to change it back, then? Maybe we should talk about the current generation and their opinion of it, seeing as we live in this generation, not the last... Not bad for a 'knowitall' eh?

    You also failed to notify the growing heat that team GB has made, and all the stars that have already put their name forward to play should team GB go ahead? I can't think why though, it'd fit well with your argument...

    -----

    Even if, and this is a big if, the Olympics isn't being considered seriously by the greater nations (even though, y'know, it is. Otherwise why would they actually send the best players they can according to the rules for the past generation and will continue to next summer? Baffles me, eh? Maybe it's to get all the kids off the streets and into some organised fun? Keeps us away from the drugs, I guess) and is played at an Under 23 level, who's to say that's actually a bad thing? It hardly did the stars of the last few Olympic Games any harm, did it? How is Carlos Tevez doing in his career? How have the Honduran team faired since experiencing the Olympic Games? How much is Guiseppi Rossi valued at these days? What's Banega, Di Maria, Aguero and Garay up to these days? Who's that Montilivo kid, again? That Belgian side they look pretty good at the moment, where's those youngsters emerged from?!

    You've got this idea that football shouldn't be included because almost 3 decades ago the decision that football wasn't taken as seriously as the other sports. Yet, in a sport that 'isn't taking it seriously' as you like to point out, we witness the most exciting prospects in football paired up against each other, with big star names in the mix as well. And that's limited due to the restrictions (which would be out-stretched if they weren't there. That's not opinion, that's fact. Take that one to the bank). How is seeing the stars of the next ten years competing for the pleasure of competing from the world's biggest sport something that shouldn't be welcomed by the Olympics? That's insanity.

    Football has changed dramatically since the inclusion of TV and Media rights, the Premier League etc. A lot of competition is drawn through money for teams. It's a battle to survive, nevermind to compete at the highest level. The Olympics offers a unique opportunity to actually compete without a cash prize being the carrot on the end of the stick. It offers talented athletes (the majority of the footballers competing at the Olympics being some of the most talented athletes the world has right now in any sport whatsoever) the chance to compete for pride and passion and for their country.

    We're not in the 1980's anymore, so maybe bring your ideas and theories forward a bit too.
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by py0alb)
    Even people involved in football feel it has no place in the Olympics.
    You have Gordon Smith's word and the decision from 2 or 3 decades ago to back up your argument there. Meanwhile, we have some of the best players in the world wanting to play for their country, and the best youngsters the world has to offer already playing in the competition.

    But you're right, lets rule out the biggest, most loved sport there is. It must be embarrassing to see some of the best athletes competing come from Football's creche when you're a curler, eh?
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I dont think any ball sports should be in the olympics really.. neither should shooting (really? - thats a sport?).. soon enough the olympics will have pool, and darts (which ARENT sports), and eventually connect 4.

    Olympics is about the countries athletes, not the teams. (relay teams, rowing teams etc are acceptable as all individuals are equal, which isnt the case in ball sports)

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: May 22, 2012
New on TSR

Find out what year 11 is like

Going into year 11? Students who did it last year share what to expect.

Article updates
Useful resources

Quick link:

Unanswered sport threads

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.