Break free from conservatism

[andy steel 0]

I spent Friday afternoon last week busying myself doing household chores, with the radio in the background tuned to Test Match Special, as England recovered from certain defeat to the brink of almost certain series victory in the space of a few hours. Once again, the summer game offered lessons for the winter one - but is it possible to believe that, like English cricket, Scottish football is capable of learning, or changing?

 

The history of cricket in the last 25 years is very relevant to us, as we survey the wreckage of another failed European adventure - one in which we (Rangers) are quite likely, in my opinion, to share, as soon as we get started. Just as we are utterly uncompetitive at the top level (and even the second or third level), so too were the English test and one-day sides. Regularly thrashed throughout the 70s by the West Indies, English cricket in the 80s and 90s had to get used to being regularly thrashed by Australia, India and Pakistan, while previous minnows New Zealand and Sri Lanka began to record victories over the motherland.

 

While on the surface, cricket appears the most conservative of sports, the administrators of the game were at least willing to try to find a way out of their pickle. Accurately perceiving that despite their failings, they still had a large fanbase willing to pay to watch their teams, the England and Wales Cricket Board split their divisions, withdrew restrictions on recruitment, altered the previous 5 or 6 Test fixtures against the same opponent each summer to 3 (or 5 against the Aussies) against different sides, expanded the one day calendar...the list goes on.

 

Not all have proven successful. The long haul of a 5 Test summer, in all conditions, against players gradually getting used to English conditions, was one of the best facets of the game and one I miss. Another area I think the ECB have got wrong is the acceptance into their teams of too many pseudo-Englishmen. Even for this most tolerant of countries, it is a bit much to have a team with more non-natives than Englishmen in it; however, the facts are that as long as Pietersen, Trott, Strauss, Kieswetter, Prior and so on continue to win, no one else minds too much. And of course, the last few days have seen the ever present threat of corruption appear again, in the guise of some youthful and very probably penniless Pakistani bowlers who are unwilling to live in poverty any longer than they have to. How dare they? They ought to be content to perform for our sakes, yes, and for a pittance too!

 

But they changed. They tried. So we can see that while conservatism certainly exists in the game of cricket, of itself it need not be a barrier to imagination.

 

Can anyone expect the same here? For a start, who do we expect it from? The SFA? Or the SPL? SFL? Government? Everyone knows the shambles of administration we have so there's no need to go on about it, but it has to be said that until the current 'many chiefs' nonsense is rationalised, there's little or no prospect of change.

 

Assuming it does happen, though, I can't see any reason why Scots football shouldn't rise again. After all, the target is hardly winning the Champions League or World Cup. The ultimate aim for our game ought to be qualification for final stages internationally with the occassional progression beyond, and at club level, regular participation up to the quarter final stages in Europe. Given the fan base, given the enthusiasm, given the lack of a serious competitor for attention, football has no excuse not to change. Why, then, even allowing for the administrative shambles, hasn't it done so already?

 

I believe it's the inherent conservative nature preventing progression. As a country Scotland is not fond of change, and in football the mantras of the 1950s still hold sway here. How often have you heard these useless catchphrases trotted out by professionals, pundits and fans alike?

 

"It's a man's game"

"Play it long and get them turned"

"He's not great, but he's a real trier"

"So-and-so put in a great shift"

 

And so on. The emphasis on strength and fitness would make us worldbeaters if allied to an equal fanaticsm for skill!

 

What's needed is a new way of viewing foootball. And this is going to be very hard indeed to sell, because we have a media which relies on the football to keep breathing, especially at these time of recession. Summer football, for example, would be a Godsend for our game - years without international tournaments especially - but the media, which holidays in the summer, would be outraged at (a) having to work their break and (b) having to find something else to fill their winter schedules. This is not a small consideration; it must be borne in mind when media types are railing against summer football, that they have a vested interest in preventing it.

 

Which in itself highlights another weak aspect of our game, the fear of the media. It's easy for me to type 'we must be bullish!' but that is whats needed. If someone at a paper wants to write something criticial, let them! there's no need to go on every media platform to discuss it...dignified silence, backed up with results on the pitch, would be the best riposte.

 

An example: I found myself in a supermarket carpark on Saturday afternoon, after the football, and despite myself listened to some of the awful 'Your Call' show (well, my kids won't let me have 'Jazz Record Requests' from Radio 3 on in the car). Someone phoned in with an ambitious and well thought out suggestion which would see all training facilities pooled between regional clubs, and players produced allocated in the American collegiate system. Dismissed! None of your forward thinking, boy. Such a proposal would draw howls of protest from those who have invested already (such as Rangers) but the way around the problem is not that hard - there could be a levy for a period of years until an agreed sum is recouped by Rangers, or whoever, or else a rental fee could be charged continuously. It doesn't take a genius to work these things out, but it will take someone with the football nous of Rino Gattuso and the hide of a rhinoceros.

 

Which is the main stumbling block I can see. Who will be the man? I thought Gordon Smith woud drive our football forward, but whether through his own failings, the system hampering him or whether I was just too optimistic, it didn't happen. Who will be the man who can achieve what would be a mammoth task against so many vested interests? If there's such a fellow currently active within the game, professionally, in the media or on the terraces, I haven't seen them. Without such a "Mandela" figure I just can't see how we will drive past the many roadblocks in the path of progress, which is a sobering and depressing thought to finish on.

 

Perhaps we ought to be looking outwith the game for the man we need. Again we see how the conservative ethos, so firmly entrenched in the game, is a drawback - it's always the usual suspects whose names are put forward when a task like this is mentioned. Campbell Ogilivie, Henry McLeish, whoever is sports minister, blah blah blah. If we were to think outwith the box and come up with somone (completely at random) like Richard Branson or Stelios Haji-Ioannou, people who would be unwilling to take 'I shall refer that to the General Purposes' committie for an answer and who would, crucially, be given carte blanche to deliver, we may see some results.

 

I fear, though, that that is a pious hope. Scottish football (indeed, Scotland's) inbuild leaning toward small c conservatism will continue to hold us back.

[Guest Buzz]

Fantastic post, I can't see much to disagree with.

[alexscottislegend 2,057]

Great post but you tell your kids to "GTF" if they won't let you listen to 'Jazz Record Requests'.

[Frankie 8,148]

An excellent discussion on the issues facing Scottish Football.

 

Of course the SFA have recently appointed Stewart Regan as the man to replace Smudger. With his cricketing background, perhaps we can get be a bit more optimistic in the context of your argument.

 

[Frankie 8,148]

PS: Published on the main site - many thanks!

 

http://www.newsnow.co.uk/A/443265569?-11344

Edited September 6, 2010 by bmck

[wabashcannonball 0]

Personally I see it as Calvanism with a large C, if the price of keeping the *******s from usurping our game, as they have GCC, is a few committees....so be it.

[bmck 117]

Personally I see it as Calvanism with a large C,

 

Eh? Calvinism with a large C is the reformed theology least impressed by free will - predestination, particular atonement, perseverance of the saints etc. I used to be a Calvinist, bizarrely! I've no idea what point you're making at all here.

[wabashcannonball 0]

Eh? Calvinism with a large C is the reformed theology least impressed by free will - predestination, particular atonement, perseverance of the saints etc. I used to be a Calvinist, bizarrely! I've no idea what point you're making at all here.

 

Be careful of what you wish. The spawn of Satan and the whore of rome are everywhere.

[andy steel 0]

I didn't know about the cricketing chap at all! Shows you how folks on the net can bump their gums in total ignorance. It's as well I don't mind making myself look stupid.

[bmck 117]

Be careful of what you wish. The spawn of Satan and the whore of rome are everywhere.

 

Even yer man Calvin was a bit apprehensive about being too certain about the ol' eschatological matters there wabash. You never know, though, John Reid's as good a candidate for anti christ as any :fish: