|
|
 |
 |   |
|
EVENTS Fantasy Central Inside Game Video Plus Statitudes Your Turn Message Boards Email Newsletters Golf Guide Cities 
CNNSI.com GROUP
COMMERCE
|  |
Debating Serie A's decline
CNNSI.com soccer columnist Gabriele Marcotti will periodically answer a few of your questions. All of your comments are read and appreciated.
I'm sorry, but I don't think Enzo Scifo failed in his career. If there is
one Belgian player from the past 15 years that sticks out in peoples' minds,
it is Scifo. He was an elegant creator who played and succeeded with great
teams like Bayern Munich, Anderlecht, and the Belgian national team. If half
of these players you mention can achieve as lengthy and successful career as
Scifo had, they should consider themselves lucky.
OK, I'll admit it; I was a little harsh with Scifo. He did have a good career (certainly better than Gustavo Neffa and Nii Lamptey). However, I stand by what I said about never fulfilling his potential (which was truly immense). Scifo was one of the most gifted footballers in recent history. He will be remembered as a good player, perhaps a great one, but not one of the best ever.
I was examining your list and I failed to find many South American players.
Also, most of the players that were selected play in Europe. Do you have
contacts with scouts in South America? The best players in the world are
from South America.
Dozens of people wrote in with suggestions of other possible future stars: thanks to all of you. Others complained that I did not have enough Brazilians and Argentines on the list (to be fair, there were two Brazilians and I did mention the fact that guys like Ronaldinho and Saviola were already household names and thus were not eligible). Folks, this is not the definitive list of future world superstars. I am not the Lord of Soccer, I do not own a crystal ball -- the whole point of this exercise was that these are the players who seemed to get the most attention in my (admittedly unscientific) poll of agents and scouts. I'm sure there are plenty of future stars who were not mentioned. Take it for what it is: a list of guys to watch out for. Just because somebody did not make my list, does not mean they won't develop into a phenom.
I am a huge follower of CNN's site, and your articles. I have sent you before thanking you for your excellent column. I would like to hear your feedback on the Spanish Liga. We always hear that the Italian is the "most competitive and entertaining in the world". I am interested in knowing your assessment of that. Although i am a fan of both leagues, i have no doubt the Spanish league is the most competitive and entertaining in the world today. On paper, Serie A has the flashier stars, and the style of play is more closed, which makes it harder to score, but if we consider the reality of the leagues now, i think my point would be visible. First, and most obvious, was three teams reaching the semi-finals of the Champions League least year. If we consider the fact that three traditionally challenging teams were relegated in the same year (Betis, Sevilla and Atletico), it was astonishing. Whats the possibility of seeing that in Italy? While Torino, Samdporia and Napoli all had their "bad years", its very unlikely the big money teams to falter in Serie A. Did you see last place Racing beat high-budgeted Barca 4-0 in complete domination? "upsets" are more frequent in Spain. Last but not least, the game is more open in Spain, proof is the number of goals per game average.
I am interested to hear your comments. Thank you for your time. I apologize
for the long message.
I think you make an eloquent argument for Spain's supremacy over Serie A. I don't think anyone disputes that the game is more open in La Liga, however you may be surprised to know that statistically there are actually more upsets in Serie A. Also, I would disagree with the idea that big money teams don't struggle in Serie A. Inter Milan is flirting with relegation, AC Milan, Parma and Fiorentina are stuck in mid-table obscurity, nearly 20 points from the top of the table. In recent years we've witnessed Atalanta and Udinese challenge for a Champions League spot, and just four years ago little Vicenza won the Italian Cup (and followed it up by reaching the semifinals of the Cup Winners' Cup the next season). Having said that, it's hard to argue with the fact that Spain might well have the top league in the world right now.
Don't you think you are overlooking the following problem: If you lift all
restrictions on foreign players, you'll get a flood of eastern european and
south american talent willing to play for less than their equally talent
counterparts in the EU? That will erode the talent base as kids move away
from the sport and fans bore at the lack of local personalities. It has
happened in athletics with the influx of Africans.
I disagree. I think the success of Africans in athletics probably has more to do with the fact that, in recent years, they've simply proven themselves to be better athletes. I don't have a problem with limits on foreigners per se, but the idea of making distinctions between EU and non-EU players is silly and discriminatory. If, for political reasons, we are not allowed to set limits on EU players, then, I think, we should just abolish limits altogether. I don't think that in the long term Europe will stop producing talented soccer players because equally talented South Americans and East Europeans will play for less money. Being a professional footballer is not like working on an assembly line or picking fruit. Kids will always dream about turning pro and they will always pursue those dreams. Look at the music industry. Yes, South Americans, Africans or East Europeans might be willing to perform for less, but have they pushed EU artists out? Not at all. Talent will rise to the top and, in time, clubs will realize how important developing homegrown players is. Taking the argument a little bit further, I think it's a little hypocritical for the West to insist on globalization if it is not ready to open its doors to foreign talent. The West is happy to export televisions and sneakers to Brazil and Nigeria. Well, soccer players are some of Brazil and Nigeria's best exports, shouldn't the West be open to them as well?
I disagree strongly. All leagues should be able to set their own limits. I
personally think that no club should be able to field a roster which feature
8 or 9 foreign players. I think 5 foreigners (all nations not just non EU)
should be the limit on the field at one time. The system is a joke right
now because all these Brazilian players are trying to find loop holes.
Chelsea is fielding an almost complete foreign roster. Several Serie A
teams, and not just Roma, have 6 or 7 South Americans on the field at one.
What ever happened to a Italian or British team actually being Italian or
British?
Forget leagues being allowed to set their own limits. It's illegal under EU rules and we just have to face the fact. You ask "whatever happened to an Italian team or British team actually being Italian or British?" Well, Goldman Sachs is an American investment bank, but there are plenty of foreigners working there. Nissan is a Japanese company, but it employs plenty of American workers. Soccer is something which evolves. Go back far enough and teams used to only field local players. Using that logic, Manchester United should only field Mancunians and Roma only Romans. Which would rule out David Beckham (a Londoner) and Marco Delvecchio (a Milanese). Yes, they are English and Italian, respectively, but so what? It's not called England United; it's not AS Italy. Where do you draw the line? Also, the facts reveal that the influx of foreigners has not hurt attendances. And, in many cases, youngsters still manage to break through. You cite Chelsea as an example. Well, Chelsea has three youth team products (John Terry, Jon Harley and Jody Morris) in its first-team squad, in spite of all the foreigners. Did youngsters have an easier time breaking in before the limits on foreigners were relaxed? Or was it simply a way for mediocre domestic players to stick around longer?
Could you explain the transfer system in world soccer. It is clearly
different than the free agent system that we have in the U.S. sports but I
don't understand what types of ownership each team has over their players
and how contracts figure into the negotiations.
I have a strange sense of déjà vu, but here goes. In U.S. sports players under contract are generally traded for other players (or draft picks). In soccer, they are bought and sold for cash. In most cases, in U.S. sports, when a player's contract expires he becomes a free agent and can sign for any club. It is much the same for soccer players. When they go out of contract, they can go wherever they want, and their former club receives no compensation. Now, the new rules which go into effect this summer have changed things a little (though the basic principle remains the same). Players who have spent three seasons (two seasons for those over the age of 28) with the same club under the same contract (i.e. they did not renegotiate or extend their deal) can choose to become free agents even if they have years remaining on their contract.
Mr. Marcotti, this is regarding a question you received in the past about
the decline of Serie A, and the uprising of the Spanish Liga. You said that
the Spanish Liga will overtake Serie A as the best league in the world, due
to the poor play of Italian clubs in European cup action. As an avid
follower of Serie A, you must know that the goals of top Italian clubs are
to win the scudetto, not to raise the champions league or uefa cup above
their heads. To win the scudetto has more meaning, than winning a european
trophy. When an Italian wins a european trophy, it is a bonus. Compared to
a european trophy , it is indescribable of what meaning and of what value
there is to win a scudetto. Therefore, you must not say that there is a
decline in the serie A and an overtaking of the Spanish Liga because Italian
clubs faired poorly in european play. That is nonsense. Please respond
with comments.
OK, I will. To say that Italian teams did poorly in Europe because they cared only about Serie A sounds like sour grapes to me. If that's the case, then how do you explain the period between 1987 and 1998, when Italian clubs dominated Europe? Where they uninterested in the scudetto back then? I don't think so. Furthermore, this season only three Italian clubs (Lazio, Roma and Juventus) have any chance of winning the title. Since the likes of Parma, Inter, Milan, Fiorentina and Udinese presumably realized this, wouldn't you think they would have at least tried to win something in Europe? Instead, all but Milan (who has been very unimpressive in the Champions League) are out. 1. Who are the three highest paid managers in the English League and how much do they get? 2. Is it true that manager Alex Fergason is now being studied in Universities in the field of management? If true, then which universities? 3. Which were the top 2 English team in the periods 1970-1980; 1981-1990's? 4. Is it true that a penalty during the game can be taken by 2players, ie the first kicker rolls the ball forward and the second player or even the third one scores? 5. How many teams qualify for the European Champions League in each country?
Ask five questions and you get five answers: 1. Wages are not public in Britain, but these are generally accepted figures. Sir Alex Ferguson is first with a salary of around US$3 million a year, followed by Claudio Ranieri (US$2.7 million) and Arsene Wenger (US$2.2 million). 2. I'm not aware that Sir Alex is specifically being studied anywhere, but I'm sure that at some point his management techniques have been the subject of academic scrutiny. 3. One team dominated the 1970s, Liverpool (5 titles, 2 European Cups, etc.). It's hard to pick who was second best, but you could make a case for Derby (2 titles) and Nottingham Forest (1 title, 2 European Cups). 4. Yes, but it's not that simple. The penalty taker needs to pass the ball forward and it needs to travel a distance of at least 10 yards (9.15 meters) before a teammate can touch it. At that point it's live. This hardly ever happens because after the pass has been hit, it's relatively easy for the goalkeeper to come out and collect it.
5. The number of teams varies based on the country's UEFA coefficient
(calculated on the country's performance in European competitions over the
previous five seasons). Spain and Italy, who boast the highest coefficient,
have four teams each, while the weakest leagues have just one team.
| |||||||||||||||||||||
