[Fred Legget's comments in Italics]
Sure as non regular fitba followers they may have decided to just join in the Olympic Spirit and display a bit of nationalism, but if ever there was a failed campaign, that did NOT deserve a standing ovation, it was this one.
I think many people gave the Australian team a standing ovation because of the 'tactics' they endured from the Hondurans which saw every little tap, brush or knock have them writhing on the ground, stretchered off only to bounce back on, within (on average, because I timed them) 14 seconds. It is this sort of performance which puts "non regular fitba followers" off football. Some football snobs may call it tactics; I call it (and I expect others do too) pure, unadulterated bad sportsmanship - and 'the great unwashed' (in Australia) don't like it.
I also think many gave the Australians a standing ovation just out of sadness. Yet another hope dashed. That's how I felt. I've had high hopes for this Olympic campaign since September 1993. As a sport, we wasted the opportunity a home Olympics should have given us - plus, now, we will lose relative funding from the Australian Sports Commission and the AOC because of our performance.
And, if you're right Fred, and we're simply not good enough (and I'm not arguing one way or the other with that view) - then that tends to suggest that our State programs haven't got it right and our national selectors haven't got it right.
Because selection tends, now, to be on the basis of being on the right treadmill from a certain age, we could well be (and again I'm not saying this is so) missing out on some more talented people if one accepts the argument that different people develop at different rates. For example, a 15 year old 'talent identified' in the recent national championships could well be very good now, very good next year, very good in 2002, good in 2003, okay in 2004 - but he's in the system so he tends to stay there. On the other hand, another 15 year old may not even have made it to State teams in 2000 but he improves to be good next year, very good in 2002, very good in 2003, outstanding but wasted in 2004.
No doubt our National Technical Director is addressing this issue.
Much hope was placed on a medal showing by the home side, perhaps as a means to attracting more bums on seats at domestic games, but it has all gone pear shaped.
SNIP
While there is an argument that we have to convert them to the national side first before we manage to get them to the domestic product, I have long wondered if indeed that is the case.
The fantasy that success at international level will automatically translate into some sort of magical turn-up of people at NSL games is merely that: fantasy. Sports marketing, and running a club, is much more complex than that and it's only the clubs who are trying to build a support base over the long haul which will succeed. (Having said that, certain clubs have had 24 years and I think we have to acknowledge they're not going to make it in terms of crowd support).
We on this List also must realise that 'the great unwashed' are just as, if not more, important to the future of Australian football than we are. It is that group, plus youngsters, where the growth in support will come from.
And perhaps even WE have all became victims of such hype and started to think that we are a lot better than we are...
I think this is a danger amongst some administrators and some fans, but I don't think the senior players (or senior team coaching staff) think this.
For every Schwarzer, Kewell, Viduka etc, there's a Barthez, Zidane, Kanu etc.